e.[119] The Abhidharma section of the Pali Canon seems
however to have been peculiar to the Theravada school. The
Sarvastivadin Pitaka of the same name was entirely different and,
judging from the Chinese Canon, the Mahayanists gave the title to
philosophic works by such authors as Asanga and Vasubandhu, some of
which were described as revelations from Maitreya.

Specially characteristic of Mahayanist Buddhism are the Vaipulya[120]
sutras, that is sutras of great extension or development. These works,
of which the Lotus is an example, follow the same scheme as the older
sutras but are of wider scope and on a much larger scale, for they
often consist of twenty or more chapters. They usually attempt to give
a general exposition of the whole Dharma, or at least of some aspect
of it which is extolled as sufficient for the right conduct of life.
The chief speaker is usually the Buddha, who is introduced as teaching
on the Vulture Peak, or some other well-known locality, and surrounded
by a great assemblage many of whom are superhuman beings. The occasion
of the discourse is commonly signalized by his sending forth rays of
light which illuminate the universe until the scene includes other
worlds. As early as the Anguttara Nikaya[121] we find references to
the danger of a taste for ornate and poetic sutras and these
compositions seem to be the outcome of that taste. The literary ideas
and methods which produced them are illustrated by the Sutralankara of
Asvaghosha, a collection of edifying tales, many of which use the
materials supplied by the Pali Nikayas and Vinaya but present them in
a more effective and artistic form. It was thought a pious task to
amplify and embellish the simple narratives handed down by tradition.

The Mahayanist scriptures are composed in Sanskrit not in Pali, but it
is only rarely--for instance in the works of Asvaghosha--that Buddhist
Sanskrit conforms to the rules of the classical language. Usually the
words deviate from this standard both in form and meaning and often
suggest that the text as we have it is a Sanskritized version of an
older work in some popular dialect, brought into partial conformity
with literary usage. In the poetical portions, this process of
sanskritization encountered greater difficulties than in prose,
because metre and prosody often refused to admit the changes required
by grammar, so that this poetical dialect cannot be called either
Sanskrit, Pali or Magadhi but remains