Bulletin of The Institute of Oriental Philosophy

No. 30, pp. 13-43, 2014.

(13)

The Single Vehicle (ekayana) in the

Avaivartikacakrasu
tra and Lotus su
tra.

James B. Apple
Introduction

The concept of the single vehicle (Skt. ekayna, , Ch. yi

sheng, Jpn. ichij) is found in various Buddhist stras which are classified
as Mahyna1 stras, such as the Saddharmapuarka, rmldevsi
handanirdea, and Lakvatra. In general, these stras utilize the term
ekayna in the sense of the one path or one vehicle that leads to full
Buddhahood as opposed to other paths that are considered unreal. The
single vehicle (ekayna) is famously celebrated in the Saddharmapuarka
(hereafter, Lotus Stra), whose characterization of the ekayna strongly
influenced forms of Buddhism in East Asia, and continues to have an
impact on present day knowledge of Mahyna forms of Buddhism.
Other Mahyna discourses, however, var y in their description of the
ekayna and the concept has been subject to a number of diverse
interpretations throughout the history of Buddhism. This paper examines
the characteristics of ekayna found in the Lotus Stra and compares
these to the characteristics found in the Avaivartikacakrastra to gain a
greater understanding of the notion of ekayna in self-proclaimed Mah
yna stras that become more prominent from the second century CE
onwards.
1 Nattier (2003:10, 100101) argues that labels such as Mahyna stra are retrospective
attributions that obscure the social, historical, and contextual complexities of a given
Dharma-discourses development among Buddhist communities. Nattier applies an
alternative classification, bodhisattva stra, as well as proposing the theoretical model
of strafication to envision the processes of how a Dharma-discourse may have
developed into a authentic text attributed to the Buddha.

13

(14)

The Historical Development of the Ekaya

na Concept

The concept of ekayna slowly developed among a minority of

Buddhist groups from around the mid-first century CE amid complex
cultural changes in Indian society and Buddhist traditions during the rule
of the Kuas in the northwest areas of Greater Gandhra and the
Stavna dynasty in the south of India. Early models of the bodhisattva
path considered the way to full Buddhahood as a long and arduous
journey over countless lifetimes to be undertaken by only the few who
were fit, resolute, and committed for the journey. At some point in the
early centuries before the Common Era, based on the narratives found in
the Jtaka tales and Avadna stories, communities of Buddhist monastics
began to envision the bodhisattvas way to full Buddhahood through
composing bodhisattva stras that were attributed to the Buddha and
which speculated on how bodhisattvas could develop into Buddhas.
Associated with these developments, in addition to the Buddhas
early followers known as rvakas (lit. listeners) disciples, Buddhist
scholiasts began to incorporate the figure of the pratyekabuddha (soli
tary buddha) into their narratives and scholastic categories. The ancient
concept of the pratyekabuddha was initially shared with other non-Bud
dhist renunciate groups like the Jains (Norman 1983; Skilling 2004:
143n24). Over time Buddhists adapted the figure of the pratyekabuddha
to account for attainment in cosmological periods when no Buddhas were
present. The pratyekabuddha may have been a conceptual ideal to serve
such cosmological, categorical, and narrative functions for, as Nattier
(2003:13940) suggests, there is no evidence that actual Buddhists
ever considered themselves practitioners of the pratyekabuddha path.
Scholars of Abhidharma and authorial communities of bodhisattva stras
placed the pratyekabuddha in a middle rank between the lower level of
rvakas and those who were aspiring for Buddhahood, the bodhisattvas.
Thus, the idea of three types of individuals who follow three different
pathways or vehicles developed in the early centuries before the
Common Era among Buddhist communities.
Manuscript and inscriptional evidence support the idea of three
vehicles as predominant among mainstream Buddhists in the first
centuries of the Common Era. Among fifty-nine Gandharan Buddhist
inscriptions, dating from the mid-second centur y BCE to the second
14

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(15)

century CE, which enumerate the honorees and/or beneficiaries of the

establishment of a relic, nine inscriptions (Baums 2012: nos. 9, 11, 17, 22,
23, 24, 30, and 36; Falk 2014:1213) pay homage to all the Buddhas (G.
budha), all pratyekabuddhas (G. pracegasabudha), and all arhats (G.
arahata, arahadi). The arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas are
represented as three separate spiritual attainments, emblematic of the
hierarchical placement of status states and their pathways during this
period. Along these lines, a collection of Buddhist manuscripts found in
the Bajaur area near Afghanistan written on birch bark in Kharoh
script that date back to the first or second centur y based on palaeo
graphical evidence, include fragments which refer to three vehicles
(ravagayaa, praceabudhayaa, samasabudhayaa) (Karashima 2013:
Nasim Khan 2008). However, extant references to bodhisattvas in these
manuscripts do not mention vehicles, but rather speak of bodhisattva
training (Gndhr bosisatvaik, Skt. bodhisattaik.s; Strauch 2010:28).
The three vehicle paradigm consisting of Buddhas, pratyekabuddhas, and
arhats/rvakas was the dominant model. This three-tiered model of
spiritual paths became accepted and followed by the majority of Nikya
ordination lineages, a phase in Buddhist history which recent scholarship
has called the period of the three vehicles.2
The Period of the Three Vehicles

Among major developments during the period of the three

vehicles, a time span from the first centur y BCE through the second
century CE, some Buddhist groups spread out into Southeast, East, and
Central Asia, some supported the sculpting of bodhisattva and Buddha
images, some began to venerate the future Buddha Maitreya (Falk 2014),
and some began emphasizing how to practice the bodhisattva path to full
Buddhahood in early bodhisattva stras (Robinson, Johnson, hnissaro
2005:75). The earliest extant versions of such stras are found in
Gndhr fragments (Karashima and Falk 2012, 2013) and in early
Chinese translations completed before the end of the second century CE
2 Nattier (2007:182, note 4) notes that the phrase the period of the three vehicles was
coined by Gil Fronsdal in a personal communication around the year 2000. The phrase
appears for the first time in print in the fifth edition of Robinson, Johnson, and
hnissaros Buddhist Religions: A Historical Introduction, 2005: 75.

15

(16)

(Harrison 1987, 1993; Nattier 2003a). Several examples of these early

bodhisattva stras that have been translated and studied are the
Aashasrik-prajpramit (Conze 1975; Karashima 2011), the
Akobhyavyha (Dantinne 1983, Nattier 2000), and the Ugraparipcch
(Nattier 2003a).
In the Ugraparipcch, which Nattier suggests may date from the
first centur y BCE, the three vehicles are treated as separate paths to
separate goals (2003a:138141; 174176). The Ugraparipcch considers
the rvaka path an authentic way of practice that leads to the goal of
Arhatship and is different from the state of Buddhahood. In this early
bodhisattva stra, the rvaka path leading to the nirva of Arhatship
and the bodhisattva path leading to the complete awakening of a Buddha
are two separate but overlapping options for Buddhist practice, leading
to two separate and unequal goals (Nattier 2003:141). Along these lines,
in the Akobhyavyha the eastern realm of Abhirati where the Buddha
Akobhya presides is considered a location where the path of Arhatship is
viable and can be easily attained, indicating that the standard scenario
of three vehicles was assumed (Nattier 2000:94). These examples
demonstrate that in early bodhisattva literature difficult practices leading
to Buddhahood, that is, the bodhisattva path, were not an option for all,
and that a Buddhas primar y job was still to ensure the success of
rvakas in attaining Arhatship (Nattier 2003a, 88 n. 23). The notion that
the rvaka path is not viable or authentic and that Buddhists should
follow only the bodhisattva path, the sole path or one vehicle, that is,
ekayna, is also not found in these early bodhisattva stras.
Along these lines, the Daoxing Banruo Jing (Karashima
2011; hereafter Daoxing), a second-centur y Chinese translation by
Lokakema, is the earliest extant full version of a prajpramit
discourse that provides evidence for how early authorial communities
constructed the bodhisattva path and thought about the practices,
doctrines, and goals of bodhisattva movements. In this early version of
the Aashasrik, there is a brief discussion on three types of individuals
and the path that they follow. The dialogue takes place between the
Buddhas disciples Subhti and riputra. Subhti explains at length that
all things, including the supreme Awakening of a Buddha, are empty
(nya). riputra responds as follows:
16

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(17)

According to Subhtis exposition of [the Buddhas] teaching, there can

be no one who attains bodhisattvahood. As the Buddha said, there are
three kinds of virtuous people, those who seek arhatship, those who seek
[the state of] pratyekabuddha, and those who seek Buddhahood. Those
three are not to considered as three. As Subhti said, they belong to one
and the same path. (Daoxing, T.224, 454a1921; Karashima 2011: 299
300).

