Introduction
Anālayo, Dīrgha-āgama Studies (Dharma Drum Institute of Liberal Arts Research Series 6). Dharma Drum Publishing Corporation, Taipei, 2017.
The Dīrgha-āgama preserved in Chinese is the first of the four Chinese Āgamas in the Taishō edition,[n.1] Zacchetti 2016: 83 comments that the expression "the 'Chinese Āgamas' is a designation perhaps more appropriate than generally conceded, for in a sense they are, as a group, an entirely Chinese invention. This is a particularly telling example of the active transformative power generated by the Chinese canon." just as its Pāli counterpart, the Dīgha-nikāya, is the first discourse collection in the Pāli canon. Although the present book with collected papers on the Dīrgha-āgama is the last of four such publications in terms of date of appearance, I expect and in fact would recommend that the present collection be the first taken up by the interested reader, to be followed by my Madhyama-āgama studies (2012f), Saṃyukta-āgama studies (2015j), and Ekottarika-āgama studies (2016b).
By way of introduction to all four volumes, in what follows I briefly survey the four main Chinese Āgamas.[n.2] What follows is based on extracts from Anālayo 2009n, 2009o, 2014h, and 2015a. In a later chapter I come back to the significance of the term āgama (as well as of the term aṅga) in relation to the formation of the textual collections of the early discourses; cf. below p. 449ff. In the first of the chapters that follow this introduction, I try to place the early discourses in historical perspective. An assessment of their value as testimonies for early Buddhist thought serves as a foundation for the comparative studies found in this and the other three volumes.
The Dīrgha-āgama
According to the information at our disposal, the Dīrgha-āgama extant in the Taishō edition as entry 1 was translated into Chinese in the year 413 of the present era by Zhú Fóniàn (竺佛念), based on an original recited by Buddhayaśas that appears to have been in a Prakrit and with high probability stems from a Dharmaguptaka line of transmission.[n.3] On the school affiliation of the Dīrgha-āgama collection preserved in Chinese translation as Taishō no. 1 cf., e.g., Przyluski 1926: 355, Lamotte 1949/1981: 811 note 1, Demiéville 1951: 252f, Brough 1962/2001: 50, Lü 1963: 242, de Jong 1962/1979: 290 note 7, Bareau 1966, Waldschmidt 1980: 136, Mayeda 1985: 97, Enomoto 1986: 25, Hirakawa 1987: 513, Schmithausen 1987: 318, Oberlies 2003: 44, Salomon 2007: 354 note 14, and Willemen 2008: 60. Besides its Pāli parallel in the Dīgha-nikāya, large parts of a Sarvāstivāda/Mūlasarvāstivāda collection of long discourses are extant in the form of Sanskrit fragments.[n.4] Surveys of this collection have been provided by Hartmann 2000, 2002, and 2004, and Hartmann and Wille 2014. Editions of discourses from this collection, listed in the order of their canonical placing, are: Govinda-sūtra (14th): Sadakata 1999 and 2006, Prāsādika-sūtra (15th): DiSimone 2016, Prasādanīya-sūtra (16th): Di- Simone 2016, Kāyabhāvanā-sūtra (20th): Liu 2010, Bodha-sūtra (21st): Hartmann 2004 and Silverlock 2009, Śaṃkara-sūtra (22nd): Zhang 2004, Āṭānāta-sūtra (23rd): Sander 2007 and Dietz 2011, Tridaṇḍi-sūtra (25th): Matsuda 2006 and Choi 2015, Piṅgalātreya-sūtra (26th): Matsuda 2006 and Peipina 2008, Lohitya-sūtra I (27th): Choi 2015, Lohitya-sūtra II (28th): Choi 2015, Kairvarti-sūtra (29th): Zhou 2008, Kūṭatāṇḍya-sūtra (34th): von Criegern 2002, Ambaṣṭha-sūtra (35th): Melzer 2006, Pṛṣṭhapāla-sūtra (36th): Melzer 2006 and Stuart 2013, Kāraṇavādi-sūtra (37th): Melzer 2006, Pudgala-sūtra (38th): Melzer 2006, Śruta-sūtra (39th): Melzer 2006, Mahalla-sūtra (40th): Melzer 2006, and Anyatama-sūtra (41st): Melzer 2006. For a survey of work in progress cf. Hartmann and Wille 2014: 142f.
