Introduction

In the present chapter I study the last moments of the Buddha's life in the way these are reported in the Chinese Dīrgha-āgama parallel to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta of the Dīgha-nikāya. I begin by translating the relevant section from the Dīrgha-āgama version,[n.1] The translated part of DĀ 2 is found at T I 26b1 to 26c14, which has already been translated into German by Weller 1940: 181–184, into French by Jin 2013: 618–642, and into English by Ichimura 2015: 149–151. and then turn to a comparative study with a particular emphasis on the description of the Buddha's meditative attainments just before passing away.

---

Translation

The Buddha said to the monks: "If you have doubts about the Buddha, the Dharma, the Community, or doubts about the path, you should swiftly ask [for clarification]. This is proper and the time for it, do not regret it later. As long as I am still present, I shall explain it to you." Then the monks were silent and without a word.

The Buddha said again: "If you have doubts about the Buddha, the Dharma, the Community, or doubts about the path, you should swiftly ask [for clarification]. This is proper and the time for it, do not regret it later. As long as I am still present, I shall explain it to you." Then the monks were still silent.

The Buddha said further: "If you feel personally ashamed and do not dare to ask, you should rely on a good friend to come and swiftly ask [for clarification]. This is proper and the time for it, do not regret it later." Then the monks were still silent.

Ānanda said to the Buddha: "I am confident that all in this community possess serene faith, not a single monk has doubts about the Buddha, the Dharma, the Community, or doubts about the path."

The Buddha said to Ānanda: "I, too, know myself that the least [developed] monks amidst this community now have all seen the tracks of the path, will not proceed to an evil destiny and will certainly eradicate the origin of dukkha, returning at most seven times [to be born]." At that time the Blessed One declared that the one thousand two hundred [and fifty] disciples had attained [at least] the fruit of the path [of stream-entry].[n.2] DĀ 2 at T I 26b13 mentions only one thousand two hundred disciples, 千二百弟 子. Such a count of disciples is unusual in the Dīrgha-āgama, which regularly presents the Buddha in the company of one thousand two hundred and fifty disciples; for instances within the same discourse (although related to different episodes) cf. DĀ 2 at T I 11a9, 13c4, and 14b11. The use of such numbers is, of course, symbolic. Other discourses in the Pāli Nikāyas and in other Āgamas regularly employ the number five hundred instead; for a more detailed discussion cf. Anālayo 2011b: 417–419. In the present case, I take it that a textual error has occurred; hence in the translation I supplement the missing fifty.

Then the Blessed One opened his upper robe, stretched out his golden-coloured arm and said to the monks: "You should contemplate that a Tathāgata emerges in the world [only] occasionally, just as an udumbara flower manifests [only] at a single time."[n.3] For a study of the Indian myth regarding the flowering of the udumbara tree cf. Norman 1991/1993a. At that time the Blessed One, contemplating its meaning again, spoke in verse:

"The purplish golden-coloured right arm

The Buddha displayed, like an udumbara [flower].[n.4] The formulation gives the impression of being a reciter's remark, not something said by the Buddha.

Past and future formations are impermanent,

Present ones [also] cease, do not be negligent.

"Therefore, monks, do not be negligent. Through not being negligent, I reached right awakening myself. An immeasurable multitude of goodness as well can be attained by not being negligent. All the ten thousand existing things are impermanent. These are the Tathāgata's last words."

Then the Blessed One entered the first absorption.[n.5] Adopting a variant without 定, in keeping with the formulation used in the rest of the passage. He rose from the first absorption and entered the second absorption. He rose from the second absorption and entered the third absorption. He rose from the third absorption and entered the fourth absorption.

He rose from the fourth absorption and entered concentration on the sphere of [infinite] space. He rose from concentration on the sphere of [infinite] space and entered concentration on the sphere of [infinite] consciousness. He rose from concentration on the sphere of [infinite] consciousness and entered concentration on nothingness. He rose from concentration on nothingness and entered concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception. He rose from concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception and entered concentration on the cessation of perception.[n.6] DĀ 2 at T I 26b26: 入滅想定, which Ichimura 2015: 151 translates as "he then entered the final state of cessation, transcendent from senses and ideation, equivalent to third saintly state of an anāgāmin." Besides the problem that most of this passage has no basis in the Chinese original, it is unfortunately also wrong, since the Buddha entered cessation as a fully awakened one, not as a non-returner.

Then Ānanda asked Anuruddha: "Has the Blessed One attained Nirvāṇa?" Anuruddha said: "Not yet, Ānanda. The Blessed One is now in the concentration on the cessation of perception. Formerly I heard from the Buddha that he will attain Nirvāṇa on rising from the fourth absorption."

Then the Blessed One rose from concentration on the cessation of perception and entered concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception. He rose from concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception and entered concentration on nothingness. He rose from concentration on nothingness and entered concentration on the sphere of [infinite] consciousness. He rose from concentration on the sphere of [infinite] consciousness and entered concentration on the sphere of [infinite] space.