The term one path () in Lokakemas version appears in

later Sanskrit versions as one vehicle (ekam eva ynam). Dharmapriya
and Zhu Fonians translation in 382 CE qualifies same path with the
Buddha-vehicle, the bodhisattvas practice (T.266, 526b14:
). The later Sanskrit version qualifies one vehicle with the Buddhavehicle, the Bodhisattva-vehicle (yad uta buddhayna bodhisattvayna)
(Karashima 2011:300n386). However, at the end of this par ticular
dialogue, Subhti (Daoxing, T.224, 454a2529) dissolves the idea of even
a single path being cognized in Suchness (Skt. tathat) (cf. Harrison
1987:84). This dialogue within an early prajpramit discourse demon
strates that some groups, those who are represented in the voice of
riputra, were beginning to consider a single way through viewing the
mainstream Buddhist understanding of the three types of individuals as
being on the same Buddha path as bodhisattvas from the perspective of
emptiness.
Another brief section of the Daoxing (T.224, 464b18c7) also
mentions a single way or same path ( ). nanda inquires about
repenting of bad thoughts and the Buddha replies regarding how a bodhi
sattva should conduct himself with others. Then nanda asks how a
bodhisattva should conduct himself toward other bodhisattvas and the
Buddha responds by stating that a bodhisattva should look upon another
bodhisattva thinking We have one and the same teacher, one and the
same ship, one and the same path (T.224, 463c3 , , ;
Karashima 2011:404). In Kumrajvas version, translated in 408 CE, the
corresponding section reads they ride on the same vehicle, they practice
on the same path (T.227, 474a1 , ; ibid). The later San
skrit version reads they have mounted on the same vehicle as I, have
ascended the same path, are of like intention with me, have set out in

17

(18)

the same vehicle as I (ibid). These passages illustrate that early

translations preserved in Chinese consider ekayna as a single way or
path that later becomes correlated with a single vehicle (ekayna, ).
The context of these passages also shows that the concern is how
bodhisattvas should act toward other bodhisattvas. The early use of
single path/vehicle in this context is an expression of inclusiveness
between bodhisattvas who have set out in the same vehicle (samayna).
As previous scholarship has demonstrated for a number of early
bodhisattva stras (Harrison 1987:82; Nattier 2003:15456), the concern
of early bodhisattvas who aspired to the full awakening of a Buddha was
to avoid falling to the level of a rvaka or pratyekabuddha while not
offending practitioners who were following those pathways. In brief,
while the details of the bodhisattva ideal and its path were being
articulated, at this point among authorial communities of bodhisattva
stras, the inclusion of other ways or vehicles had not yet developed.
The Greater Way of Bodhisattvas

In the later timeframe of the period of the three vehicles, based

upon the number and content of texts that were translated into Chinese
in the third century by scholars like Zhi Qian () and Dharmaraka
(Zhu Fahu , fl. 265309), more bodhisattva stras appear that
praised and exalted the bodhisattva vehicle above the other two vehicles.
Although a minority movement within Buddhist institutional commu
nities, advocates of the bodhisattva vehicle (bodhisattvayna) began to
state that the way of the bodhisattva was a greater way or great
vehicle (mahyna), an early epithet of admiration (Nattier 2003: 174n6)
that soon became used with other synonyms such as buddha-vehicle
(buddhayna). As the above passages from the early Chinese translations
of Lokakema demonstrate, yna had a double meaning in the period of
the three vehicles in that it could mean vehicle as well as path. Early
Chinese translators employed the transliteration mhyan (0) or
frequently used the translation dadao (), the great way, but some
also used dasheng () the great vehicle (Durt 1994; Vetter 2014).
This indicates that Indian Buddhist authorial communities who strongly
advocated for the bodhisattva way played upon the double meaning of
yna in their rhetorical tropes and parables in generating support for
18

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(19)

their movement.
However, the relations with other vehicles varied among bodhi
sattva interest groups. Some groups, while advocating the bodhisattva
vehicle and upholding the traditional view of the three vehicles, granted
that the Arhat or Pratyekabuddha achieves liberation from sasra but
assert that these goals were not praiseworthy. Other groups, like the
authorial community of the Vimalakrtinirdea (second century CE) de
picted rvakas and pratyekabuddhas as men blind from birth who are
like burnt seeds (Lamotte 1976:149) with no hope for achieving full
Buddhahood. On the other hand, some groups began to assert forms of
bodhisattva universalism, a key defining feature of a number of
bodhisattva movements that would later become identified with the
Mahyna. These groups advocated that the bodhisattva path is
appropriate for all, and that all Buddhists either are, or should be, on that
path (Nattier 2003:175). These authorial communities insisted that the
goals of Arhatship or Pratyekabuddhood were only illusions and that all
Buddhists (knowingly or unknowingly) are on the path to Buddhahood
(ibid). It is among these groups that the inclusivism of a single path/
vehicle went beyond something that was shared between groups of
bodhisattvas and began to include rvakas and pratyekabuddhas. As
Nattier (ibid) points out, the concept of ekayna is a strong form of
bodhisattva universalism where only one path and one goal really exist.
However, the bodhisattva interest groups who began to advocate an
inclusive vision of the way to full Buddhahood to include other vehicles
were among the minority of bodhisattvas.
One can infer that advocates of bodhisattva universalism were a
minority based on the analysis of the term ekayna as it appears in
present day Buddhist canonical literature preser ved in Chinese and
Tibetan. As Nattier (2007:182) demonstrates in her analysis of the term
One vehicle (yisheng, ) in the Taish canon, although there are
over 6000 occurrences of the term, No occurrence of yisheng can be
found in a Buddhist text prior to the time of Dharmarakathe pattern
of distribution points to the likelihood that it was Dharmaraka himself
who first introduced yisheng as the Chinese equivalent of Sanskrit (or
Prakrit) ekayna. As Nattier concludes, before the time of Dharmaraka,
the ver y idea of a single vehicle seems to be absent from scriptures

19

(20)

translated into Chinese (ibid 183). I carried out a similar search of the
Tibetan Kanjur for One vehicle (theg pa cig) and found that only thirtythree stras out of 361 texts, including Prajpramit, Avatasaka, and
261 Mahyna stras, contained the term. This data points to the fact
that the doctrine of one vehicle, even though it is an essential concept
in East Asian forms of Buddhism from its ver y beginnings, required
many centuries to gain even a modicum of acceptance in India (Nattier
2003a:86).3
Ekaya
na in the Lotus Su
tra and Avaivartikacakrasu
tra

When we examine a reliable list of the 154 translations that were

carried out by Dharmaraka and his team of translators over a forty-year
period (Boucher 2006), we find that the Lotus stra (Zhengfahua jing
, T.263), translated in 285 CE, and the Avaivartikacakrastra (Awei
yuezhizhe jing , T.266), translated in 284 CE, are among the
earliest of his translations to discuss the single vehicle (, ekayna).
In fact, of the fourteen translations that Dharmaraka completed before
the Lotus stra, the Avaivartikacakrastra is the earliest translation to
discuss single vehicle (yisheng, ).
In order to gain a greater understanding of the notion of the
ekayna in self-proclaimed Mahyna stras, I examine the characteristics
of this concept found in the Lotus stra and compare these to those found
in the Avaivartikacakrastra. A comparison of the Lotus stra and the
Avaivartikacakrastra provides a good case study because both of these
stras represent a second layer of early to middle period (from the first
to third century CE) developments where bodhisattva interest groups,
self-referencing their pathway as the Mahyna, were beginning to
more clearly articulate their differences from conservative mainstream
forms of Buddhism but still had to address how bodhisattvas become
Buddhas. Both stras were compiled before the ten stages of a bodhi
sattva system and the three bodies of a Buddha had been fully
3 I carried out the Tibetan Kanjur search through the E-Kanjur at the The Tibetan &
Himalayan Library (http://www.thlib.org/) web site. As far as I am currently aware,
the earliest extant manuscript occurrence of the term ekayna is preser ved in the
colophon of the rmldevsihandanirdea fragments in the Schoyen collection
(Matsuda, 2000:74).
20

