The Bodhisattva Ideal in Theravada Buddhist Theory and Practice: A Reevaluation of the Bodhisattva-Sravaka Opposition

Abstract

In the academic study of Buddhism the terms and are often set in contradiction to each other, and the two vehicles are described as having different aspirations, teachings, and practices. The distinctions made between the Mahayana and the Hinayana, however, force the schools into neat, isolated, and independent categories that often undermine the complexities that exist concerning their beliefs, ideologies, and practices. While some of the categories used to differentiate the Mahayana and the Hinayana are helpful in the study and interpretation of Buddhism, these distinctions must continually be reviewed. This article attempts to review one such distinction: the commonly held theoretical model that postulates that the goal of Mahayana practitioners is to become buddhas by following the path of the bodhisattva (bodhisattva-yana), whereas the goal of HTnayana practitioners is to become arahants by following the path of the Hearer or the Buddha's disciples (riavaka-yina). In demonstrating the oversimplifications inherent in this model, this article will investigate the presence and scope of the bodhisattva ideal in Theravada Buddhist theory and practice. By raising issues surrounding the Mahdyana-Hinayana opposition, however, I am not suggesting that distinctions cannot be made between the two vehicles, nor am I proposing to do away with the terms and Hinayana. Rather, in exploring the oversimplifications inherent in the Mahayana-HTnayana dichotomy, it is my intention to replace the theoretical model that identifies (1) Mahayana Buddhism with the bodhisattva-yana and (2) HTnayana Buddhism with the sravakayina with a model that is more representative of the two vehicles. In doing so, the implied purpose of this article, as is John Holt's study of the place and relevance of Avalokiteivara in Sri Lanka, is to raise questions among students of Buddhism regarding the very utility of the terms Mahayana ... and Theravada as designating wholly distinctive religiohistorical constructs' (emphasis added). Before turning to the presence and scope of the bodhisattva ideal in Theravada Buddhism (the only extant school of HTnayana Buddhism), it may be beneficial to investigate briefly the sources that identify the bodhisattva-yana with Mahayana Buddhism and the ?ravaka-yana with HTnayana Buddhism. Instead of looking at how this model is appropriated by scholars of Buddhism, I will turn to the writings of three Mahayana Buddhists in which this bifurcation is suggested. Jeffrey Samuels