ONE of the most difficult tasks confronting the student,
and -- more especially -- the teacher of the history of
religions is the study of Mahāyāna Buddhism ( 1 ).
Let us consider wherein the difficulties lie. Buddhism originated
in India, and Indian thought is different enough from our ways
of thinking to pose serious problems to the Western scholars. In
a stimulating little book, B. Heimann has shown how different
is the basic approach in theology, ontology, ethics, logic, and
aesthetics in the two parts of the world( 2 ). Hīnayīna Buddhism,
on the whole much better known in Europe than Mahāyāna ( 3 ),
differs just enough from Brahmanism, from which it evolved,
and from orthodox Hinduism, to warrant the most careful
examination. It uses a terminology which shows considerable
independence of that employed in the so-called classical
six systems, and in its epistemology, psychology and philosophy
Buddhism is different enough to prevent us from regarding it, as
some have suggested, as a Hindu sect ( 4 ). We have not as yet
been able to ascertain with all the accuracy desirable the defin-
ite meaning of such central notions as that of Nirvāna ( 5 ) or
Dharma ( 6 ), or to form a clear picture of the teachings and the
historical development of the earlier philosophical schools in
Hīnayīna Buddhism ( 7 ). A British scholar presented us recently
with a comprehensive publication in which, grouped according
to topics, a number of important texts of the Southern branch
of Buddhism are newly translated, and a great number of cross-
references enables the student to compare pertinent passages
( 8 ). The tireless work of a number of older and younger Pāli
scholars has by now made available to the Western reader
translations of practically all the canonical and several -- though

-104-