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(21)

developed, yet they both have a number of interrelated concerns and

intertextual relations.
The comparison between these two sutras portrayal of ekayna
illustrates underlying similarities in how ekayna was conceived but also
clarifies impor tant dif ferences of meaning that broadens scholarly
knowledge of the ekayna in Mahyna literature. As pointed out by
Kunst (1977:313), the concept of the ekayna employed by authorial
communities of Mahyna stras not only illustrates how the Mahyna
is conceived but also provides samples of degrees of tolerance
towards the acceptance of the validity of other vehicles The compari
son between the Lotus stra and the Avaivartikacakrastra in the following
pages demonstrates that both stras advocate ekayna, but differ in terms
of their depiction of other pathways/vehicles. Additionally, this compari
son illustrates how these stras manage the toleration of other vehicles
while ultimately not accepting that other paths/vehicles and their results
are real.
Ekaya
na in the Lotus su
tra

A seminal study on the notion of the ekayna in the Lotus stra

was initially published by Ktatsu Fujita () in Japanese in 1969 as
Ichij to sanj, and then translated in English by Leon Hurvitz as One
Vehicle or Three (1975). As Fujita points out, an important feature of
the Lotus stra is its denial of the commonplace Mahyna notion that
there are three paths to salvation(1975:79). The Lotus stra famously
teaches the doctrine of ekayna through explicit statements and through
parables utilizing skillful means (upyakaualya). The basic position of the
Lotus stra is clarified in its second chapter on skillful means (Upya
kaualyaparivarta) which forcefully pronounces the doctrine of ekayna. A
central citation that illustrates ekayna in the Lotus stra is found in its
second chapter, as follows:
With a single duty, riputra, with a single task the Tathgata, Arhat and
Per fectly Awakened One appears in the worldNamely, in order to
inspire living beings to the mental vision of a tathgata (tathgatajnadar
ana), the Tathgata, Arhat and Perfectly Awakened One appears in the
world With reference to only a single vehicle, riputra, I teach the

21

(22)

Dharma for living beings, namely, the vehicle of the buddhas. riputra,
there is not any second or third vehicle. This, riputra, is the True Law
everywhere in the worlds of the ten regions.4

In this passage the Buddha articulates to riputra that the only

purpose of his teaching is to establish living beings on the path to
complete Buddhahood, the mental vision of a Tathgata. The Buddha
teaches the Dharma based on only a single vehicle (ekam ynam) which
is equivalent to the vehicle of the buddhas or Buddha-vehicle
(buddhayna). Fujita (1975:8393) examines a number of prose and verse
citations to indicate that Buddha-vehicle (buddhaynam) in the Lotus
stra is synonymous with a number of expressions such as Unique
Vehicle (ekam eva yna), One Vehicle (ekayna), the Unique Buddhavehicle (evaika buddhayna), great vehicle (mahyna), Unique
Great Vehicle (ekam eva mahyna), and Bodhisattva-Vehicle (bodhi
sattvayna).
The Lotus stra states that Buddhas, due to the cosmological cir
cumstances of being born in an age characterized by Five Corruptions,5
present the Three Vehicles as part of a skillful method to teach beings.
The Buddha adapts the teachings of the Dharma to the needs,
aspirations, and capacities of sentient beings by indicating Three Vehicles
utilizing skillful means. Fujita (1975:84) draws attention to verses of the
Lotus stra that authenticate its assertion of the One Vehicles uniqueness
by connecting it to the traditional life story of the Buddha. The Lotus
stra (KN 54.13f f, verses 2.113f f) depicts the Buddha recalling the
skillfulness of former Buddhas in reaching his decision to preach by
4 Translation from Zimmermann 1999:157 based on Sanskrit from KN 39.1340.15:
ekaktyena riputraikakarayena tathgato rhan samyaksabuddho loka utpadyate yad
ida tathgatajnadaranasamdpanahetunimitta sattvn tathgato rhan
samyaksabuddho loka utpadyate / ekam evha riputra ynam rabhya sattvn
dharma deaymi yad ida buddhayna / na kicic chriputra dvitya v ttiya v
yna savidyate / sarvatrai riputra dharmat daadigloke /
5 The five corruptions (pacakaya) are considered to be signs of the degenerate age of
the dharma (saddharmavipralopa), a cosmological time period when there are the
degenerations of lifespan (yukaya), views (dikaya), mental afflictions (kleakaya), existence (sattvakaya), and of the eon (kalpakaya).See Edgerton 1953:102,
174.
22

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(23)

dividing the Buddhas awakening into three kinds (buddhabodhi tridh

vibhajya). However, the Buddha having seen the thousands of myriads
of millions of beings who seek the Buddha path, or supreme highest
awakening perceives that the time is ripe to cast aside expedient devices
and merely preach the unexcelled path (Hurvitz 2009:42).
The relationship between skillful means and the single vehicle
that is asserted in the second chapter will be restated and explained in
the next seven chapters of the Lotus stra through parables (aupamya),
background tales (pryayoga) and predictions of future Buddhahood
(vykaraa). As Gombrich (1992) has suggested, the Lotus stra puns on
the double meaning of yna as path and vehicle to illustrate its
inclusive avocation of the bodhisattva way to Buddhahood. The parable
of the burning house (Chapter 3) uses the metaphor of vehicle while the
parable of the apparitional city (Chapter 7) uses the metaphor of a path.
Some parables, such as the wealthy man and his impoverished son
(Chapter 4), medicinal herbs (Chapter 5), and the jewel hidden in the
robe (Chaper 8) do not utilize either metaphor to illustrate the suprem
acy of the single way to Buddhahood. Kumrajvas version of the Lotus
stra will state both metaphors: The Buddhas teach the single path,
explaining it as three (T.262,19a; Kubo and Yuyama 2007:94) and It is
only through the power of the Tathgatas skillful means that the single
buddha vehicle is explained as three (T.262, 26a; Kubo and Yuyama
2007:132).
Related to this use of ekayna, as a number of scholars have
pointed out (Teiser and Stone 2009:16-17), the Lotus stra does not
provide an explicit definition of the single path/vehicle and never actually
explains exactly what the one path/vehicle is. This leads to a number of
questions among later Chinese and Japanese commentators concerning
whether the one vehicle or buddha vehicle is the same as, or different
from, the bodhisattva vehicle. Fujita (1975) gives evidence from the
Lotus stra that either interpretation is possible.
However, as Tamura (1972) and Tsukamoto (1986; 2007:261263)
have pointed out, in the above passage from the second chapter, the
Sanskrit uses ordinal numbers in stating not any second or third vehicle
while the Chinese may be interpreted as using cardinal numbers that
state neither two nor three vehicles. Some scholars in interpreting the

23

(24)

numbers as ordinals understood the second and third vehicles to refer to

pratyekabuddha and rvaka vehicles while the Buddha-vehicle is under
stood as the first. Other scholars in interpreting the numbers as cardinal
understand two to refer to the rvaka and pratyekabuddha vehicles and
three to refer to the the rvaka, pratyekabuddha and bodhisattva
vehicles. Kumrajvas disciple Daosheng (, ca.355434 c.e.), in his
commentar y on the Lotus stra interpreted this phrase as second or
third (Kim 1990:123) while Fayun (, 467529 c.e.) established the
One Vehicle that stood apar t from the three vehicles (Kanno 1992;
Hayakawa 2007). Followers of Fayuns interpretation are known as
proponents of the four vehicles.
Be that as it may, as Fujita (1975:105) notes, the presumption of
the Single Vehicle advocated by the Lotus stra was to rebuke the view of
the Three Vehicles that was held among the dif ferent mainstream
Buddhist Nikya lineages, such as the Sarvstivda school, at the time of
the Lotus stras composition. How were the three vehicles generally
understood at the time of the Lotus stra and how are the three vehicles
depicted in the Lotus stra?
The Three Vehicles in the Lotus su
tra

As I have documented above, and as Fujita has discussed (1975:

