Though European writers usually talk of two Yanas or Vehicles—­the great and the little—­and though this is clearly the important distinction for historical purposes, yet Indian and Chinese Buddhists frequently enumerate three.  These are the Sravakayana, the vehicle of the ordinary Bhikshu who hopes to become an Arhat, the Pratyekabuddhayana for the rare beings who are able to become Buddhas but do not preach the law to others, and in contrast to both of these the Mahayana or vehicle of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.  As a rule these three Vehicles are not regarded as hostile or even incompatible.  Thus the Lotus sutra,[3] maintains that there is really but one vehicle though by a wise concession to human weakness the Buddha lets it appear that there are three to suit divers tastes.  And the Mahayana is not a single vehicle but rather a train comprising many carriages of different classes.  It has an unfortunate but distinct later phase known in Sanskrit as Mantrayana and Vajrayana but generally described by Europeans as Tantrism.  This phase took some of the worst features in Hinduism, such as spells, charms, and the worship of goddesses, and with misplaced ingenuity fitted them into Buddhism.  I shall treat of it in a subsequent chapter, for it is chronologically late.  The silence of Hsuean Chuang and I-Ching implies that in the seventh century it was not a noticeable aspect of Indian Buddhism.

Although the record of the Mahayana in literature and art is clear and even brilliant, it is not easy either to trace its rise or connect its development with other events in India.  Its annals are an interminable list of names and doctrines, but bring before us few living personalities and hence are dull.  They are like a record of the Christian Church’s fight against Arians, Monophysites and Nestorians with all the great figures of Byzantine history omitted or called in question.  Hence I fear that my readers (if I have any) may find these chapters repellent, a mist of hypotheses and a catalogue of ancient paradoxes.  I can only urge that if the history of the Mahayana is uncertain, its teaching fanciful and its scriptures tedious, yet it has been a force of the first magnitude in the secular history and art of China, Japan and Tibet and even to-day the most metaphysical of its sacred books, the Diamond Cutter, has probably more readers than Kant and Hegel.

Since the early history of the Mahayana is a matter for argument rather than precise statement, it will perhaps be best to begin with some account of its doctrines and literature and proceed afterwards to chronology.  I may, however, mention that general tradition connects it with King Kanishka and asserts that the great doctors Asvaghosha and Nagarjuna lived in and immediately after his reign.  The attitude of Kanishka and of the Council which he summoned towards the Mahayana is far from clear and I shall say something about this difficult subject below.  Unfortunately