He rose from concentration on the sphere of [infinite] space and entered the fourth absorption. He rose from the fourth absorption and entered the third absorption. He rose from the third absorption and entered the second absorption. He rose from the second absorption and entered the first absorption.

He rose from the first absorption and entered the second absorption. He rose from the second absorption and entered the third absorption. He rose from the third absorption and entered the fourth absorption. Rising from the fourth absorption, the Buddha attained Nirvāṇa.

At that time there was a great earthquake and all the devas and the humans in the world were greatly frightened. All the remote and dark places not illuminated by the sun and the moon were completely covered by a great brightness, so that each could see the other, and they said to each other: "Other beings are reborn here, other beings are reborn here!" That light was everywhere, surpassing the light of the heavens.

Then the devas of the Thirty-three who were in mid-air strewed mandārava flowers, uppala, paduma, kumuda, and puṇḍarīka flowers on the Tathāgata and the assembled community; and they strewed heavenly sandalwood powder on the Buddha and the great community.

---

Study

The Dīrgha-āgama account of the Buddha's passing away has discourse counterparts in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta of the Dīgha-nikāya, in Sanskrit fragments of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, and in three discourses preserved as individual translations in Chinese.

The extract translated above begins with the Buddha inviting the monks to have their doubts clarified. The parallel versions report a similar invitation, although with some minor differences in their descriptions as to what such doubts might concern. In agreement with the Dīrgha-āgama version, the Pāli Mahāparinibbāna-sutta indicates that such doubts could be in regard to the three jewels (the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Community) or in regard to the path.[n.7] [6] DN 16 at DN II 154,25 mentions doubts about the magga and the paṭipadā, alongside the three jewels; the same is also the case for a parallel to this section of DN 16 in AN 4.76 at AN II 79,13.

The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra preserved in Sanskrit fragments also refers to the three jewels, besides which it mentions dukkha, its arising, its cessation, and the path [to its cessation].[n.8] [7] Waldschmidt 1951: 390 (§42.2): yasya syāt kāṅkṣā vā vimatir vā buddhe vā dharme vā saṅghe vā duḥkhe vā samudaye vā nirodhe vā mārge vā. That is, the doubts might be about the four noble truths. The same is also the case for one of the individually translated Chinese versions.[n.9] [8] T 6 at T I 188b4: 有疑望非意在佛及法, 聖眾, 苦, 習, 盡, 道. Another of the individually translated Chinese versions, however, records a single enquiry about doubts in regard to the discourses. [n.10] [9] T 5 at T I 172c7: 於經有疑結者; on the translator attribution for the cases of T 5 and T 6 cf. Park 2010. The third of the individually translated versions just mentions doubts, without further specifications. [n.11] [10] T 7 at T I 204c8: 若有疑難. This version agrees with DN 16 and DĀ 2 that the Buddha made his enquiry three times; cf. T 7 at T I 204c12. In this way the parallel versions show some variations regarding this last exchange between the Buddha and his disciples.

In reply to this enquiry by the Buddha, Ānanda made it clear on behalf of the assembled monks that they had no doubts, something of which the Buddha had already been aware. In one of the individual translations, the monks themselves explicitly confirm that they indeed had no doubts.[n.12] [11] T 5 at T I 172c11: 吾等無疑.

The Sanskrit fragments of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra explain why the Buddha had invited the monks to ask questions to clarify their doubts, even though he already knew this was not required as they had no doubts. The Buddha had to act like this out of compassion for later generations.[n.13] [12] Waldschmidt 1951: 392 (§42.8): api tu karaṇīyam etat tathāgatena yathāpi tat paścimāṃ janatām anukaṃpamānaḥ. In other words, the point of the description is to convey to future disciples that at the time of the Buddha's death there had been no doubts at all regarding the teachings, etc., among the disciples present on this occasion,[n.14] [13] As noted by von Hinüber 2008b: 208, no nuns are mentioned among those present on this occasion. This is only to be expected, since according to a rule found in the different Vinayas monks and nuns were not allowed to travel together; cf. the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, T 1429 at T XXII 1018c21, the Lokottaravāda Mahāsāṅghika Vinaya, Tatia 1975: 21,15, the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, T 1422 at T XXII 197b14, the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Banerjee 1977: 34,15, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, von Simson 2000: 210,5, and the Theravāda Vinaya, Vin IV 62,28. Given that this rule is attributed to the Buddha, it is no surprise that in a description of his passing away during one of his journeys the Buddha is accompanied only by monks; for a comparable case in relation to the funeral of Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī cf. Dhammadinnā 2016a: 43. thereby providing a contrast to disagreements about the teachings that arose in later times.