9293), the idea of Three Vehicles was the dominant mainstream
Buddhist position before the concept of One Vehicle was formulated.
Fujita traced the expression three vehicles and its cognates (tri
ynni, triyna, ynatraya, etc.) to frequent occurrences in a Sarvstivda
text known as the Mahvibh as well as the Mahvastu of the
Lokottaravda branch of the Mahsghikas.
The Three Vehicles are mentioned throughout the Lotus stra and
a description of their individual characteristics is found in the third
chapter, the Aupamyaparivarta, on the well-known parable of the burning
house. In this section of the Lotus stra the vehicle of the rvaka is
described in the following passage from the Sanskrit:
There are some who, wishing to follow the dictates of anothers voice,
apply themselves to the teaching of the Tathgata in order to realize the
Nobles Four Truths for the purpose of their own nirva. These, desiring
24

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(25)

the vehicle of the rvakas, escape from the three realms [KN 80.58]

In this passage the Lotus stra describes the rvaka vehicle as

consisting of those who hear the Tathgatas teaching from another and
focus on realizing the Nobles Four Truths for the purpose of their own
personal nirva. The characterization of a mainstream Buddhist focus
upon ones own personal nirva (tmaparinirva) is from the perspec
tive of one who is following the bodhisattva ideal. Less polemically, the
Lotus stra recognizes the ideal of the rvaka vehicle as centered upon
the mainstream Buddhist teaching of the Nobles Four Truths. The Lotus
stra characterizes the vehicle of the pratyekabuddha in the same section:
Other beings, who seek wisdom not dependent on a teacher, as well as
self-restraint and calmness, apply themselves to the Tathgatas teaching
in order to realize causes and conditions for the purpose of their own
nirva. These, desiring the pratyekabuddha vehicle, escape from the
three realms [KN 80.810]

In this section the pratyekabuddha is characterized as seeking

wisdom without a teacher and focusing on calmness. However, the Lotus
stra also makes a connection between the pratyekabuddha and the
twelve causes and conditions of dependent arising (prattyasamutpda)
which has been thoroughly discussed by Fujita (1975:98104). The point
being that the type of individual in this vehicle, from the perspective of
the Lotus stra, gains achievement through realizing causes (hetu) and
conditions (pratyaya).
The above two passages demonstrate that the Lotus stra
embraces the two vehicles of the rvaka and pratyekabuddha, i.e., the
position of earlier schools, by acknowledging their pathways on their
own level. However, the parables and predictions in the Lotus stra
illustrate that these pathways were not considered real. What of the
vehicle of the bodhisattvas?
The vehicle of the bodhisattva is also described in the same
section of the Lotus stra as follows:
Again other beings, those who desire the wisdom of the Omniscient

25

(26)

One, the wisdom of a Buddha, the self-generating wisdom, the wisdom

acquired without a teacher, for the benefit of many people, for the
happiness of many people, apply themselves to the Tathgatas teaching
to understand the knowledge, power, and fearlessness of the Tathgata,
out of compassion, for the sake of aims, benefit, and happiness of the
majority of beings, gods and humans, for the sake of complete nirva of
all beings. Of them it is said that, in their desire for the Great Vehicle,
they escape from the three realms. That is why they are called Bodhi
sattvas, Great Beings. [KN 80.1181.5]

This passage states that those who desire the Great Vehicle
(mahyna) are bodhisattvas. They are those who desire to attain the
state of omniscient full Buddhahood out of compassion for other beings.
Such beings desire the knowledge and power of a Tathgata to lead all
beings to complete nirva. Fujita (1975:110f) explains that Great Vehicle,
Buddha-vehicle (buddhayna), bodhisattva vehicle, and the single vehicle,
or single way, are synonyms in the Lotus stra. As Fujita (1975:108)
states, This demonstrates that the One Vehicle as such is no different
from the Buddha-Vehicle as a member of the triad. An important insight
made by Fujita (1975:93) is that the Nikya schools never present the
buddhayna, the first among the three vehicles, in terms of a bodhi
sattvayna. In the Lotus stra, the understanding of the bodhisattvavehicle becomes more universal in scope and signifies that all beings
are on the path to Buddhahood rather than the limited view of the few
who can be a bodhisattva as presented in earlier discourses. Therefore,
the expression three vehicles is understood differently between the
Nikya schools and the authorial community of the Lotus stra.
Ekayna in the Lotus stra signifies a critique of three distinct
vehicles, with the focus of the critique always being directed against
those who are following the vehicles of the rvaka and pratyekabuddha,
never that of the Buddha. A passage from Dharmarakas Lotus stra
translation, not found in Kumrajva (nor cited by Fujita), reads: [You]
should uphold this True Lotus Stra. The Tathgata distinguishes skillful
means [in a way that] there are not two vehicles (or alternatively, not

26

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(27)

the second vehicle) and all go on one path.6 Whether we read this
extract as criticizing two vehicles or a second vehicle, the passage speaks
of the one path (), echoing the meaning of a single way or path
mentioned above. As we will see below in Dharmarakas translation of
the Avaivartikacakrastra, the single way is equated with Mahyna.
In sum, the Lotus stra acknowledges the position of earlier
schools on the characteristics of the rvaka and pratyekabuddha
vehicles/paths, but harshly critiques these as unreal through the use of
predictions and parables. The Lotus stra refers to the Buddha-vehicle, or
path, with the additional classifications Great Vehicle, or Bodhisattva
Vehicle One Vehicle and Unique Vehicle expanding the notion of
buddha path/vehicle while critiquing the view of three distinct paths or
vehicles.
The Avaivartikacakrasu
tra and its Relations with the Lotus su
tra

The Avaivartikacakrastra is classified as a Mahyna stra and is

said to have been taught by the Buddha, at rvast, in the Jeta Grove of
Anthapiada. The stra depicts the Buddha teaching the wheel of the
irreversible doctrine (avaivartikadharmacakra) where all beings are
destined for Buddhahood. The overall content and structure of the stra
reflects influences from several Mahyna stras. Akira Hirakawa (1990)
describes the stra as a combination of the Perfection of Wisdom and the
Lotus stra. The Avaivartikacakra is influenced by the Perfection of Wis
dom in terms of its teaching on emptiness and irreversible bodhisattvas.
The Lotus stra influence is apparent with the Avaivartikacakras em
phasis on ekayna and skill-in-means (upyakaualya). This correlation of
subject matter between the Lotus stra and the Avaivartikacakra would
lead some Chinese catalogs to list the stras together within a single
section (See Demiville, Choix dtudes bouddhiques, 19291970, page 192,
2111. IV). The Avaivartikacakrastra was composed at a time when
Akobhya (Tib. mi khrugs pa) and Amitbha (Tib. od dpag med) were
popular, as visions of both Buddhas are a benefit of the stra (Chapter
14, mdo sde zha 293a46). I have demonstrated that there are several
common narrative elements shared between the Lotus stra and the
6 T.263, 100b12b13:

27

(28)

Avaivartikacakrastra (Apple 2012). Both stras have Majur and

Maitreya as the main opening interlocutors, both place emphasis on skillin-means (upyakaualya) and the allegorical purport of the Buddhas
teaching, both utilize the literary motif of bodhisattvas emerging from
the gaps of the earth, and both teach the theory of ekayna.
Ekaya
na in the Avaivartikacakrasu
tra

