Skillful Means (Upaya) in the Mahayana

The Buddha and Upaya

The vast system of Buddhist theology and philosophy originated from the spiritual realization of a single man, Gotama Buddha. He was historically the first to encounter the formidable task of communicating enlightenment, which is an intuitive experience transcending conventional language and thought, to the non-enlightened. It was obvious that such communication would only be perfect if the listener himself could share the experience But enlightenment is based on a comprehension of interdependent origination (Pali, Paticca samuppada), which entails a radical reorientation from the accepted mode of daily life of the common man. Before this experience can be attained, a discontent with conventional life must exist, as well as a doubt of the veridical nature of common sense impressions and reasoning. This makes it nearly impossile for the individual who accepts ordinary life as the sole reality, to spiritually progress.

In an attempt to capture the import of the crucial moment when the historical Buddha decided to communicate his experience, subsequent theogians portrayed the historical Buddha in a histrionic setting wrestling with the question of devoting himself to the enjoyment of his experience of enlightenment or preaching it to an uncomprehending audience. The deity Brahma, symbolically representing common man, was selected by these writers to appear to the Buddha the fifth week after his enlightenment to request him to preach. At that time he acquiesced, though even he realized the doctrine was so profound and incomprehensible to ordinary men that they would probably scoff at it.

This dramatic account is exceedingly important， since it so clearly demonstrates the formidability of communicating the fruits of enlightenment. The choice of Brahma symbolizes the human element within the historical Buddha supplicating the spirit of enlightenment， It is only possible to describe ths event ・ devotionally as a psychological struggle since, as we shall later see, an inevitable function of enlightenment entails its preaching. To observers from a conventional viewpoint, however, it appears that a natural conflict would exist whether to devote oneself to the arduous task of preaching to the uncomprehending or enjoying the experience of enlightenment itself.

The problem the historical Buddha faced was how to communicate his experience, and this was resolved with the nascence of upaya， Fully realizing the inadequacies of human language, which is based on a conceptualized view of reality, he knew that the degree a single individual would profit from his preaching highly dependent on diverse factors such as the existent spiritual level, past experience, present environment, psychological needs, and so on. He also was aware that it was possible for a layman to benefit as much as a learned monk if the teachings were presented in a comprehensible manner to the layman; thus different varieties and intellectual modes of approaches were necessary・ All these forms of communication constituted upaya, an exceedingly egalitarian concept that ultimately embraced every level of Buddhist teaching.

In Early Buddhism abundant evidence exists of upaya directed toward the conversion of non-Buddhists. The great Indra, king of the deva, was supposedIy converted to Buddhism in the Sakkhapañha Suttanta and subsequently became a guardian and instructor of the faith. Also the deities of the Six Directions were transformed in the famous Singalovada Suttanta into Buddhist moral obligations. It was exceedingly important that the autochthonous Indian deities, around which the theological language permeating Indian thoughtand culture took shape, be utilized as a means ofBuddht instruction.

At the lay level, the three katha or graduated forms of discourse consisting of dana katha (benefits of giving), sila katha (proper conduct), and sagga katha (promise of happy rebirth) were tangible inducements to practice virtue in anticipation of rewards in a better future life. The ultimate purpose of these practices was a conversion of mental attitude. Ideally, after practicing dana (giving) and sila (conduct), the layman would discard the simplistic desire to perpetuate mundane values and seek Nirvana instead. Devotional means such as the endowment of he enlightened ones with supernaural powers (siddhi) and the thirty-two marks of a superman, the Jataka and Apadana moral tales, as well as theprayers of safety( paritta), all performed similar functions ideally leading to mental purification.

At the monk's level, language itself served as an upaya, but this was not always necessary. There was also the wordless word, as described in the legend of the Buddha's transmission to Mahakassapa by the sign of a flower， Methods of presentation differed and at times the doctrine was set forth by means of parable, such as in the famous Burning Sermon, or in mnemonic fashion to facilitate remembrance. Supernatural powers [siddi) served as inducements for novice monks to begin the process of mental purification, and numerous practices such as meditation were devised as methods of spiritually transcending conventional reality.

The concept of upaya is inseparable from the notion of Buddha since it is his means of communication with the unenlightened. It also serves as the medium whereby the individual can attain the experience of enlightenment. We find the theoretical basis of upaya as a necessary function of enlightenment in Nagarjuna's Madhyamika philosophy, which subsequently influenced virtually every school of Mahayana Buddhism in China and Japan.