Regarding the different Buddhist schools that transmitted these āgamas or nikāyas, it might be opportune to note that each of these discourse collections is not so much the product of a school, but rather the final result of oral transmission over long periods of time by successive generations of Indian reciters, of which only the last generations could be considered members of a particular school. Although school affiliation is certainly a relevant aspect to be taken into consideration, the vicissitudes of oral transmission have affected these discourses right from the time they came into existence, not only since they were transmitted by reciters who considered themselves to be members of one or another of the Buddhist schools. In other words, variations between parallel versions need not invariably be the result of sectarian agendas.
Besides the three complete Dīgha-nikāya/Dīrgha-āgama collections, individual long discourses are also preserved in Chinese translation (T 2 to T 25), in Indic language fragments that do not belong to the Sarvāstivāda/Mūlasarvāstivāda collection mentioned above, as well as in Tibetan translation.
The distribution of discourses among the different āgamas/nikāyas according to principles such as length for the purpose of facilitating their memorization has provided reciters of a particular collection with a somewhat specific coverage of topics.
Such specific coverage appears to be recognized in an explanation given in the Sarvāstivāda *Vinayavibhāṣā that relates the long discourses collected in the Dīrgha-āgama especially to the refutation of heterodox philosophies.[n.5] T 1440 at T XXIII 504a1; cf. also below p. 339f note 31. This seems to hold also for the Dīgha-nikāya, where the Buddha's ability to convert outsiders and to stand his ground successfully in debate is a prominent theme, together with the inspiration to be gained from the Buddha's exceptional nature and qualities. As debates and eulogies can easily become prolonged, it would only be natural for a collection of long discourses to contain much material of this type.
The exceptional nature of the Buddha as an important topic in the Dīgha-nikāya seems to be also reflected in the Pāli commentarial tradition, according to which the transmission of this collection was taken up by the disciples of the Buddha's attendant Ānanda.[n.6] Sv I 15,2. In early Buddhist texts, Ānanda stands representative of a deeply devoted attitude towards the Buddha. From the viewpoint of the commentarial tradition, his personal inclinations (which would presumably have attracted similarly inclined disciples) fit this particular discourse collection. In other words, the collection of long discourses would have a particular appeal for disciples who feel strong devotion towards the Buddha as their teacher, as well as for disciples who are engaged in winning converts to the tradition and disciples who have to defend Buddhist doctrine against other philosophies and beliefs.
The Madhyama-āgama
The Madhyama-āgama extant in the Taishō edition as entry 26 appears to have been translated by Gautama Saṅghadeva based on an original that would have been from a Sarvāstivāda line of transmission.[n.7] The general consensus among scholars on the school affiliation of the Madhyama-āgama has recently been called into question by Chung and Fukita 2011: 13–34, as well as Chung 2014 and 2017 (cf. also Fukita 2017); for critical replies cf. Anālayo 2012f: 516–521 and 2017c. On the underlying language cf. Karashima 2017. In addition, middle-length discourses are preserved individually in Chinese translation (T 27 to T 98), a number of Madhyama-āgama discourses are extant in Indic language fragments, and some exist also in Tibetan translation.
The Pāli Majjhima-nikāya is fairly consistent in adopting a pattern of ten discourses per chapter, the sole exception being its penultimate chapter with twelve discourses. The count of discourses per chapter in the Madhyama-āgama shows greater diversity. Although a grouping of ten is the most common count, the eleventh chapter, for example, entitled the "Great Chapter", has twenty-five discourses. The sequences of the discourses in the two collections have little in common.