The Avaivartikacakrastra teaches ekayna but in a roundabout

manner. In the opening chapter of the Avaivartikacakrastra, riputra
arrives at Majurs residence and joins Majur sitting cross-legged
and together they travel (through samdhi??) eastward beyond worlds as
numerous as the sands of the Ganges river to the world realm
(lokadhtu) known as Irreversible Sound (*Avaivartikanirgho, phyir mi
ldog pai dbyangs) where the Tathgata *bhvtapadmaphullitagtra (od
zer gyis khebs pai pad ma rab tu rgyas pai sku) dwells.7 This Tathgata is
surrounded by gold complexioned bodhisattvas endowed with thirty-two
auspicious marks sitting on thousand-petalled lotuses. This Tathgata
asks Majur where he is from and Majur replies that he is from the
Sah (mi mjed) world system.
Then a mahsattva, bodhisattva named nandokti (sgra snyan)
asks the Tathgata where the Sah world is, which Buddha teaches
there, and what kind of dharma does he teach. The Tathgata indicates
that the Sah world is west beyond as many world systems as sands in
the Ganges and that the Buddha kyamuni resides there. nandokti
asks if such a teaching is harmonious with the teachings of other
Buddhas. The Tathgata responds that this teaching is harmonious and
7 I have reconstructed the name of the *Avaivartikanirghoa world-system based on the
world-system Avaivartikacakranirghoa found in the Sanskrit manuscript of the
Anantabuddhaketraguodbhvana-nmamahynastra (Vint 2010:571). This reading
matches with Dharmarakas irreversible sound (T.266, 198c89). The
reading also matches with the Tibetan, phyir mi ldog pai dbyangs, found in all
manuscripts among Western Kanjurs (e.g. Basgo, Hemis) and the Them-spangs-ma
line (e.g. Tokyo, Ulan Bator). However, manuscripts among the Tshal-pa manuscript
line, such as Jang sa tham /Lithang, Kangxi (257a3), Peking (257a5), Qing Kangxi
(257a5), and Derge (242a6) read phyir mi ldog pai dbyings, irreversible sphere. I
have reconstructed the name of the Tathgata *bhvtapadmaphullitagtra based on
the Tibetan in consultation with Handurukande (1973) and the name Sunicitapad
maphullitagtra given in the Sanskrit (Vint, ibid).
28

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(29)

that all Buddhas teach the avaivartikadharmacakra (phyir mi ldog pai

chos kyi khor lo) that leads beings to the one path/vehicle through
utilizing skill-in-means after initially indicating three paths/vehicles. The
Avaivartikacakrastra reads in detail as follows:
Then the Tathgata *bhvtapadmaphullitagtra, although he already
knew, said the following words to Majur, Majur, from where do
you presently come? Majur replied, Bhagavan, I come from the Sah
world system. Then, with reverence to the Bhagavan a bodhisattva
named Pleasant Sound (nandokti), arose from his lotus seat, put his
upper robe over one shoulder, prostrated with his head to the feet of the
Bhagavan, placed his right knee on the ground, saluted the Bhagavan
with his hands joined together, and asked himHow far is the Sah
world system? The Tathgata *bhvtapadmaphullitagtra said to the
bodhisattva-mahsattva Pleasant Sound, Son of Good Family, it is beyond
as many world systems as particles of sand in the Ganges River in the
western direction from this world system. [The bodhisattva] replied,
What Bhagavat teaches dharma in that world system? The Bhagavan
[*bhvtapadmaphullitagtra] replied, The Tathgata, Arhat, complete,
perfect Buddha called kyamuni. [The bodhisattva] asked, What kind
of dharma does that Bhagavan teach? [The Bhagavan [*bhvtapad
maphullitagtra] replied], He sets forth the three vehicles. [The bodhi
sattva] asked, Bhagavan, what are the three vehicles? [The Bhagavan
[*bhvtapadmaphullitagtra] replied] The vehicle of the rvakas, the
vehicle of the pratyekabuddhas, and the Mahyna. Having established
those three vehicles, the Bhagavan, the Tathgata, Arhat, the complete,
per fect Buddha kyamuni teaches that dharma. [The bodhisattva]
asked, Bhagavan, is that not compatible with the dharma of all Buddha
Bhagavans? [The Bhagavan [*bhvtapadmaphullitagtra] replied], Son
of Good Family, this is compatible with the teachings of the Buddha
Bhagavans. [The bodhisattva] asked, To what extent is this compatible
with the dharma teachings of the Buddha Bhagavans? [The Bhagavan
[*bhvtapadmaphullitagtra] replied], The dharma teaching of the
Buddha Bhagavans is compatible with the discourse on irreversible
dharma (avaivartikadharmacakra). [The bodhisattva] asked, Bhagavan,
How is it that a Bhagavan sets forth the three vehicles and presently

29

(30)

teaches dharma?8

In the version translated from Tibetan given above, the bodhi

sattva asks about three vehicles (theg pa gsum) while in Dharmarakas
version, he inquires about three paths (, T.266, 199a3). Along these
lines, the third path/vehicle in the Tibetan is Mahyna (theg pa chen
po), while in Dharmarakas version the third is given as spreading the
Buddhas path (). Based on Fujitas work (1975:8393) articulated
above, this is most likely a reference to buddhayna. Here we see the
same equivalences between path/vehicle and Mahyna/Buddhayna as
are found in the Lotus Stra.
The above citation of the Avaivartikacakrastra portrays the bodhi
sattvas in the Irreversible sound (Avaivartikanirghoa) world-system as
never having heard of three vehicles. The implication being that
Buddha kyamuni teaches a kind of dharma that bodhisattvas in the
pure realm of Irreversible sound are not familiar with. Although the
stra does not explicitly advocate ekayna at this point, the statement
which follows implicitly indicates that the stra is promoting the single
path/vehicle.
[The Bhagavan [*bhvtapadmaphullitagtra] replied] Son of Good
Family, sentient beings aspire for the inferior and when they do not enter
the single path/vehicle, [the Buddhas] guide them with skill-in-means.
Son of Good Family, the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, have great skill-inmeans. [The bodhisattva] stated, Bhagavn, will those [sentient beings]
not aspire for the single vehicle at the time of the five corruptions?
Bhagavn, the teaching of dharma is considered to be ver y difficult.
[The Bhagavn replied,] Son of Good Family, it is so.9

This scene in the opening chapter of the Avaivartikacakrastra

utilizes a narrative technique which I refer to as displacement, a tech
nique that entails introducing the audience to problems and issues to be
8 Avaivartikacakrastra, translated from Tibetan Derge 242b2243a5, close corre
spondence with Dharmaraka (T.266, 198c27-199a8).
9 Avaivartikacakrastra, translated from Tibetan Derge 243a5243a6; close correspon
dence with Dharmaraka (T. 266, 9.198c27199a8).
30

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(31)

negotiated by Buddhists in this world through the narrative displaced

context of another world-system. This opening setting has riputra and
Majur traveling to another world-system called Irreversible Sound
(Avaivartikanirghoa), to ostensively learn from a Buddha in that realm
that the single path/vehicle is taught throughout the universe but three
vehicles are only taught in this Sah world-realm due to the inferior
aspirations of beings and their poor cosmological circumstances.
The next scene in the stra shifts back to Jeta Grove in rvast,
where nanda recognizes through a number of auspicious signs that the
Buddha is about to give an important teaching. Just as the Buddha arises
from his concentration, Majur emerges out of the gaps of the earth
travelling from the Irreversible Sound world-system with thousands of
bodhisattvas. The Buddha then commands nanda to summon all the
members of the sagha in Jeta Grove to hear the anticipated Dharma
teaching. After nanda returns from summoning members of the
sagha, the Buddha requests Mahmaudgalyyana to go out and sum
mon, in the Tibetan version, as many bodhisattvas-mahsattvas as possi
ble throughout the three-thousand-fold universe. Dharmarakas version
has the same scenario, but qualifies the bodhisattvas as all who have
served previous Buddhas, whose aspiration is to the great vehicle and
who learn to stay on the single path (T.266, 201a1718;
. ). This section of the stra implies that bodhisattvas
reside on the single path to Buddhahood while aspiring for the great
vehicle. The stra plays on the two metaphors of path and vehicle to
convey the notion that one way is travelled by all to the destination of
Buddhahood. Does this include rvakas and pratyekabuddhas? If so, how
does this stra depict their pathways?
The Three Vehicles in the Avaivartikacakrasu
tra

The Avaivartikacakrastra, unlike the Lotus stra, does not describe

the qualities and pathways of rvakas and pratyekabuddhas on their own
level and then reveal through parables and predictions that those levels
are illusionary. Rather, the Avaivartikacakrastra rewrites and transforms
the pathways and qualities of various types of rvaka spiritual attain
ments, including the pratyekabuddha, as actually being bodhisattvas
through the rhetorical technique of semantic elucidation (skt. nirukta)

31

(32)