Madhyamika Concept of Sunyata and Upaya

In an effort to counterbalance what he considered to be the dangerous realistic extremes of Abhidharma philosophy, Nagarjuna of the Madhyamika school stressed the theory of Sunyata (emptiness) as based on interdependent origination (Sanskrit, Pratitya samutpada) He applied this view to human existence in the following manner:

In conventional life the human consciousness(vijnana) interreacts with the so-called objective world (nama-rupa) by grasping the world in order to affirm its own existence. Self is differentiated from other, which in turn is immeasurably divided and further separated from self . This continual differentiation creates the propensity to cling to the self as an independent entity and to others as attributes esteemed in light of their relation to the self. From this mental attitude arise the common notions of I am and this is mine, with the self (atman) feeding on the outer world, like fire on firewood, in order to nourish its illusion of being. As a result of this appetency to cling to self, possessions, and loved ones, a snowball of ignorance is begun that inevitably leads to frustration. For according to the law of interdependent origination, an independent absolute entity such as self(atman)is an unreality, all existents are impermanent (anitya) and those who attempt to cling to this impermanence will inevitably experience suffering (duhkha). The events of human life continually thwart the individual self' s desire to be absolute, while the obects he clings to in an effort to affirm his own permanence constantly undergo change and destruction until ultimately he is left grasping empty hulls. In Buddhism ignorance is regarded as this inability to recognize the actual interdependent and impermanent nature of existence.

According to Nagarjuna, the only method of shattering ignoranee and breaking free from the vicious cycle of suffering is to reverse the mental process creating ignorance:

If the individual self does not exist, how then will there be something which is my own?... He who is without possessiveness and who has no ego... He, also, does not exist... When I and mine have stopped, then also there is not outside nor nor an inner self. The acquiring [of karma] (upadana) is stopped; on account of that destruction, there is destruction of every existence.

This does not mean that the individual physically becomes extinct, but rather that he ceases to exist the cycle of ignorance. The method of attaining such freedom merely necessitates a transformation of mental attitude, but this is a change that shatters the very foundation of conventional life as grounded on categorical reasoning and on discrimination between self and others.

Subjective discrimination forms the basis of the conventional world since all human discourse and knowledge requires such differentiation. Each object the individual encounters he labels and in so doing separates it as being other than himself. Subsequently he proceeds to evaluate the other objects in terms of self and his own egocentric need to affirm and perpetuate his existence. Such distortions inevitably lead to human suffering. Release is found in recognizing the true relationship between the subective self and the so called objective world in view of the law of interdependence. Such an understanding, which transcends common language and categorical reasoning, is known as the experience of Sunyata (emptiness).

Although sunyata has a negative connotation, it is not a negtive experience. It represents an emptying out of the false notion of self and the world but also entails an entirely different means of viewing existence Since the individual no longer seeks to affirm his own being by the protection of his egocentric desires on the world about him, he is now able to view the world in its as-it-is-ness, without distortion. Sunyata is negative only in the sense that Indian thinkers chose to define the transcendental experience by what was not in terms of the life of ordinary man; ultimately this is one of the highest forms of affirmation.

Sunyata, as the intuitive experience of enlightenment itself, did not represent the totality of Nagarjuna's goal. Frequently Nirvana has been misinterpreted as beng a permanent transcendence or escape from human life. This is invalid since Nirvana does not represent a change of locus, but merely a transformation of mental attitude. The enlightened individual continues to live and function in the human world though he is free from the sufferings engendered by a false view of reality， If enlightenment represented a permanent transcendence, then the historical Buddha would have had no need to devote himself to the arduous task of preaching his experience; the fact that he did was of profound significance to Nagarjuna. In fact, he both opened and closed his famous Mulamadhyamakakarikas with a pledge of devotion to the Buddha who preached the doctrine of interdependent origination. And Nagarjuna well understood the difficulties of such a task since he stated:

Emptiness, having been dimly perceived, utterly destroys the slow witted. It is like a snake wrongly grasped or [magical] knowledge incorrectly applied.

Therefore the mind of the ascetic [Gautama] was diverted from teaching the dharma.

Having thought about the incomprehensibility of the dharma by the stupid.