Differences in distribution of discourses over the āgamas/nikāyas appear to be the result of an ongoing process of shifts in location. Apparently even whole groups of discourses were moved from one collection to another.[n.8] Cf. Bucknell 2014 and 2017. This seems to have happened in the case of the first chapter in the Madhyama-āgama, for example, where all of the ten discourses revolve around the number seven. Most of the discourses in this chapter have their counterparts among the Sevens of the Aṅguttara-nikāya. This gives the impression that these discourses could originally have been assembled as part of a numerical collection of Sevens and were then subsequently inserted at the beginning of the Madhyama-āgama.
A similar process appears to have happened in the case of the Majjhima-nikāya in relation to its last chapter, which combines discourses that in one way or another deal with the topic of the six senses. Parallels to these discourses are found in the Saṃyukta-āgama which, like its Pāli counterpart, the Saṃyutta-nikāya, has an entire section dedicated to the six senses. In this case it seems that ten discourses originally formed a group in a topic-wise collection and subsequently made their way into the Majjhima-nikāya.
The rationale behind such moves would be to ensure each collection had a good coverage of various aspects of the teachings and thereby counter the somewhat mechanical allocation to collections according to principles like length of a discourse. The attempt to improve the coverage of a particular collection would have led some reciters to want to incorporate material from other collections which they considered important. The same would also explain the not infrequent doubling of discourses, where the same text appears in whole or in part in more than one collection.
Regarding the somewhat different emphases in the long and middle-length discourse collections, according to the Sarvāstivāda *Vinayavibhāṣā the Madhyama-āgama presents profound doctrines for an intelligent audience.[n.9] T 1440 at T XXIII 503c28. The Pāli commentarial tradition associates the transmission of the Majjhima-nikāya with the disciples of Sāriputta, who in the tradition represents the quality of wisdom par excellence.[n.10] Sv I 15,5. The perspectives provided by these two works agree in indicating that the middle-length collections would be of particular relevance for disciples who intend to deepen their understanding of the teachings in order to develop their wisdom.
The Saṃyukta-āgama
Three Saṃyukta-āgama collections are extant in Chinese. The first and fairly complete collection now found in the Taishō edition as entry number 99 was based on a Sanskrit original recited by Guṇabhadra and translated by Bǎoyún (寶雲), probably reflecting an original that stemmed from a Mūlasarvāstivāda line of transmission. The manuscript of this discourse collection was apparently acquired in Sri Lanka by the Chinese pilgrim Fǎxiǎn (法顯),[n.11] Glass 2010: 200. who stayed at the Abhayagiri monastery.
A partially preserved Chinese translation of a Saṃyukta-āgama collection of uncertain school and translator can be found as entry number 100 in the Taishō edition,[n.12] Cf. the study by Bingenheimer 2011. followed by another short Saṃyukta-āgama fragment as entry number 101,[n.13] Cf. the study by Harrison 2002. and by several individually translated Saṃyukta-āgama discourses (T 102 to T 124). Besides Indic language fragments, a considerable number of Saṃyukta-āgama parallels are extant in Tibetan translation. These appear for the most part in Śamathadeva's Upāyikāṭikā on the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya.[n.14] Cf. the studies by Dhammadinnā 2012, 2013a, 2013b, 2014, and 2016b.
The circumstance that the Saṃyutta-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama are arranged according to topics makes it natural that a considerable number of their discourses deal with doctrinal themes like dependent arising, the aggregates, the senses, and aspects of the path. In this way, the two collections provide a range of closely related spotlights following each other in immediate succession on central themes of early Buddhist philosophy and practice. The collection of connected discourses would thus have been of special interest for disciples wishing to develop a comprehensive understanding of specific aspects of the teachings.
The Sarvāstivāda *Vinayavibhāṣā indicates that the Saṃyukta-āgama is particularly appropriate for providing topics for meditation.[n.15] T 1440 at T XXIII 503c29. The Pāli commentarial tradition associates the transmission of the Saṃyutta-nikāya with the disciples of Mahākassapa,[n.16] Sv I 15,8. who in the tradition exemplifies the austere forest monk given to ascetic practices, which in turn are often seen as related to intensive meditation. These two works seem to agree in considering the collection arranged topic-wise as providing teachings suitable for meditative reflection, ideally undertaken in seclusion.