According to early Buddhist doctrine, the complete removal of doubt takes place with stream-entry;[n.15] [14] Cf., e.g., Sn 231, with a counterpart in the Mahāvastu, Senart 1882: 291,23. in fact in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and the Dīrgha-āgama discourse the Buddha reveals that all of the monks present had at the very least attained streamentry.[n.16] [15] DN 16 at DN II 155,28 and DĀ 2 at T I 26b11. In one of the individually translated versions the Buddha instead indicates that those monks present on this occasion who have not yet attained [full] awakening will reach the eradication of the influxes after his Nirvāṇa.[n.17] [16] T 7 at T I 204c16. The nuance of assurance that emerges with this proclamation becomes more prominent with the other two individually translated discourses, as in them the Buddha predicts the advent of another Buddha in the future. Thus the impending demise of the Buddha as a teacher of mankind will eventually be followed by the emergence of another Buddha.[n.18] [17] In T 5 at T I 172c3 he indicates that in fifteen koṭīs and 70,600,000 years there will be another Buddha. According to T 6 at T I 188b14, in one koṭi and 40,000 years the Buddha Maitreya will appear.

The Dīrgha-āgama discourse translated above continues from the level of accomplishment of the assembled monks to the uniqueness of a Buddha appearing in the world. Similarly to the Dīrgha-āgama presentation, several of the parallel versions also compare the appearance of a Buddha to an udumbara flower.[n.19] [18] This is the case for the Sanskrit version, Waldschmidt 1951: 394 (§42.10), and for two of the individual translations, T 5 at T I 172c6 and T 6 at T I 188b15. The Dīrgha-āgama account stands alone, however, in reporting that the Buddha revealed his right arm.[n.20] [19] DĀ 2 at T I 26b14. According to the Sanskrit fragments of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, the Buddha rather displayed his (upper) body and invited the monks to look at it.[n.21] [20] Waldschmidt 1951: 394 (§42.10): avalokayata bhikṣavas tathāgatasya kāyam, vyavalokayata bhikṣavas tathāgatasya kāyam. An earlier version of this description might have been about the Buddha displaying how old age had affected his body, thereby providing a vivid reminder of impermanence to the assembled disciples.[n.22] [21] Waldschmidt 1948: 248 comments: "der Buddha nahm von seinen Jüngern Abschied, indem er seinen Körper vor ihnen entblößte und ihnen die Vergänglichkeit alles Irdischen am Verfall seines eigenen Körpers vor Augen führte"; cf. also Waldschmidt 1939/1967: 87f. With the growth of docetic tendencies this might then have become an act of revealing the extraordinary nature of the Buddha's body.

Impermanence is then also the theme of the Buddha's final statement, which the parallel versions report with some differences. According to the Sanskrit fragments of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, the Buddha told the monks to be silent and declared that "all formations are of a nature to decay."[n.23] [22] Waldschmidt 1951: 394 (§42.11). The Mahāparinibbāna-sutta combines a similar indication with an injunction to be diligent: "Formations are of a nature to decay, strive on with diligence."[n.24] [23] DN 16 at DN II 156,1. As Law 1933: 99 points out, this saying "strikes the key-note of the Buddha's philosophy and mission". One of the individual translations reports the Buddha's final words as follows:

You should know that all formations are entirely impermanent. Even though I now have this vajra body, I too am not exempt from being changed by impermanence. Being amidst birth and death is highly fearful, you should diligently make an effort, try to be free quickly from this fiery pit of birth and death. This is my last teaching, the time for my Nirvāṇa has come.[n.25] [24] T 7 at T I 204c25; this part has already been translated into German by Waldschmidt 1939/1967: 82. Bareau 1971b: 14 comments on a similar reference to the impermanence of the Buddha's vajra body in DĀ 2 at T I 27b12, where it forms part of stanzas spoken by an unnamed monk after the Buddha had passed away: "the author of this strophe probably had the idea that the body of the Beatific could not be constituted of the same flesh as men's, but that it was made of a substance if not truly precious at least more capable of resisting the forces of destruction and, in consequence, extraordinary"; for a detailed study of the vajrakāya notion cf. Radich 2011/2012.

In the other two individual translations the Buddha points out that half of the night has already passed. According to one version he then tells the monks that they should make an effort; according to the other he indicates that there should be silence now.[n.26] [25] T 6 at T I 188b18: 汝其勉之, 夜已半矣, and T 5 at T I 172c12: 夜已且半, 勿復有聲. Waldschmidt 1939/1967: 86 understands the passage in T 5 to be an indication that the Buddha will not say anything further, "kein Laut soll mehr (von mir) vernommen werden." Pachow 1946: 25, however, takes the passage in T 5 to be an injunction to the monks to be silent, which he paraphrases as "the Buddha ordered the Bhikkhus to keep quiet."

The main theme underlying these different records of the last words spoken by the Buddha would be that he used his own death as a final illustration of impermanence,[n.27] [26] As Gethin 1996: 210 points out, "one might go so far as to say that it is precisely his own death that constitutes the Buddha's profoundest teaching: whoever one is, whatever one does, one cannot avoid death, this is the nature of the world." and that he encouraged his disciples to devote themselves fully to their practice.[n.28] [27] Gnanarama 1997a: 16 comments that "even in the last few hours of His existence the Buddha was mindful to instill energy, exhorting the monks to exert themselves and strive for Liberation."