Nagarjuna faced the same dilemma with his own view of emptiness since it offered an enticement to the intellectual extreme of nihilism. To avoid the danger of falsely grasping a single aspect of emptiness, the Madhyamika defined sunya realization as consisting of three simultaneous inseparable aspects: sunyata, sunyatayam, and sunyata artha.

sunyata represents the condition wherein the subjective clinging to the exterior world is denied and the endless cycle of clinging ceases. It is the perfect calm in which the interrelated nature of all existents can be intuitively comprehended. Logic and worldly thought are temporarily suspended in favour of the intuitive faculties， It represents what we ordinarily consider to be the experience of Nirvana, but still this is merely one aspect of enlightenment.

Sunyatayam prayojanam (the functioning of emptiness) is the second aspect, wherein the individual surrenders his natural tendency to cling to the experience of sunyata itself. This is accomplished by means of self-reflection and represents the continual process of mental purification that is an essential attribute of enlightenment. But at the moment the tendency to cling to the enjoyment of the experience is surrendered, an awareness of the existence of other suffering sentient beings also arises. Having attained a complete comprehension of Pratitya samutpada, the enlightened one immediately realizes the undifferentiated oneness encompassing himself and all other beings. This is not a feeling of compassion in our usual sense of the term, since he no longer has any false awareness of a separation between himself and others. He sees others as part of his own infinite being, and their suffering is noW instinctively recognized and experienced as his own. Working to liberate others now means endeavoring to save part of himself and in a certain sense, his action is supra-selfish. He experiences himself as a distinct member of the whole, just as the right hand suddenly comprehends its integral and yet unique relationship to the body. He is not in effect losing himself but merely the false notion of an independent self accompanied by the realization of his specific role in the totality of existence. But this second aspect merely represents an understanding of interrelatedness, it is not complete without action and application to the conventional world.

The third aspect of Sunya realization provides the practical ground of sunya for salvation and this is termed sunyata artha (practice of emptiness in the conventional world ). It can also be defined as the temporal presentation of emptiness. Although the experience of sunyata transcends conventional language, the enlightened one must seek the means to teach despite the possible risk of distortion. In other words, this aspect of sunya realization clearly relates to preaching. As a function of the flowing cycle of his very enlightenment, the enlightened one spontaneously finds the means of communicating his experience (upaya) to ignorant men who, from their standpoint, interpret his action as compassion. In Madhyamika philosophy, this actual practice of emptiness in the conventional world is closely related to the Mahayana view of the two fold truth.

Two-fold Truth: Samvrti Satya and Paramartha Satya

If we tentatively postulate a chronological spatial sequence in the enlightened one's realization of sunya, the movement could be represented thus: from sunyata (experience of emptiness) to sunyata artha (practice of emptiness).

Such a chronological separation can only be spoken of figuratively, since the three aspects of sunya described above are instantaneous and do not represent stages. But the flow from sunyata to sunyata artha also corresponds to the expression of ultimate truth (Paramartha satya) by the enlightened one in the form of conventjonal truth (samvrti satya). explained this in the following manner:

The Buddha' Dharma-explanation relies on two truths: the worldly, conventional truth, and the absoute truth, Those who do not know the distinction between these two truths do not know the deep reality the Buddha's teachings.

However, Nagarjuna also visualized the process as working in a reverse fashion, which would correspond to the ignorant sentient being listening to the enlightened one's practice of emptiness and then proceeding to the eventual experience of sunyata himself. In this case the representation would appear as follows: from sunyata artha to sunyata.

As he continued to explain: Without reliance on the expressional [truth], he absolute is not taught; without arriving at the absolute, nirvana is not reached. The late Prof. R. Robinson cogently summarized the relationship between paramartha satya and samvrti satya in a manner which nearly paraphrases the chung-lun (Japanese, churon) explanation:

Worldly,conventional, or expressional truth means language and verbal thought. The absolute is said to be inexpressible and inconceivable. Yet realization of this fact depends upon comprehension of expressional truth. All doctrines taught by the Buddhas are compatilble with emptiness; emptiness characterizes every term in the system of expressional truths.

Samvrti satya or conventlonal truth is inseparable from paramartha satya since it offers the mode by which the latter can be discursively presented. This means that there are not actually two truths but merely single truth and its presentation. We cannot properly speak of a higher and lower truth or a superior or inferior truth since both are interdependently related, as Hui-yuan wrote:

According to the Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise, the ultimate principle is that there are no real objects corresponding to ideas or words, that cognition is not a relation between objects and real perceivers. This truth clears away all false notions, and enables the spirit in samadhi to realize its goal, which is beyond affirmations and negations. In this samadhi, the identity of conventional truth and absoIule truth is realized, and the bodhisattva path culminales in the realization of final unity.