The complete Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99) comes in fifty fascicles, of which only forty-eight correspond to the original text. Owing to a misplacing of fascicles at some time in the past, the order of the collection fell into disarray and two fascicles that do not belong to the Saṃyukta-āgama have been accidentally included.[n.17] Anesaki 1908: 70–74.
The reconstructed Saṃyukta-āgama follows the same basic fivefold division as the Saṃyutta-nikāya. A difference is that the reconstructed Saṃyukta-āgama has a chapter of sayings by disciples, and a chapter with sayings by the Buddha or Tathāgata. More than two thirds of the discourses in the Saṃyukta-āgama have parallels in the Saṃyutta-nikāya.
The Ekottarika-āgama
A collection of numerical discourses was translated into Chinese by Zhú Fóniàn (竺佛念) in the year 384 of the present era. The school affiliation of this Ekottarika-āgama has been a subject of ongoing discussion among scholars. A Mahāsāṅghika affiliation of the Indic original seems to be the most probable hypothesis, although for the time being it is probably best to consider as uncertain the provenance of the Ekottarika-āgama in the form in which it is now extant as entry 125 in the Taishō edition.[n.18] Cf. in more detail Anālayo 2016b: 173–178 and 211–214.
The Chinese canon has also preserved a partial Ekottarika-āgama translation by Ān Shìgāo 安世高 (T 150a),[n.19] Cf. the study by Harrison 1997. as well as individually translated discourses (T 127 to T 149). Parts of a collection of numerical discourses are extant in Sanskrit,[n.20] Edited by Tripāṭhī 1995. besides other fragmentary parallels and a few counterparts in Tibetan translation.
The basic principle adopted in the Aṅguttara-nikāya and the Ekottarika-āgama groups together discourses that are in some way related to a particular number. The numbers taken into consideration proceed one by one, which would have earned the collections their title, beginning with the Ones and coming to a conclusion with the Elevens. Not all numerical topics are necessarily covered, since items like the 'four' noble truths or the 'eight'-fold noble path have found inclusion in the topic-wise arrangement in the saṃyukta collections instead.[n.21] The eightfold path does, however, appear as part of the tenfold path among the Tens, AN 11.113 at AN V 223,3. The division between the saṃyukta and ekottarika collections is not always clear-cut and at times items are present in both collections.
As a result of the inclusion of discourses with an emphasis on doctrinal matters in the topic-wise arrangement in the saṃyukta collections, the discourses left for assignment according to the numerical principle tend to cover more practical matters and everyday issues, which makes the numerical collection particularly suited to the concerns of the laity, although the collection also has several passages that are related to monastic discipline. The spiritual and mundane needs of the laity are in fact taken into account in a number of early discourses in the āgamas/nikāyas, clearly indicating that early Buddhist texts are not solely concerned with teaching monastics. A listing of disciples outstanding for particular qualities in the Aṅguttara-nikāya and in the Ekottarika-āgama, for example, covers not only monks and nuns, but also male and female lay disciples.[n.22] Cf. AN 1.14.6 to 1.14.7 at AN I 25,32 and EĀ 6.1 to 7.3 at T II 559c9.
An emphasis on practical teachings appears to be also reflected in the indication given in the Sarvāstivāda *Vinayavibhāṣā that various teachings for gods and men are assembled in the Ekottarika-āgama.[n.23] T 1440 at T XXIII 503c27. The Pāli commentarial tradition attributes the transmission of the Aṅguttara-nikāya to the disciples of Anuruddha,[n.24] Sv I 15,10. who was famous for his exercise of a supernatural ability called the divine eye. According to tradition, with the help of the divine eye a practitioner is able to see events far away and in various heavenly spheres, which would presumably have furnished Anuruddha with the kind of information relevant to the concerns of gods and men.
The Ekottarika-āgama extant in Chinese appears to have remained open to later influences for a considerably longer time than the other Āgamas; in fact a whole discourse appears to have been added and others seem to have been reworked after the collection had reached China.[n.25] Cf. Anālayo 2013h, 2014/2015, and 2015g.