In contrast to the considerable number of variations found among the parallel versions so far, these same versions are in close agreement when describing the Buddha's meditative progression. Except for one individual translation, they all report that the Buddha proceeded through the nine successive meditative attainments up and down, and then went up from the first to the fourth absorption to attain Nirvāṇa. The individual translation that differs from this general consensus nevertheless has a reference to the Buddha mentally proceeding from the four heavenly kings up to the sphere of [neither-perception-nor-]non-perception, and from there returning to come back to his own body.[n.29] [28] T 5 at T I 172c14: 從四天王上至不想入, 從不想轉還身中.

At first sight a variant appears to occur elsewhere in the Pāli tradition, as the Pali Text Society edition of a Saṃyutta-nikāya parallel to this episode does not mention his attainment of cessation.[n.30] [29] Rhys Davids 1917/1979: 196 note 1, Geiger 1930/2003: 246 note 3, and Nakamura 2000b: 292 note 111 observed that the cessation attainment mentioned in DN 16 is not found in a parallel to this episode in SN 6.15 at SN I 158,11, where the Buddha just goes up to neither-perception-nor-non-perception and then descends again. Nakamura 2000b: 292 note 111 then even drew the conclusion that "this fact suggests that this term was a later addition to the Mahāparinibbāna-suttanta." Yet, the cessation attainment is found in all Asian editions, so that this difference is probably a textual error in the manuscripts used for the PTS edition.[n.31] [30] According to Be, Ce, and Se, as well as the new PTS edition by Somaratne 1998: 340, the Buddha proceeded up to the attainment of cessation; cf. also Bodhi 2000: 442 note 421. Another textual error on the part of the manuscripts used for the old PTS edition appears to be that SN 6.15 at SN I 158,1 has the two parts of the Buddha's final injunction in the opposite order to DN 16, where again Be, Ce, and Se, as well as the new PTS edition by Somaratne 1998: 340, agree on recording this in the same way as DN 16 at DN II 156,1.

This Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse shows several other differences when compared to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta, however, which are also attested in the Asian editions. The Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse does not report the exchange between Anuruddha and Ānanda regarding the Buddha's attainment of cessation,[n.32] [31] The episode where Ānanda enquires from Anuruddha whether the Buddha has already passed away is mentioned only in the commentary on SN 6.15, Spk I 223,15. Another difference is that in SN 6.15 at SN I 158,35 the stanzas spoken by Ānanda in relation to the Buddha's passing away come before those of Anuruddha, whereas DN 16 at DN II 157,12 adopts the opposite sequence. Yet another difference occurs in relation to the stanzas spoken by Anuruddha, where according to DN 16 at DN II 157,13 he referred to the moment "when the sage passed away", yaṃ kālaṃ akarī munī, whereas according to the corresponding part in SN 6.15 at SN I 159,4 he stated that "the one with vision [entered] final Nirvāṇa", cakkhuma parinibbuto. nor does it record that an earthquake marked the occasion.[n.33] [32] SN 6.15 at SN I 158,24 continues directly from stating that the Buddha had attained final Nirvāṇa to the stanza spoken on this occasion by Brahmā Sahampati; the great earthquake is then reported in the commentary, Spk I 224,25, with explicit reference to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta. For a study of earthquakes in Buddhist literature cf. Ciurtin 2009 and 2012. The Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels, however, agree that an earthquake marked the Buddha's passing away.[n.34] [33] DN 16 at DN II 156,35, Waldschmidt 1951: 398 (§42.19), T 5 at T I 172c17, T 6 at T I 188c6, and T 7 at T I 205b1.

Other partial parallels to the present episode in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels can be found in the two Saṃyukta-āgamas. The completely preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99) contains two short discourses, one of which narrates the episode involving the conversion of Subhadda, concluding with a brief reference to the Buddha's passing away.[n.35] [34] The relevant part of SĀ 979 at T II 254b29 reads: "Then, after the venerable Subhadda had first [entered] Nirvāṇa, the Blessed One [entered] Nirvāṇa", 時尊者須跋陀羅先般涅槃已, 然後世尊般涅槃. This episode is also reported in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels. Since this Saṃyukta-āgama discourse only takes up the Subhadda episode, it refers just briefly to the Buddha's passing away to mark the fact that Subhadda had entered Nirvāṇa before the Buddha. The narrative context makes it natural that no further details are given regarding the Buddha.

Another discourse in the same collection then takes as its main theme the various stanzas that were held to have been spoken by devas and men present on this occasion. Here, too, the actual passing away of the Buddha is not the main theme, but is only referred to in the introductory narration.[n.36] [35] SĀ 1197 at T II 325b10 indicates that: "At that time the Blessed One, in the middle of the night, [entered] Nirvāṇa in the Nirvāṇa [element] without remainder", 爾時世尊即於中夜, 於無餘涅槃而般涅槃. Hence here, too, it is natural that no further details are given.[n.37] [36] The Subhadda episode can also be found in EĀ 42.3, which has several episodes that in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels occur in close vicinity to their description of the Buddha's passing away. Nevertheless, EĀ 42.3 concludes with Subhadda's final Nirvāṇa, T II 752c10 and the Buddha's last instruction regarding how the monks should address each other in future, T II 752c16, without even mentioning the Buddha's own passing away; for a translation cf. Bareau 1987: 28f.