(Apple 2009). In other words, the stra presumes that all the various
types of Noble Beings (rya), as well as those who aspire for such status,
are bodhisattvas from the onset but do not realize it due to degenerate
circumstances. The stra explains that the Buddha employs skill-in-means
in his use of allegorical speech (Tib. ldem po ngag, Skt. sadhbhya)
for beings who do not initially aspire for the state of Buddhahood at the
time of the five corruptions.
In Chapters Two through Chapter Ten of this stra, the Buddha
ar ticulates to nanda how mainstream Buddhist rvaka stages of
attainment are actually irreversible bodhisattvas. The Buddhas re
describes the following rvaka stages of attainment, which are found in
the earliest extant discourses attributed to the Buddha, as bodhisattvas:
Followers-through-Faith (raddhnusrin), Followers-of-Dhar ma
(dharmnusrin), the Eighth (aamaka), Stream-enterer (srota-panna),
Once-returner (sakdgmin), Non-returner (angmin), Arhat, and
Pratyekabuddha. These categories of spiritual attainment are found in all
the Nikya schools of mainstream Buddhism (Bareau 2013).
In the stra, the Buddha gives a whole prose discourse followed
by a number of stanzas on a certain type of bodhisattva who has a status
name derived from rvaka terminology. According to the normative
representation of this stra, the Buddha here skillfully creates notions or
perceptions (saj) of stages of traditional mainstream Buddhist
categories of progression to illustrate bodhisattvas. The bodhisattvas are
described with word-plays, or puns, that elucidate the qualities of the
bodhisattva based on the rvaka terminology. A Follower-of-Dharma is
described as a bodhisattva who follows the stream of inconceivable
dharmas (Taipei 240, fol. 502, acintya-dharma-rota-anusri) and is
irreversibly bound to attain the omniscient knowledge of a Buddha
(buddha-jna) or the great knowledge (mahjna). The stra redefines
the term Follower-of-Dharma and connects it with being an irreversible
bodhisattva by means of semantic elucidation (nirvacana) or word-plays
on the term dharma. Along these lines, the Eighth (aamaka) is
redescribed as a bodhisattva-mahsattva through word plays on cate
gories related to eight (aa). The bodhisattva enters into the Buddhavehicle while passing beyond the eight perversions, contacting the eight
liberations, not having attachment to the eight-fold path. A Non-returner
32

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(33)

(angmin) is redefined with word-plays on movement (Skt. gamyate) as

there is no coming (angama) nor going (anirgama) in terms of ultimate
reality (Cf. Lamotte 1976:117; Braar vig 1993: xliii). This chapter also
indicates that All sentient beings have the opportunity for the buddha
vehicle, universalizing the bodhisattva path for all beings. The stra also
describes an Arhat with a semantic elucidation playing on the twofold
etymology of arhat as one who is worthy (from the root arh to be
worthy) and one who has destroyed (hata) the foe (ari). For example,
the stra states the bodhisattva, the mahsattva is one who destroys
activities of limited religious practice and is one who is worthy to achieve
the activity of liberating all sentient beings. The Avaivartikacakrastra is
the earliest Indian Buddhist source I am aware of to employ this twofold
etymology with reference to Arhats. The stra will redefine pratyeka
buddha based on etymological word-plays of pratyaka, direct percep
tion. As illustrated above in the Lotus stra, the prateyakabuddha is
usually thought to be construed from glosses related with pratyaya
conditions (Fujita 1975: 99101, 128n88; Dejong 1977). Echoing the
Lotus stra (KN 4.53; Kubo and Yuyama 2007:93), the Avaivartikacakra
stra states that a rvaka is one who proclaims unelaborated, pacified,
awakening of Buddhahood to immeasurable sentient beings (Taipai 240,
fol. 531.3,). Both these stras pun the word rvaka, a vddhi derivative of
the root ru- (to hear) to which the suffx -ka has been appended, to
mean two things at the same time. The primary meaning is of one who
hears found within mainstream Buddhist formations, including Indic
heterodox traditions such as Jainism, and the second meaning, the
rhetorical understanding that these Mahyna stras wish to advocate, is
one who enables others to hear. The idea being that real rvakas in
these Mahyna stras are those who proclaim the universal path to
Buddhahood to all beings.
In this way, the Avaivartikacakrastra rhetorically transvalues the
stages of rvaka spiritual attainment, as well as the attainment of
pratyekabuddha, found in early mainstream Buddhist discourses into
bodhisattvas. The authorial community of this stra hollowed out and
redefined the traditional terms of status found within mainstream
hierarchical Buddhist path structures to reconceive the bodhisattva way.
In brief, these status terms were transvalued to embody bodhisattva

33

(34)

qualities that were redirected toward entering the Buddha-vehicle

(buddhayna) and following the Buddha-path to attain buddha-dharmas
and buddha-jna. The stra makes clear that the Buddha-vehicle is the
way of bodhisattvas for all the types of Noble beings discussed
throughout the discourse who are considered to be bodhisattvas. Along
these lines, the stra also considers even great arhats, such as riputra,
Maudgalyyana, Subhti, Aniruddha, Revata, and Kapina to be bodhi
sattvas.10 The Avaivartikacakrastra employs a subtle rhetoric of bodhi
sattva universalism to its audience through the use of semantic
elucidation and the hermeneutics of allegorical speech to convey the
notion that all spiritual attainments in Buddhism are directed toward the
destination of Buddhahood.
Conclusion

The Lotus stra and the Avaivartikacakrastra represent a second

layer of early to middle period developments among bodhisattva interest
groups who were still addressing how bodhisattvas become Buddhas and
outlining the bodhisattva path against traditional mainstream forms of
Buddhism. At the time of the formation of these stras, a three path or
vehicle paradigm consisting of Buddhas, pratyekabuddhas, and arhats/
rvakas was the dominant model accepted and followed by the majority
of mainstream Buddhists within the Nikya ordination lineages. Advo
cates of the bodhisattva way began to popularize the path to Buddhahood
as not only more exalted but also more accessible to Buddhist followers.
This depiction of the bodhisattva way (bodhisattvayna) differed from the
Nikya schools who had upheld a more exclusive way to Buddhahood
(buddhayna). The rhetorical use of the concept of ekayna, a term
expressing a single path or vehicle, was one of numerous techniques,
including skillful means, allegorical meaning, and semantic elucidation
that the second layer of bodhisattva stras utilized to enable the
bodhisattva path to become more popular.
In its earliest extant use, the idea of ekayna was utilized in an
inclusive manner to unify bodhisattva groups as being on the same
path (samayna). Ekayna then became a technique of incorporating the
10 Avaivartikacakrastra, Tibetan, Derge, 273a3273b7.
34

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(35)

conser vative mainstream vehicle of the rvaka path to be included

within the Greater Vehicle (mahyna) while expanding the definition
and presence of the bodhisattva path to be universalist in scope. Stras
composed at the time of the Lotus stra and the Avaivartikacakrastra
began to redefine and expand the status of the bodhisattva and the bodhi
sattva path to be all inclusive of every conceivable status category within
the mainstream Buddhist worldview. For the authors of the Avaivartika
cakrastra, this included status categories and terms like Stream-enterer,
Once-returner, and even Tathgata and Bhagavan, who were redefined as
bodhisattvas (Apple, forthcoming). The use of the ekayna theory along
with semantic elucidation by the authorial community of the Avaivartika
cakrastra was mostly inclusive in nature as this discourse does not
contain the exclusionar y, as well as derogator y, term hnayna the
inferior vehicle in referring to those who do not follow the bodhisattva
way. On the other hand, while the Lotus stra utilizes predictions and
parables to demonstrate the power of its teaching to grant future Buddha
hood to its followers, it appears to be one of the first stras to use the
term hnayna inferior vehicle, which occurs eight times in the early
strata of Kumrajvas version (Saigusa 1981:125). Even though the Lotus
stra recognizes the pathways of rvakas and pratyekabuddhas on their
own level, it is forceful in its negation of those pathways as genuine.
Both the Lotus stra and the Avaivartikacakrastra teach the single
vehicle and advocate that all beings are destined for Buddhahood if one
hears and has faith in its teaching. However, unlike the Lotus stra which
accepts mainstream Buddhist categories of attainment and then discards
them in the egalitarian context of one single vehicle, the Avaivartikacakra
stra redefines and transforms these categories to indicate bodhisattvas
who are progressing towards the state of Buddhahood. The Avaivartika
cakrastra therefore maintains the step-by-step progress structure of
mainstream Buddhism but revises the end point of the journey as full
Buddhahood rather than nirva. Alternatively, the Lotus stra advocates
a leap philosophy (Nattier 2006; 2009) of sudden progress based on faith
in the message of the stra itself. This is illustrated by the episode of the
Nga kings daughter who immediately attains Buddhahood based on her
hearing and her faith in the Lotus stra. In brief, the Lotus stra and the
Avaivartikacakrastra both discuss the single vehicle but differ in terms