Contents
The studies in the chapters that follow are revised versions of previously published articles.[n.26] A translation and study not included in the present selection is Anālayo 2016d, which instead has been included in Anālayo 2017b. In relation to the translations found in this and other publications of mine, I would like to mention that I am not a trained Sinologist, wherefore the contribution I am able to make lies predominantly in the study parts and in attempting to understand the development of early Indian Buddhism, for which the translations are meant as a support. The majority of these studies relate to a Dīrgha-āgama discourse, which is translated either in part or full, followed by an examination of aspects that I felt to be of further interest.
In the first chapter I begin by exploring the historical value of the Pāli discourses, and by implication of their Āgama parallels. In the next four chapters I take up various aspects related to the Brahmajāla-sutta (DN 1) and its Dīrgha-āgama parallel. Several of these aspects are of general significance for an appreciation of the early discourses, such as oral features discussed in the first two chapters and the nature of the Tathāgata taken up in the third. In the fourth chapter I turn to the Brahmajāla's analysis of the view-forming process.
The sixth chapter presents a translation of the Dīrgha-āgama parallel to the Tevijja-sutta (DN 13) and a study of its significance. The next two chapters are based on two extracts from the Dīrgha-āgama parallel to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta (DN 16), based on which I explore the nature of healing in early Buddhist thought and the account of the Buddha's meditative passing away.
An extract from the Dīrgha-āgama parallel to the Sakkapañha-sutta (DN 21) forms the starting point for a discussion over two chapters of miraculous feats, in particular fire miracles attributed to the Buddha and descriptions of levitation.
A translation of the Dīrgha-āgama parallel to the Pāyāsi-sutta (DN 23) can be found in the next two chapters, together with a study of its debate character. Then I translate the Dīrgha-āgama version of the Discourse on the Wheel-turning King (DN 26) and examine its prediction of the future Buddha Maitreya.
The next two chapters offer translations and studies of two Dīrgha-āgama discourses that do not have a Pāli parallel, but which belong to the same genre of listings of doctrinal terms as the Saṅgīti-sutta and the Dasuttara-sutta.
Complementing the study of orality in the first chapters of this collection, the final three chapters take up aspects of the Pāli oral transmission. These are the significance of the aṅgas, oral features of the Pāli discourses, and the potential of comparative study for improving our understanding of the Pāli discourses, exemplified by cases taken from the Madhyama-āgama. The last of these thereby serves as a lead-over to my Madhyama-āgama studies.[n.27] Anālayo 2012f.
Conventions
Since a considerable part of my target audience will be familiar mainly with the Pāli canon, in what follows I employ Pāli terminology, except for anglicized terms like "bodhisattva", "Dharma", or "Nirvāṇa", without thereby intending to take a position on the original language of the Dīrgha-āgama discourses or to suggest that Pāli language is in principle preferable. I hope that this will facilitate access to my studies by those who are more familiar with Pāli terms. For the same reason, I have arranged my studies in the sequence in which the respective discourses are found in the Pāli canon. The original order of the Dīrgha-āgama discourses translated and studied in the present monograph can be seen in table 1 below.
In the notes to the translations, I discuss selected differences in relation to the Pāli and other parallels. Abbreviations in the translation are usually found as such in the Chinese original. These are reproduced with an ellipsis. Instructions in the original that indicate the need to recite the elided text are given in italics.
In the translations, I use square brackets [ ] to indicate supplementation and angle brackets ⟨ ⟩ to mark emendation. In order to facilitate cross-referencing, I use square brackets in subscript to provide the pagination of the original Chinese text on which the translation is based and the pagination of the original paper, as well as superscript for its footnote or endnote numbering, whenever these differ from the present annotation.[n.28] Due to revision of the original papers, at times these references to the earlier pagination or footnote numbering are not in sequential order. When quoting text editions, I have occasionally standardized or adjusted the punctuation.