Another relevant discourse is found in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100). As already suggested by Bareau, this discourse is simply a combination of what in the completely preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99) are two discourses.[n.38] [37] Bareau 1979a: 60 suggests that SĀ2 110 (his version C) would be the result of combining SĀ 979 and SĀ 1197 (his versions B and D): "la série C … semble donc résulter d'une combinaison des séries B et D." This discourse in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) also has only a brief reference to the Buddha's passing away, presented together with the indication that Subhadda passed away before him.[n.39] [38] According to SĀ2 110 at T II 413c22: "Subhadda then first entered Nirvāṇa, after that the Tathāgata also entered Nirvāṇa", 須跋陀羅即時先入涅槃, 如來 於後亦入涅槃 (adopting the variant 槃 instead of 盤).

Similar to the two discourses in the completely preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99), the Avadānaśataka also has two tales that briefly mention the Buddha's passing away. As in the Saṃyukta-āgama, one of these tales reports the Subhadda episode, while the other records the stanzas spoken after the Buddha had passed away. Here, too, the actual passing away of the Buddha is merely mentioned in passing, without further details.[n.40] [39] The first tale reports that "then the venerable Subhadra first [entered] final Nirvāṇa, after which the Blessed One [entered final Nirvāṇa]", Speyer 1906/ 1970: 234,6: tatrāyuṣmān subhadraḥ prathamataraṃ parinirvṛtaḥ, tataḥ paścād bhagavān. According to the second tale, "then in the middle watch of the night the Blessed One [entered] final Nirvāṇa in the Nirvāṇa element without a remainder", Speyer 1909/1970: 198,1: tatra bhagavān rātryā madhyame yāme 'nupadhiśeṣe nirvāṇadhātau parinirvṛtaḥ.

Taking into account the narrative contexts of the Saṃyukta-āgama discourses and the tales found in the Avadānaśataka makes it clear that these need not be considered as alternative accounts of the Buddha's passing away. Instead, they appear to be simply extracts that focus on a particular aspect of a wider tale. In fact the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya has preserved a full version of the Mahāpariṇirvāna-sūtra, and this full version records the Buddha's passing away in detail. In agreement with the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels, the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya reports that the Buddha proceeded through the nine meditative attainments in forward and backward order, followed by again ascending up to the fourth absorption in order to enter Nirvāṇa.[n.41] [40&41] T 1451 at T XXIV 399b13 and the Tibetan version in Waldschmidt 1951: 397,36; on the close correspondence between the accounts of the Buddha's passing away in the Avadānaśataka and the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya cf. Przyluski 1918: 488–496. So this tale was clearly known among Mūlasarvāstivāda reciters.

A comparable pattern can be seen regarding what tradition reckons to be the Buddha's first discourse. A Saṃyukta-āgama discourse has preserved a version of this first discourse without any reference to the need to avoid the two extremes of sensual indulgence and self-mortification.[n.42] SĀ 379 at T II 103c13, translated in Anālayo 2012a: 17–19. The two extremes are instead found in another discourse in the same Saṃyukta-āgama collection. [n.43] SĀ 912 at T II 228c18, parallel to SN 42.12 at SN IV 330,26. The Saṅghabhedavastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, however, has the two extremes as part of the first discourse.[n.44] T 1450 at T XXIV 127b24, translated in Anālayo 2012a: 21–24; cf. also Gnoli 1977: 134,10 and Waldschmidt 1957: 140 (§11.14). Nevertheless, another section of the same Vinaya, the Kṣudrakavastu, has a version of the first discourse without the two extremes. Moreover, the identical text, attributed to the same Yìjìng (義淨) who translated the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, is found as an individual discourse in the Taishō edition.[n.45] T 110 at T II 504a7 = T 1451 at T XXIV 292a29, translated in Anālayo 2012a: 39f. The identity between these two texts has already been noted by Chung 2006: 78. It seems fair to conclude that what we have here are intentional extracts from a larger account known to the reciters of the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition, not different versions of the first teaching given by the Buddha.[n.46] Pace Bareau 1963: 181, who holds that "à une lointaine époque, une partie au moins de docteurs du Bouddhisme ignoraient quel avait été le thème du premier sermon ou refusaient de considérer comme tel les quatre saintes Vérités." For a more detailed critical reply cf. Anālayo 2012a and 2013a.

The same also applies to the Saṃyukta-āgama discourses that describe the final moments in the life of the Buddha. These similarly appear to be extracts from a larger account.

---

Supposed Lateness of the Meditative Progression

In this way a comparative study of the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels gives the impression that the Buddha's gradual progression through the four absorptions and the immaterial spheres up to cessation is fairly common ground among most of the otherwise quite different parallel versions. Nevertheless, several modern scholars consider this episode to be the result of a later addition. In what follows, I critically survey the reasons given to support this view.