35

(36)

of their depiction of, and toleration for, other pathways/vehicles while

ultimately not accepting that other paths/vehicles and their results are
real in their teaching of universal Buddhahood.
Bibliography and Abbreviations
Indian Stras
Aashasrikprajpramitstra. Phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa brgyad
stong pa. Th. no. 12. Derg Kanjur, vol. KA, folios 1v.1286r.6. Tr. by
kyasena, Jnasiddhi and Dharmatla. See Karashima (2011) for Chinese
versions.
Avaivartikacakranmamahynastra. Aweiyuezhizhe jing (T. no.266, 1)
translated by Dharmaraka (284 c.e.). Butuizhuanfalun jing (T.
no.267, 1) translated during the Northern Liang dynasty () (412439
c.e.). Guangboyanjing butuizhuanlun jing (T. no. 268, 1)
translated by Zhi-yan (427 c.e.). Phags pa phyir mi ldog pai khor lo zhes
bya ba theg pa chen poi mdo. Th. no. 240. Derg Kanjur, vol. ZHA, folios
241v.4301v.7. Translated by Jinamitra, Dnala, Munivarma, Ye shes sde.
Saddharmapuarkanmamahynastra. Zhengfahua jing (T. no.263, 9)
translated by Dharmaraka (286 c.e.). Miaofalianhua jing (T. no.
262, 9), translated by Kumrajva (406 c.e.). Dam pai chos padma dkar po
zhes bya ba theg pa chen poi mdo). Th. no. 113. Derg Kanjur, vol. JA, folios
1v.1180v.7. Translated by Surendrabodhi and Sna nam Ye shes sde. For a
Sanskrit version see KN (Kern and Nanjio 190812).
Modern sources
Apple, James B. 2008. Stairway to Nirva: A Study of the Twenty Saghas based
on the works of Tsong-kha-pa (State University of New York Press).
Apple, James B. 2009. Wordplay: Emergent Ideology through Semantic
elucidation. A Rhetorical Technique in Mahyna Buddhist Formations.
Bulletin of The Institute of Oriental Philosophy 25: 161173.
Apple, James B. 2011. On Avaivar tika and Avaivar tikacakra in Mahyna
Buddhist Literature with special reference to the Lotus Stra. Bulletin of
The Institute of Oriental Philosophy, No. 27, pp. 119147.
Apple, James B. 2012. The Structure and Content of the Avaivartikacakra stra
and Its Relation to the Lotus Stra. Bulletin of The Institute of Oriental
36

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(37)

Philosophy, No. 28, pp. 155174.

Apple, James B. forthcoming. Transvaluing Buddhist Categories of Spiritual
Attainment through Semantic Elucidation (nirukti): A Rhetorical Technique
in Early Mahyna Stras.
Bareau, Andr. 2013. The Buddhist Schools of the Small Vehicle. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press.
Baums, Stephan. 2012. Catalog and Revised Texts and Translations of
Gandharan Reliquar y Inscriptions. Pp. 200252 in David Jongeward,
Elizabeth Errington, Richard Salomon, and Stefan Baums. Gandharan
Buddhist Reliquaries. Seattle: Early Buddhist Manuscripts Project.
Bhattachar ya, Gouriswar. 2010. How to Justify the Spelling of the Buddhist
Hybrid Sanskrit Term Bodhisatva?, in Eli Franco and Monika Zin (eds.),
From Turfan to Ajanta: Festschrift for Dieter Schlingloff on the Occasion of his
Eightieth Birthday, Rupandehi: Lumbini International Research Institute, Vol.
II, pp. 3550.
Boucher, Daniel. 2006. Dharmaraka and the Transmission of Buddhism to
China. Asia Major, Vol. 19, pp. 1337.
Braarvig, Jens. 1993. Akayamatinirdeastra. Volume I: Edition of Exant Manu
scripts with an Index. Volume II: The Tradition of Imperishability in Buddhist
Thought. Oslo: Solum.
Bur nouf, Eugne. 1925. Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi, Traduit du Sanscrit,
accompagn dun Commentaire et de vingt et un Mmoires Relatifs au
Buddhisme. Paris: Maisonneuve frres.
Conze, Edward. 1975. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its
Verse Summary. Four Seasons Foundation: San Francisco.
Conze, Edward. 1978. The Prajpramit literature. Tokyo: The Reiyukai.
Dantinne, Jean. 1983. La splendeur de linbranlable Akobhyavyha. Tome I,.
Louvain-la-Neuve: Universit catholique de Louvain, Institut orientaliste.
De Jong, J.W. 1977. Review of Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma
(The Lotus Stra) by Leon Hurvitz. Eastern Buddhist, pp. 169174.
Demiville, Paul. 1973. Choix dtudes bouddhiques, 19291970. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Durt, Hubert. 1994. Daij. In Paul Demiville, Hubert Durt, and Anna Seidel,
eds. Hbgirin, Vol. 7. Paris: Libraire dAmrique et dOrient, pp. 768801.
Edgerton, Franklin. 1953 (1970 reprint). Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and
Dictionary. 2 vol. Motilal Banarsidass: Delhi.
Falk, Harry. 2014. The First-Century Copper-plates of Helagupta from Gandhra

37

(38)

hailing Maitreya. Annual Report of The International Research Institute for

Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 2013, Vol. 17,
pp. 326.
Falk, Harr y and Seishi Karashima. 2012. A First-Centur y Prajpramit
Manuscript from Gandhraparivarta 1 (Texts form the Split Collection 1).
Annual Repor t of The International Research Institute for Advanced
Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 2011, vol. XV, pp. 1961.
Fronsdal, Egil. 1998. The Dawn of the Bodhisattva Path: Studies in a Religious
Ideal of Ancient Indian Buddhists with Particular Emphasis on the Earliest
Extant Perfection of Wisdom Sutra. Thesis (Ph. D.)-Stanford University.
Fujita Ktatsu . 1975. One Vehicle or Three. Journal of Indian Phi
losophy 3:79166 (trans. Leon Hurvtiz).
Fujita Yoshimichi . 2009. The Bodhisattva Thought of the Sarvstivdins
and Mahyna Buddhism. Acta Asiatica 96, 98119.
Fuse Kgaku . 1934. Hokeky seiritsushi . Tky: Dait
Shuppansha.
Gombrich, Richard F. 1992. A Momentous Effect of Translation: The Vehicles
of Buddhism. Apodosis: Essays presented to Dr. W.W. Cruickshank to mark his
80th birthday. St. Pauls School, London, pp. 3446.
Gonta, Sonam Gyaltsen. 1992. Tsong kha pas view on the Theory of Ekayna.
In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Associa
tion for Tibetan Studies, Narita-Shi, Japan, 1992. Narita-shi, Japan: Naritasan
Shinshoji, pp. 5966.
Harrison, Paul M. 1987. Who Gets to Ride in the Great Vehicle: Self-Image and
Identity Among the Followers of the Early Mahyna. Journal of the Inter
national Association of Buddhist Studies, Vol. 10, no.1, pp. 6790.
Harrison, Paul M. 1993. The Earliest Chinese Translations of Mahyna
Buddhist Stras: some notes on the works of Lokakema, Buddhist Studies
Review, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 13577.
Handurukande, Ratna. 1973. Avaivartacakra-Nma-Mahyna-Stra. Encyclo
paedia of Buddhism 2.3: 400402.
Hayakawa Takashi . 2007. The Interpretation of the Buddhayna in
Fayuns Fahua yiji. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku
Bukkygaku Kenky, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp. 583586.
Hirakawa Akira . 1990. A History of Indian Buddhism from kyamuni to
Early Mahyna. Translated by Paul Groner. Honolulu: University of Hawaii
38

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(39)

