The main reason for the split between Theravada and Mahayana traditions was a dispute about how the Buddha could, as a human being, attain enlightenment.
According to Encyclopedia Brittanica: around 100 years after the Buddha’s passing, a debate took place in the Buddhist Council between the two sides of monks:
- one focused on following strict monastic rules (the origin of Theravada), and
- the other focused on engagement with society (Mahasanghika). Mahasanghika is the original root of Mahayana (Great Vehicle) Buddhism.
Mahayana originated from the Buddha’s compassion towards ordinary people. He exerted great efforts traveling throughout the land and meeting with ordinary people of different tribes. That’s why in many sutras reference is made to the “four kinds of Buddha followers: monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen”.
Obviously then, not all the Buddha’s followers were monks. Laypeople constituted much wider community to receive the Buddha’s teachings, which the Mahasanghika represented at the Buddhist Council.
The Question of: How did the Buddha attain Enlightenment?
Among other points that were raised by Mahasanghika - the “nature of Buddha” dominated the debate.
Differences in views were presented during that debate – the most important of which was the question of whether ordinary human being can become enlightened as the Buddha was – or that no one can become a Buddha.
In other word: how could the Buddha, born as a human being, attain the highest state of humanity, that of enlightenment?
Because the state of Enlightenment cannot be acquired from outside sources (or be externally given) - then this highest state of life must have been inherent within the life of Siddhartha Gautama as a potential – a potential inwardly existing before he could reveal it later to the world, becoming thus the Buddha.
Mahasanghika’ perspective was that: the capacity or potential to attain enlightenment was part of Shakyamuni’s human nature. The way Shakyamuni turned his inner potential of enlightenment into reality was through defeating all thoughts of ignorance and opposition, metaphorically represented by Mara.
Mara: the lower states of human nature
In the lower states of human nature, life manifests misery, delusion and sufferings. The lower states of life originate from ignorance, deception, and tendencies to enslave the mind by desires and beliefs that obstruct the capacity for wisdom and compassion. This powerful cloud of doubts, negative tendencies and desires – is metaphorically represented by Mara. When Shakyamuni defeated Mara, his enlightened nature emerged triumphant, thus becoming a Buddha.
“Before Siddhartha was enlightened and became the Buddha
he had to face the demon Mara and his army
Mara is also an analogy for our obstacles in Buddhism
and for the Three Fires / Poisons of greed, anger and ignorance”.
Source: Learning Buddhism
The Buddha could defeat Mara. This means that for us to defeat Mara in our life, we need to reveal our Buddha nature - because only the power of Buddha nature can defeat Mara.
Theravada Buddhism agrees that Siddhartha Gautama attained enlightenment only after defeating the negative forces of Mara that opposed his determination to become a Buddha.
The Buddha’s enlightenment and the defeat of evil are inseparable.
Defeating Mara took place in this physical world we live in. Can ordinary people take the Buddha as a role model and defeat Mara in their life in this world - as he did?
Mara’s defeat was caused by the power of the enlightened nature. How can we defeat the evil forces in life if we do not have the power of the Buddha-nature?
Theravada’s view of human nature as being inferior to evil (of Mara)
Denial of the potential of Buddha-nature in people means that human beings have no hope for being able to defeat evil. Theravada teaches that the Buddha was an exception in his power to defeat the forces of evil in this world, and that no one else can be his equal.
In essence, the denial of Buddha-nature is Theravada’s acknowledgement of the supremacy of evil of Mara in this world! It is a belief in the inability of people to defeat evil (as they lack the power of Buddha-nature, as Theravada teaches).
This is the background meaning of why Mahayana Buddhism considers the denial of Buddha-nature in people as submission to evil.
Buddha-nature and the concept of Potentiality
Some Mahayana websites explain the Buddha-nature in terms of concept of “potentiality”. The word Tathagatagarbha (Buddha-nature) means the Womb of Buddhahood, implying the pregnancy of life with the possibility or potential for enlightenment:
In Mahāyāna Buddhism, the term tathāgatagarbha refers to the Buddha-nature, or the innate potential for all beings to become a Buddha. The term literally translates to “the womb of the thus-come-one”. Source: Buddha Weekly
Mahayana sources try to explain to Theravada scholars that Pali Cannon itself contains reference to the Luminous Mind in everyone’s life:
“Luminous Mind similar to Buddha Nature
Although Buddha Nature is a vital teaching in Mahayana Buddhism, it is not — in those terms — expressed in Therevadan traditions, where instead they refer to the Pali Tipitika and Shakyamuni Buddha’s teaching on Luminous mind. Luminous Mind is similar in concept the Buddha Nature in some ways, and many equate the two — since Buddha, in Pali Canon, described that luminous mind is present whether you are aware of it or not — that it is mind “freed from incoming defilements.” A mind free of defilements is clearly the first step on the path to an Enlightened Mind.
The Pali Tipitika (Pabhassara Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya 1.49-52”.
Source: Buddha Weekly
This fact of the Buddha’s teaching of a “Mind free from defilements” in all people adds to another contradiction of Theravada scholars’ rejection that no one can become to the Buddha.
The ‘luminous mind’ exists, as the Buddha taught, and the potential to become conscious (or awakened to it) - is a possibility, a possibility of revealing its quality of wisdom and compassion leading to freedom from suffering in this world.
However, Theravada’s rejection of the potential of revealing Buddha-nature, makes its mainstream teachings as teachings of hopelessness for ordinary people, hopelessness of defeating evil – while offering only one solution of escapism from the world (for monks).
The Mahasanghika firmly rejected Theravada’s misunderstanding of the Buddha’s teachings about the potential of any person o become a Buddha. That was the reason of the split in Buddhism into a tradition for monks (Theravada) and another for ordinary people (Mahayana).
_______________________________________