In his comparative study of the accounts of the Buddha's passing away, Bareau comes to the conclusion that the description of his meditative progression is a late element invented on purpose for the Mahāpariṇirvāna-sūtra.[n.47] Bareau 1979a: 55: "le long récit de l'Extinction du Buddha, récit célèbre qui décrit les méditations et recueillements atteints successivement par le Bienheureux avant de parvenir à la paix suprême de la Délivrance définitive, a sans doute été inventé spécialement pour le MPNS [Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra]." Bareau bases his assessment on the Saṃyukta-āgama discourses mentioned above, which he sees as different accounts of the Buddha's passing away extant in Chinese translation.[n.48] Bareau 1979a: 55: "la preuve en est que deux autres sūtra, qui ne nous sont parvenus que dans leur version chinoise et qui racontent chacun, en une courte série, des épisodes précédant et suivant celui du Parinirvāṇa, ne font que mentionner très brièvement celui-ci, sans donner aucun détail à son propos." He takes these to represent an ancient tradition which rejected the detailed account in the Mahāpariṇirvāna-sūtra.[n.49] Bareau 1979a: 59 sees SĀ2 110 (his version C) and SĀ 1197 (his version D) as representing "[des] auteurs [qui] étaient demeurés fidèles … à la vieille tradition qui avouait implicitement ne savoir du Parinirvāṇa du Buddha que le simple fait qu'il avait eu lieu e qu'ils rejetaient comme apocryphe le récit très détaillé que nous en donnent les six versions du MPNS [Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra]" (in the original the part I have quoted takes the form of a question, the question being whether EĀ 42.3 can also be seen as reflecting the same supposedly ancient tradition).

Bareau's discussion ignores the detailed study and translation of these two Saṃyukta-āgama discourses by Przyluski, published more than half a century earlier in the Journal Asiatique as part of a set of four successive papers on the theme of the Buddha's parinirvāṇa.[n.50] Przyluski 1918, 1919a, 1919b, and 1920. In this study, Przyluski comes to rather different conclusions. After noting the close resemblance between the two Saṃyukta-āgama discourses and the two Avadānaśataka tales, he suggests that these would have originally come into being as intentional discourse extracts, whose purpose was to introduce the accounts of the so-called councils (saṅgīti),[n.51] Oldenberg 1879/1997: xxviii assumed that differences between the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and the account of the first saṅgīti at Vin II 284,2 implied that the reciters of the one text were ignorant of the other; cf. also Franke 1908: 66–74, Dutt 1957: 102, and An 2001: 52. Critical replies to this assumption can be found in Thomas 1927/2003: 165, Finot 1932: 243, Obermiller 1932, Thomas 1933/2004: 29, Frauwallner 1956: 45, Ch'en 1958, Upadhyaya 1971: 43–45, de La Vallée Poussin 1976: 13 note 39, Jinananda 1993: 93, Witanachchi 2006: 723, and Anālayo 2011b: 863 note 43. thereby investing these accounts with authority.[n.52] Przyluski 1918: 505: "les récits des Conciles relatant des événements postérieurs à Çākyamuni ne pouvaient prétendre d'eux-mêmes à la haute autorité qui s'attachait aux Sūtra. Par un détour assez habile, on leur conféra en quelque sorte une authenticité factice en les faisant précéder d'un Sūtra ou d'un fragment de Sūtra. Les textes racontant la fin du Maître furent naturellement désignés pour servir de lien et de transition entre les écrits reproduisant la parole du Buddha et les chroniques des premiers siècles de l'Église." In fact, one of the two Avadānaśataka tales (no. 100) has the title saṃgītiḥ, clearly marking this as its chief topic. Przyluski's suggestion offers a considerably more convincing explanation than Bareau's assumption.

Bareau's remark that the presentation in the Saṃyukta-āgama discourses is only extant in Chinese translation shows that he was unaware of the parallel versions in the Avadānaśataka. He also did not take into account the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya version. This reflects a basic methodological problem with Bareau's study of the biography of the Buddha in general, in that he did not base his various hypotheses on a study of all relevant versions.

In the case of the Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse that also reports the Buddha's meditative progression, Bareau summarily dismisses this version as a text that has been reworked to accord with the presentation in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta.[n.53] Bareau 1979a: 55 refers to SN 6.15 as "un sutta pāli qui, selon toute vraisemblance, a été remanié plus tard pour le rendre identique à la version pālie de notre ouvrage, ce qui rend donc nul son témoignage." The evidence at our disposal stands in contrast to this conclusion. As mentioned above, there are several substantial differences between the Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse and the relevant section of the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta.[n.54] For a survey of differences between the two versions cf. Przyluski 1918: 506–508. These differences are remarkable, given that these two discourse versions pertain to the same Theravāda Pāli canon. Thus the Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse cannot be regarded as merely a late reworking based on the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta.

In sum, it seems preferable to follow the lead of Waldschmidt who, based on his detailed study and on taking into account the research by Przyluski, concludes that a comparative study of the relevant sources provides no support for the assumption that the progression of the Buddha through the nine meditative attainments on the eve of his passing away is a later expansion of an earlier shorter account.[n.55] Waldschmidt 1948: 251: "der Vergleich der verschiedenen überlieferten Parinirvāṇatexte gibt keine Anhaltspunkte zur Stütze dieser Annahme", written in relation to the suggestion that the reference to the immaterial spheres is a later addition to the description of the Buddha's passing away (in the introduction to his study, Waldschmidt 1944: 3 note 11 explicitly mentions that he benefited from the work by Przyluski). As a methodological point in relation to studying the Mahāparinirvāṇa narrative in general, Snellgrove 1973: 409 comments "how unsatisfactory a proceeding it is to produce a plausible biography from these materials by simply accepting the parts which seem humanly possible and rejecting the miraculous elements as obvious accretions."