Words are empty symbols imagined (vikalpyate) by the listener. There can be no question about the veridical nature of samvrti satya as set forth by the enlightened one; false understanding is merely a result of individual misinterpretation. Words express only metaphorically, and there is no such thing as a literal statement, because there is no intrinsic relation to mystical experience and to worldly experience, since all alike are only figured but not represented by discursive symbols.

lt is not proper to compare samvrti and paramartha with the western distinction between the phenomenal and noumenal or the knowable and forever unknowable, since Nagarjuna has clearly indicated that paramartha is dependent on samvrti. In other words, samvrti is the means (upayabhuta) and paramartha the end (upeyabhuta) for the common man. The reverse is true for the enlightened one who seeks to share his experience.

As a natural function of enlightenment, the enlightened one spontaneously communicates his experience (upaya), and this communication of his inexpressible understanding of sunyata (paramartha) by discursive language is what is known as conventional truth (samvrti). This verbal communication is made by symbols or signposts that only become distortions and samvrti (literally, cover or hide) when they are falsely grasped as substantial realities or entities and understood in literal fashion. The enlightened one's communication is not in error, merely the understanding of the listener is.

The interrelationship between paramartha and samvrti closely approximates what Nagarjuna described so often as the identiy between nirvana and samsara. The world of enlightenment is not a spatially transcendent realm, there is no difference in locus between the World of enlightenment and the world of ignorance; the sole difference lies in the attitude of the viewer. Those who exist in the cycle of ignorant subject-object clinging perceive the world from the standpoint of samsara, while the enlightened one, who has surrendered his clinging for the three aspects of sunya realization, views the identical locus as nirvana. In a similar situation the enlightened one, from his experience of sunyata artha, preaches the conventional truth or uses discursive language; another enlightened one can immediately comprehend the emptiness of the words and understand them as paramartha. But the ignorant man, who clings to the words as real entities and uses them to enforce his own cycle of clinging, would indeed have covered the truth with his subjective mental distortions. It is solely a question of attitude. This is why there are many differences and degrees of conventlonal truths.

From the standpoint of the enlightened one, it is not possible to state that these conventional truths (upaya) have superior or inferior soteriological value, for the ability of the enlightened one is such that he can effectively penetrate any level of spiritual awareness and awaken the individual. In such a case, samvrti satya actually means speaking the language the individual can comprehend. On the other hand, from the standpoint of the individual struggling to attain paramartha, the gradations of conventional truths appear to assume immense significance. This is the reason why some scholars, who approach the goal from the individual's viewpoint alone, are convinced that all conventional truths must be removed before a comprehension of the ultimate truth can be reached. What they overlook is the fact that nothing can be metaphysically established about the nature of paramartha or the means of attaining it, without language (samvrti). Language and preaching in the conventional world are essential components of sunyata artha， which is an inseparable aspect of enlightenment. Samvrti satya or verbal expression, in this respect, is identical with upaya (means of communicating enlightenment).

Pen-chi (本迦 ) and Upaya

Seng-chao, in an effort to resolve the Chinese Buddhist confusion of the two-fold truth with the Taoist concept of existence versus non-existence, was one of the first Buddhist theologians to use the term pen-chi. In his commentary to the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra he wrote:

... in terms of essence, Buddhism is non-duality. All doctrines are the origin (pen) or the unthinkable... Without the origin there is no manifestation (chi), without manifestation there is no origin. Origin and manifestation are different but unthinkable oneness.

This quotation was later used by Chih-i, the founder of the T'ien T'ai sect, in his commentary on the Saddharma Pundarika Sutra as a justification for dividing the sutra into sections of origin (pen-men) and manifestation (chi-men). Chih-I, however, was not the first to use pen-chi methodology in relation to the Saddharma Pundarika or Lotus Sutra.

Sengjui (倍数 ), a contemporry of Seng-chao, utized the pen-chi theory in his analysis of the Apparition of a Stupa (Stupa samdarsana-parivarta) chapter of the Lotus. According to his view, the protagonist of this chapter, the Eternal Buddha Prabhutaratna, was the original Buddha Sakyamuni, whom he invited to sit beside him in the stupa, was representative of the countless manifestation Buddhas preaching his doctrine in the myriads of worlds. It was not accidental that the pen-chi theory was first applied to this section of the Lotus Sutra, for in many respects, the chapter symbolically presents the doctrine of the entire sutra.