Press.
Hur vitz, Leon. 19701971. The Lotus Stra in East Asia: A Review of Hokke
shis. Monumenta Serica 29: 697762.
Hurvitz, Leon. 2009, Revised Edition. Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine
Dharma (The Lotus Stra). New York: Columbia University Press.
Kajiyama Yichi . 2000. The Saddharmapuarka and nyat Thought.
The Journal of Oriental Studies, Institutute of Oriental Philosophy, Tokyo, vol.
10, pp. 7296.
Kanno Hiroshi . 1992. :
(Fa-yun ()s Interpretation of the One-vehicle Teaching in
the Lotus Stra). Skadaigaku jinbun gakkai 4, pp. 320.
Karashima Seishi . 2011. A Critical Edition of Lokakemas Translation of
the Aashasrik Prajpramit. Tokyo: The International Research
Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University.
Karashima Seishi . 2013. Was the Aashasrik Prajpramit Compiled
in Gandhra in Gndhr? Annual Report of The International Research
Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year
2012 [= ARIRIAB], Vol. XVI, March, pp. 171188.
Kim, Young-ho. 1990. Tao-shengs Commentary on the Lotus Stra: A Study and
Translation. Albany: State University of New York Press.
KN = Saddharmapuarkastra, ed. by Hendrik Kern and Bunyiu Nanjio, St.
Petersburg 190812: Acadmie Imperiale des Sciences (Bibliotheca Buddhica
X); Reprint: Tokyo 1977: Meicho-Fuky-Kai.
Kubo, Tsungunari and Akira Yuyama (trns). 2007. The Lotus
Sutra. BDK English Tripiaka, 13I. Berkeley, Calif: Numata Center for
Buddhist Translation and Research.
Kunst, Arnold. 1977. Some Aspects of Ekayna. In Lewis R. Lancaster, Luis O.
Gmez, and Edward Conze, editors, Prajpramit and Related Systems:
Studies in Honor of Edward Conze. Berkeley: University of California, pp.
313326.
Lamotte, tienne. 1976. The Teaching of Vimalakrti (Vimalakrtinirdea). Trans
lated by Sara Boin. London: Pali Text Society.
Lamotte, Etienne, and Sara Boin-Webb. 1998. ragamasamdhistra: The
Concentration of Heroic Progress: An Early Mahayn Buddhist Scripture.
Surrey: Curzon Press.
Matsuda Kazunobu . 2000. rmldevsihandanirdea. Pp. 6576 in

39

(40)

Jens Braar vig, Mark Allon, and Mar tin Schyen. Buddhist manuscripts.
Volume 1. Oslo: Hermes Pub.
Nasim Khan, M. 2008. Kharoh Manuscripts from Gandhra. Published by Dr.
M. Nasim Khan, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar.
Nattier, Jan. 2000. The Realm of Akobhya: A Missing Piece in the History of
Pure Land Buddhism. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist
Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 71102.
Nattier, Jan. 2003a. A Few Good Men: The Bodhisattva Path according to The
Inquiry of Ugra (Ugraparipcch). University of Hawaii Press: Honolulu.
Nattier, Jan. 2003b. The Indian Roots of Pure Land Buddhism: Insights from the
Oldest Chinese Versions of the Larger Sukhvatvyha. Pacific World 5 (3rd
series): pp. 179201.
Nattier, Jan. 2006. A Greater Awakening, Tricycle: The Buddhist Review 15, no.
3, pp. 6569.
Nattier, Jan. 2007. One Vehicle () in the Chinese gamas: New Light on an
Old Problem in Pli. Annual Report of The International Research Institute
for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 2006, vol.
10, pp. 181200.
Nattier, Jan. 2009. Gender and Hierarchy in the Lotus Stra. Pp. 83106 in
Stephen F. Teiser and Jacqueline Ilyse Stone, Readings of the Lotus Sutra.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Norman, K. R. 1983. The Pratyeka-Buddha in Buddhism and Jainism, in Philip
Denwood and Alexander Piatigorsky (eds.) Buddhist Studies: Ancient and
Modern. London and Dublin: Curzon, pp. 92106.
Norman, K. R. 1992. Review of Wiltshire 1990. Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies 55/1: 1445.
Rawlinson, Andrew. 1977. The Position of the Aashasrik Prajpramit in
the Development of Early Mahyna, in Prajpramit and Related Sys
tems. Studies in Honor of Edward Conzed, ed. Lewis Lancaster and Luis O.
Gomez, Berkeley (The Center for South & Southeast Asian Studies, the
University of California) (Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series 1).
Robinson, Richard H., Willard L. Johnson, hanissaro, and Richard H. Robinson.
2005. Buddhist Religions: A Historical Introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/
Thomson.
Ruegg, David Seyfort. 1969. La Thorie du Tathgatagarbha et du Gotra: tudes
sur la Sotriologie et la Gnosologie du Bouddhisme. Paris: cole Franaise
40

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(41)

dExtrme-Orient.
Ruegg, David Seyfort. 1977. The Gotra, Ekayna and Tathgatagarbha theories
of Prajpramit according to Dharmamitra and Abhaykaragupta. In Lewis
R. Lancaster, Lewis R., Luis O. Gmez, and Edward Conze, editors,
Prajpramit and related systems: Studies in honor of Edward Conze.
Berkeley: University of California, pp. 283-312.
Saigusa Mitsuyoshi . 1981. Gaisetsu: bosatsu, haramitsu
, in Hirakawa Akira , Kajiyama Yichi , Takasaki Jikid
(eds.) Kza: Daij bukky . Vol. 1. Tokyo: Shunj-sha,
pp. 89152.
Skilling, Peter. 2004. Mahyna and Bodhisattva: An Essay Towards Historical
Understanding. In Phothisatawa Barami Kap Sangkhom Thai Nai
Sahatsawat Mai [Bodhisattvaparami and Thai Society in the New Millen
nium], edited by Pakorn Limpanusorn, and Chalermpon Iampakdee, 13956.
Bangkok: Chinese Studies Center, Institute of East Asia, Thammasat
University.
Stone, Jacqueline I. 1999. Inclusive and Exclusive Perspectives on the One
Vehicle. Dharma World 26: 2025.
Strauch, Ingo. 2010. More Missing Pieces of Early Pure Land Buddhism: New
Evidence for Akobhya and Abhirati in an Early Mahayana Sutra from
Gandhra. The Eastern Buddhist 41/1:2366.
Tamura Yoshir . 1972. Hun no Hokkegiki no kenkyuu
(Study on Fayuns commentar y on the Lotus Sutra), in Sakamoto
Yukio , ed., Hokeky no chgokuteki tenkai (The
Development of the Lotus Sutra in China), Kyoto: Heirakuji, 1972, pp. 175
221.
Teiser, Stephen F. and Jacqueline Ilyse Stone. 2009. Interpreting the Lotus
Stra. In Stephen F. Teiser and Jacqueling I Stone, editors, Readings of the
Lotus Stra. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 161.
Tsukamoto Keish . 2007. Source Elements of the Lotus Stra: Buddhist
Integration of Religion, Thought, and Culture. Tokyo: Ksei Publishing.
T = Taish Shinsh Daizky , ed. J. Takakusu and K. Watanabe,
100 vols., Tokyo, 192434.
Vetter, Tilmann. 2013. Early Mahyna and The Bodhisattvas of the Ten
Directions. In Ulrich Timme Kragh, editor, The Foundation for Yoga
Practitioners: The Buddhist Yogcrabhmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in

41

(42)

India, East Asia, and Tibet. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University, Depart
ment of South Asian studies, pp. 290311.
Vint, Bhiku. 2010. A Unique Collection of Twenty Stras in a Sanskrit
manuscript from the Potala. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House.
Zimmermann, Michael. 1999. The Tathgatagarbhastra: Its Basic Structure and
Relation to the Lotus Stra. Annual Report of the International Research
Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year
1998, Vol. 2, pp. 143168.

42

The Single Vehicle (ekayna) in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra

(43)

The Single Vehicle (ekayna)

in the Avaivartikacakrastra and Lotus stra.

James B. Apple
The concept of the single vehicle (Skt. ekayna, , Ch. yisheng, Jpn. ichij) is
found in various Buddhist discourses that are classified as Mahyna stras, such as
the Saddharmapuarka, rmldevsihandanirdea, and Lakvatra. This paper
examines the characteristics of ekayna found in the in the Saddharmapuarka, also
known as the Lotus Stra, and compares these to the characteristics found in the
Avaivartikacakrastra to gain a greater understanding of the notion of ekayna in selfproclaimed Mahyna stras that become more prominent from the second century CE
onwards.

43