---

The Buddha's Attainment of the Immaterial Spheres

In what follows I survey other arguments raised in support of the assumption that the description of the Buddha's attainment of the immaterial spheres on the verge of his death is a later addition. Due to the complexity of the topic, my discussion will also include an examination of the Buddha's pre-awakening meditation practice.

In addition to arguments derived from the comparative study of the parallel versions of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, Bareau also supports his hypothesis by pointing out that no one could possibly have known what went on in the Buddha's mind. As the Buddha passed away right at the end of his meditative progression through the absorptions and immaterial spheres, he would not have been able to tell others what took place in his mind right on the verge of his own death.[n.56] Bareau 1979a: 62: "puisque, de toute évidence, le Bienheureux n'a pu expliquer à ses disciples par quelle méthode psychique, en ses derniers instants, il est parvenu au Parinirvāṇa, lui qui en était le seul témoin silencieux, il est donc certain que cette description est purement imaginaire." Bareau is not the first one to make this point, as already T.W. Rhys Davids had expressed a similar view.[n.57] Rhys Davids 1910: 174 note 1 comments that "no one, of course, can have known what actually did occur."

To be sure, it is not really possible for us to reconstruct historical facts based on mere textual accounts that are the final products of a prolonged period of transmission. This is especially true in the case of the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels, which are clearly interspersed with hagiographic elements.[n.58] Williams 2000: 26f explains that "the life-story of the Buddha is not a historical narrative but a hagiography … in which how it was, how it should have been, and how it must have been … are united under the overriding concern of exemplary truth … the life-story reflects the unification of is and ought in the vision and needs of the subsequent community … the 'is' of historical fact was only one dimension, and a subordinate one, in the construction of the original hagiography. Thus the hagiography as a whole is to be read as an ideological document … the Buddha's hagiography should be read as an illustration of what is to Buddhists important." Nevertheless, it is possible to consider whether a particular narration is internally coherent and in line with general ideas and notions found in other early Buddhist texts.

According to early Buddhist thought, meditative expertise enables knowing the state of mind of another. Such ability is regularly mentioned among a set of supernormal abilities held to be accessible once the mind has been cultivated up to the depth of concentration and inner stability of the fourth absorption, an example in case being the Sāmaññaphala-sutta and its parallels.[n.59] DN 2 at DN I 79,26 and its parallels DĀ 27 at T I 109b8 (which abbreviates and thus needs to be supplemented from DĀ 20 at T I 86a23), T 22 at T I 275b26, and the Saṅghabhedavastu, Gnoli 1978: 248,16.

It would therefore be in keeping with such assumptions on the power of the mind when the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels attribute the information about the Buddha's meditative experience to Anuruddha.[n.60] In reply to the comment by Rhys Davids quoted above p. 242 note 57, Walshe 1987: 575 note 454 points out that "since Anuruddha is said to have had highly developed psychic powers, we cannot be so sure." As Nyanaponika and Hecker 1997: 208 explain in relation to DN 16, according to the presentation in the discourse "Anuruddha, an arahant endowed with the divine eye, had been able to gauge the level of meditation into which the Buddha had entered." Anuruddha features in the early Buddhist tradition as an outstanding disciple in the exercise of a supernormal ability called the divine eye.[n.61] AN 1.14.1 at AN I 23,20 and EĀ 4.2 at T II 557b9. Evidently he was reckoned to have been an adept in meditative concentration. Hence, at least from the perspective of the textual tradition, the idea that no one could possibly have known what went on in the Buddha's mind overlooks the role of Anuruddha in the Mahāparinirvāṇa narrative, where he explicitly informs Ānanda that the Buddha has entered cessation.[n.62] In fact according to MN 31 at MN I 209,22 and its parallel EĀ 24.8 at T II 629b25 (cf. also Senior Kharoṣṭhī fragment 12r50), on another occasion Anuruddha displayed knowledge of his companions' abilities to enter the same range of attainments, from the first absorption up to cessation (another parallel, MĀ 185 at T I 730b28, mentions the six supernormal knowledges instead of the cessation attainment). The same type of explanation would then also work for SN 6.15, even though this version does not record an explicit exchange between Anuruddha and Ānanda. Nevertheless, SN 6.15 at SN I 159,1 reports stanzas spoken by Anuruddha, which shows that he was on record as present on this occasion and would thus have been able to understand through his psychic powers what was going on.