The pen-chi concept as applied to the Stupa chapter and later by Chih-I to the entire Lotus Sutra, offers a tangible application of the fold truth theory. The original Buddha or teaching of the origin symbolizes the inexpressible ultimate truth that becomes a conventional truth merely by being uttered. The manifestation Buddha represents the conventional truths that lead to the ultimate.

Chih-i systemahcalIy applied his heory to the entire Lotus Sutra: the first half of the text, pertaining to the teaching of Sakyamuni and the manifestation Buddhas, he termed chi-men and he latter portion of the text, relating to Sakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha, he called pen-men. Since Chih-i was particularly concerned with the struggle of the ignorant man to attain enlightenment, the T'ien T'ai sect emphasized the manifestation section of the sutra and Chih-i wrote:

1. For the sake of the true there is the provisional (農實施槽).
2. Open the provisional and reveal the true (開槽額實).
3. Abandon the provisional and establish the true (廣権宜賓).

Later, the Japanese Nichiren sect was to place its stress on the second section of the sutra, dealing with the original Buddha or the process by whih the enlightened one set forth his teachings for the benefit of sentient beings. These methods represented concrete applications of the two fold truth theory and they were carried one step further in Japan with the development of the honji suijaku (本地垂述 true nature-manifestation) theory.

The Chinese pen-chi (Japanese, honjaku 本 述 ) methodology as applied to the Lotus Sutra formed the theoretical basis for the Japanese development of honji suijaku. As the theory finally developed during the late Heian or or Early Fujiwara period, Buddhas, bodhisattvas and Indian deva were believed to manifest themselves in the form of native Japanese kami This application was the product of diverse philosophical, devotional and political motivations, but in effect, it made the indigenous deities the theoretical equivalent of their Buddhist originals. It also represented the extension of the concept of upaya to the verge of its logical limits. For how can the deities of an alien religion be considered equivalent to a Buddha or bodhisattva in the process of leading an ignorant sentient being to enlightenment?

From a common sense view, the Buddha or bodhisattva would excel the kami as a guide to Buddhist salvation, just as from the same standpoint conventional truth would seemingly be an obstacle on the path to enlightenment. From the theological view, however, the simple process of venerating a native deity as a manifestation becomes equivalent to venerating a Buddha himself, since the basis of the ontological existence of the manifestation lies in its confrontation with its origin. Ultimately both Buddha and kami are upaya, since all endeavors to express the absolute truth are conventional truths. The quality of the upaya can only be determined by its usefuless in transforming the mind of the individual recipient. That success can be judged solely by the enlightened one and not by an individual who has himself emerged in the samsanic cycle of clinging. The honji suijaku theory can be regarded as a practical means of applying the concept of the two-fold truth or a tangible form of upaya.

From Prajña to Karuna, the Bodhisattva Way

The evolution of the concept of the bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism was the product of diverse philosophical, historical and social developments. Predominant among these was the growth of bhakti (devotion) in accompaniment with the idealization of the Buddha. As the notion of Buddha became universalized and equated with the ultimate truth in writings such as the Lotus Sutra, it was necessary for devotional purposes to discover more tangible objects of veneration. At the same time, Abhidharma scholars, with their intense philosophical speculation, ostensibly lost interest in the soteriological aspects of Buddhism and became vastly alienated from the needs of the masses. When they did speak of nirvana, it was as an individual goal with no apparent concern for universal attainment. This extreme philosophical speculation and neglect of the necessary soteriological function of enlightenment prompted the Mahayana followers to claim that the Arhat goal was an inferior stage of spiritual realization. This is undoubtedly why Nagarjuna both opened and closed his Mulamadhyamakakarikas with homage to the Buddha who preached the law of of interdependent origination. New emphasis had to be placed on this integral function of enlightenment.

The theological basis for the development of the bodhisattva is found in the Madhyamika view of sunya realization. As discussed earlier, the realization of sunyata or enlightenment automatically leads to a concern for others, since with a complete comprehension of interdependent origination, all existents are recognized as inseparably entwined to form part of the enlightened one's larger self. This concern is expressed by tangible efforts in the conventional world to communicate enlightenment (upaya, sunyata artha). The Temporal presentation became the task of the bodhisattva, devotionally represented by the figure of an individual who delays his own enjoyment of enlightenment in order to aid other sentient beings. Experientially, the in separable relationship between the three aspects of sunyata realization are identical to the process leading from prajña (wisdom) to karuna (compassion) in the life of the bodhisattva.