Translation Terminology
When translating Dīrgha-āgama discourses, I have attempted to stay close to the terminology adopted by Bhikkhu Bodhi in his renderings of the Pāli equivalents, to facilitate comparison. In the case of 苦, equivalent to dukkha, however, I simply keep the Pāli term, which at times does stand for outright "pain", but on many an occasion refers to "unsatisfactoriness", where translations like "suffering" or "pain" fail to convey adequately the sense of the passage in question. The standard rendering of bhagavant in the Ekottarika-āgama is 世尊, literally "World Honoured One", in which case I follow Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of the corresponding Pāli term and adopt the rendering "Blessed One". For 慈 I use the Pāli equivalent mettā, and for 漏, corresponding to āsava, I employ the rendering "influx".[n.29] For a more detailed discussion of the term āsava cf. Anālayo 2012g: 80–82.
| DĀ no.: | Pāli no.: | Pāli title: |
|---|---|---|
| DĀ 2 | DN 16 | Mahāparinibbāna-sutta |
| DĀ 6 | DN 26 | Cakkavatti-sutta |
| DĀ 7 | DN 23 | Pāyāsi-sutta |
| DĀ 11 | no parallel | |
| DĀ 12 | no parallel | |
| DĀ 21 | DN 1 | Brahmajāla-sutta |
| DĀ 26 | DN 13 | Tevijja-sutta |
Titles of the original publications: "Āgama and aṅga in the Early Buddhist Oral Tradition" (2016a); cf. below p. 449ff.
"The Brahmajāla and the Early Buddhist Oral Tradition" (2014a); cf. below p. 51ff.
"The Brahmajāla and the Early Buddhist Oral Tradition (2)" (2015b); cf. below p. 79ff.
"Brahmavihāra and Awakening, A Study of the Dīrgha-āgama Parallel to the Tevijja-sutta" (2015c); cf. below p. 179ff.
"The Buddha's Fire Miracles" (2015d); cf. below p. 249ff.
"The Buddha's Last Meditation in the Dīrgha-āgama" (2014b); cf. below p. 225ff.
"Debate with a Sceptic – The Dīrgha-āgama Parallel to the Pāyāsi-sutta (1)" (2012c); cf. below p. 295ff.
"Debate with a Sceptic – The Dīrgha-āgama Parallel to the Pāyāsi-sutta (2)" (2013b); cf. below p. 321ff.
"Healing in Early Buddhism" (2015h); cf. below p. 203ff.
"The Historical Value of the Pāli Discourses" 2012e; cf. below p. 15ff.
"Levitation in Early Buddhist Discourse" (2016f); cf. below p. 281ff.
"Maitreya and the Wheel-turning King" (2014e); cf. below p. 349ff.
"Oral Dimensions of Pāli Discourses: Pericopes, Other Mnemonic Techniques, and the Oral Performance Context" (2007a); cf. below p. 473ff.
"Selected Madhyama-āgama Discourse Passages and Their Pāli Parallels" (2016h); cf. below p. 501ff.
"Some Renditions of the Term Tathāgata in the Chinese Āgamas" (2017d); cf. below p. 101ff.
"Summaries of the Dharma – A Translation of Dīrgha-āgama Discourse No. 12" (2013g); cf. below p. 433ff.
"Three Chinese Dīrgha-āgama Discourses Without Parallels" (2014h); cf. below p. 393ff.
"Views and the Tathāgata – A Comparative Study and Translation of the Brahmajāla in the Chinese Dīrgha-āgama" (2009i); cf. below p. 115ff.
Acknowledgement
I am indebted to Marcus Bingenheimer, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Roderick Bucknell, Adam Clarke, Bhikkhunī Dhammadinnā, Stephen A. Evans, Sean Fargo, Rupert Gethin, Michael Hahn, Jens-Uwe Hartmann, Jan Nattier, Michael Running, Lambert Schmithausen, Syinchen Shi, Ken Su, Tilmann Vetter, Oskar von Hinüber, Stefano Zacchetti, and Monika Zin for comments and suggestions made in regard to one or more of the articles collected in this volume, and to the editors of the respective journals and volumes for permission to reprint the material.