Another argument raised by Bareau is that he finds it difficult to understand why the Buddha would have gone up and down these various levels of meditative experience. According to Bareau, this difficulty makes it probable that the original description just mentioned the four absorptions and, having attained the fourth absorption, the Buddha entered Nirvāṇa.[n.63] Bareau 1971a: 155f: "ces montées et descentes successives paraissent assez étranges, et l'on ne comprend pas bien, à première vue, pourquoi le Buddha n'est pas entré dans le Parinirvāṇa en sortant du recueillement de cessation, ni les deux premières fois où il a quitté la quatrième méditation … on est ainsi conduit à admettre une version primitive réduite à cette seconde partie, dans laquelle le Bienheureux montait tout de suite jusqu'à la quatrième méditation, puis s'éteignait."

Here, too, Bareau is not the first one to make such a suggestion. In a detailed study of the absorptions in Buddhism, Heiler (1922: 44) drew a distinction between what he considered to be the ancient tradition of the Buddha's meditation practice on the eve of his passing away and the four immaterial spheres and cessation as what according to him is a later addition. Similar suggestions have also been made by other scholars.[n.64] Thomas 1927/2003: 153 note 2, Falk 1939/2004: 339f, Foucher 1949: 313, King 1980/1992: 15, and Zafiropulo 1993: 67; cf. also Rhys Davids 1927: 713, who speaks of a "curious insertion of the Jhāna formulas into the account of the moment of his passing."

In the case of Heiler, his presentation is part of an overall argument that the immaterial spheres are a late addition to early Buddhist meditation theory. As I have argued elsewhere, what has been proposed in support of the assumption that the immaterial spheres are a later addition to the descriptions of meditative practice in the early discourses is not convincing.[n.65] Several of these arguments, which were originally part of the article published in the present chapter, are instead republished in Anālayo 2017b. This in turn implies that the mere fact that the immaterial spheres occur in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels as part of the meditative practice of the Buddha on the verge of his death is not in itself a sign of later addition. Nevertheless, according to the query raised by Bareau it needs to be explained why the Buddha would have been depicted as going up and down these various levels of meditative experience before passing away.

A discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallels report the Buddha proclaiming that he can freely attain each of the four absorptions and each of the four immaterial spheres.[n.66] [86] SN 16.9 at SN II 211,5 and its parallels SĀ 1142 at T II 302a18 and SĀ² 117 at T II 416c24. A difference is that the attainment of cessation is only mentioned in SN 16.9 at SN II 212,8. This proclamation implies that to be able to do so is a mark of meditative mastery. Hence for the Buddha to be on record as proceeding through the same series on the verge of his death, in spite of being about to pass away, is simply a way of throwing into relief that he was still in full possession of his meditative mastery.

There is thus a fairly straightforward rationale behind the description of the Buddha's meditative progression at this moment. This rationale is fully in keeping with the general tendency in the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels to show the self-possession of the Buddha when confronted with the most fearful of all human experiences: one's own death. The same is also evident, for example, in the depiction in the same Mahāparinibbāna-sutta and its parallels of his deliberate giving up of his life-force on an earlier occasion.[n.67] [87] DN 16 at DN II 106,21, Waldschmidt 1951: 212 (§16.14), DĀ 2 at T I 15c20, T 5 at T I 165a23, T 6 at T I 180c6, and T 7 at T I 191c8; cf. also Cowell and Neil 1886: 203,7. The step-by-step progression through this range of meditative attainments in forward and backward order is thus not a detour, let alone a tortuous procedure,[n.68] [88] Pande 1957: 105 wonders: "one may ask why this tortuous procedure?" but from a Buddhist perspective much rather depicts the most peaceful and self-possessed way to meet one's own death, exemplifying the Buddha's high degree of self-mastery.

In this way, even on the verge of his death the Buddha is endowed with complete mastery over all these attainments, the four absorptions and the four immaterial attainments. He is able to attain and leave each of them freely, proceeding onwards until he reaches what goes beyond the teachings and attainments known among his contemporaries, the attainment of cessation.

His degree of detachment and self-mastery is such that he executes this progression in the forward order and the reverse direction, in line with what in early Buddhist meditation theory is a criterion for true meditative mastery: being able to proceed through a series of meditative attainments in the forward and backward order. [n.69] [111] Cf., e.g., AN 9.41 at AN IV 448,8, which relates the Buddha's attainment of awakening precisely to his ability to progress through the nine meditative attainments in forward and backward order. After this demonstration of his meditative mastery, he uses the same step-by-step approach once again up to the fourth absorption, as a basis for his entry into final Nirvāṇa.

The main point made in this way also emerges when turning to Buddhist art, such as a depiction of the Buddha's Mahāparinirvāṇa from cave 26 at Ajaṇṭā.[n.70] Cf. below p. 667 plate 1. The depiction of the Buddha's passing away in this image conveys an air of calm self-possession, of being at ease and in peace.

---

Conclusion

When considered from the viewpoint of early Buddhist meditation theory in the way this has been preserved in the early discourses, there seems to be nothing inherently incoherent or problematic in the depiction of the Buddha's meditation practice on the verge of his passing away. The main point of the passage is simply to show the Buddha's meditative mastery right on the eve of his passing away, and at the same time exemplify his transcendence of meditative attainments, esteemed among contemporary practitioners in ancient India, with his attainment of Nirvāṇa.