In the Buddhist tradition, prajña (Pali pañña) denotes the ability to perceive things as they are, which refers to the recognition of the non-substantiality of existents resuling from the law of interdependent origination. But in Mahayana, greater emphasis was placed on this concept and it became identical to the experience of Sunyata or comprehension of the ultimate truth.

From a devotional view, karuna is generally translated as compassion, for it appears to those submerged in samsara that the bodhisattva is bestowing his compassion on them in his attempt to lead them to enlightenment. As we have previously seen, from the standpoint of the enlightened one, this is merely a natural function of enlightenment. The bodhisattva is no more motivated by pity or kindness than is the hand when it disentangles the foot from a snarl of vines. This is an instinctive aspect of self-preservation and the bodhisattva has simply realized his self in the form of all existence. Karuna thus is the conventional name given to Sunyata artha (the temporal presentation of emptiness) and it is equivalent to upaya or the communication of enlightenment. Its uniqueness lies in the fact that primarily it is how the ignorant individual attains enlightenment. The following diagram illustrates this process in detail:

The Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra speaks of the inseparable unity of prajña and upaya in the following terms:

Wisdom-perfection [prajña-paramita] is a Bodhisattva's Mother
                his father is expedient method [upaya]
                For the teachers of all living beings come
                Only from these two (upaya and prajña).

For the masses， the bodhisattva concept introduced vital new means of religious practice. As a Buddha-to-be the term applied both to the individual who, from a devotional standpoint, appeared to delay his enjoyment of Nirvana in order to assist others, as well as to every sentient being as a potential Buddha. The Six Paramitas, dana (。 giving), sila (proper conduct), ksanti (patience), virya (endeavor), dhyana (meditation) and prajña (the resulting wisdom), became bodhisattva practices or spiritual exercises for those who aspired to attain enlightenment. The mythical figures of the bodhisattvas, devised to symbolically represent virtues and philosophical concepts, fulfilled the bhakti needs of the masses and served as upaya leading to the first stages of awakening.

Among the myriads of bodhisattvas that subsequently developed in Mahayana Buddhism, two pair symbolically represented the relationship between prajña and karuna: Mañjusri (文殊) and Samantabhadra (普賢), on the one hand, and Mahasthamaprapta (勢至) and Avalokitejvara (観音) on the other. These are constantly linked in iconography and literature. For instance, the first pair play a crucial role in the Avatamsaka Sutra and the second are attendants of Amitabha in the Pure Land triad. This latter grouping and the role of Amitabha represent one of the most perfect expressions of the bodhisattva theory.

Buddhist theologians place the origin of Amitabha (Japanese, Amida 阿藤 陀) Buddha in a dramatic setting in the Larger Sukhavativyuha Sutra (大無量詩経). There Dharmakra(Japanese, Hozo 法蔵) bodhisattva made his famous vow that he would not enter enlightenment unless all sentient beings who invoke his name with sincere faith are assured of attaining his Pure Land. The bodhisattva's subsequent enlightenment as Amitabha Buddha finalized his vow from a devotional standpoint. This vow of Amitabha represents the supreme emphasis on the enlightened one's function of saving sentient beings in the conventional world (sunyata artha). We can properly view the entire drama theologically by reversing the order and saying that it was actually the enlightened Amitabha who assumed the form of Dharmakara bodhisattva in order to lead sentient beings to enlightenment. As long as a single individual remains unenlightened, he will continue to offer his vow and the means of invoking his name. Amitabha's attendants, Mahasthamaprapta (Japanese, Seishi 勢至) and AvalokiteSvara (Japanese, Kannon 観),representing respectively the twin aspects of prajña and karuna, further emphasize this active function of enlightenment.

In summary, as we view the development of upaya in Mahayana Buddhism, we note that it has a dual connotation, being both:

1. A method for the enlightened one's communication of his experience, and
2. A method of spiritual awakening for the ignorant sentient being.

As a method of communication, it represents the conventional truth taught by the enlightened one, the manifestation of the origin or true nature of enlightenment and the apparent compassion of the bodhisattva. Each of these functions in turn can serve as a means for the ignorant sentient being to attain enlightenment. The ultimate upaya in Mahayana Buddhism is the bodhisattva way, founded on the concepts of prajña and karuna. This is the method par excellence of communicating the fruits of enlightenment to beings in the conventional world and at the same serves as a pathway for individual spiritual progress. In this manner, upaya becomes not a mere device or secondary teaching, but rather represents the most crucial concept of Mahayana philosophy: the integral aspect of enlightenment that spontaneously necessitates the enlightenment of all existents as symbolized by the bodhisattva.