Namdrol wrote:Most importantly, that Buddha was omniscient with miracle powers is basically required belief to be a Buddhist.
The conclusion you are drawing from your premise is erroneous.
The fact that Buddha claimed omniscience for himself in some Pali text does not prove he personally taught even one Mahayāna text.
My approach to this is to toss out authorship as a valid criterion for judging the validity of a given Buddhist text. Instead I look at the text itself, rather than its putative author. In other words, judge the text by what it says, not by who supposedly said it.
I'm not saying it proves he taught Mahayana. I'm saying you cannot disprove it. If you cannot disprove it, it's not false. If it's not false or true, then you just don't know. My premise is there is no historical fact that proves Gautama taught only sravakaya, other than mere supposition and theory.