Introduction

In the present chapter I return to the topic of Paccekabuddhas in the Ekottarika-āgama, already broached in the penultimate chapter on the Isigili-sutta. As in the earlier chapter, my study is part of an attempt to appreciate the significance of the figure of the Paccekabuddha in Buddhist thought.

Among the Chinese Āgamas and the Pāli Nikāyas, the Ekottarika-āgama stands out for having a substantial number of tales and references related to Paccekabuddhas. Another story to which I will return in a subsequent chapter involves a housewife who, on seeing a Paccekabuddha out on the road begging for his food, falls in love with him. Being informed by her that she is particularly enchanted by his beautiful eyes, the Paccekabuddha gouges out one of them. After this rather drastic action, he gives her a short but penetrating teaching which, on being put into practice by her, leads the housewife to a heavenly rebirth.[n.1] EĀ 38.9 at T II 724a7 to 724b27; cf. below p. 345ff.

Inasmuch as the motif of the Paccekabuddha is concerned, the protagonist of the Ekottarika-āgama story delivers a substantial doctrinal teaching, which confirms that Paccekabuddhas were not invariably seen by tradition as "silent Buddhas".[n.2] [3] The fact that Paccekabuddhas usually do not have disciples is explicitly stated in EĀ 32.5 at T II 676c18, however, cf. also above p. 230f. EĀ 31.2 at T II 667c21 clarifies that neither a Paccekabuddha nor an arahant could equal the way of teaching of a Buddha. In keeping with the restricted soteriological function of a Paccekabuddha, however, the housewife does not attain stream-entry or any other level of awakening, but is rather reborn in a Brahmā world.

The depiction of the autocombustion of Paccekabuddhas in the Ekottarika-āgama parallel to the Isigili-sutta reflects another characteristic regularly associated with them.[n.3] [4] EĀ 38.7 at T II 723a29; cf. above p. 215ff. This in a way follows from the fact that they awaken without a teacher, namely that Paccekabuddhas are expected to live only during periods when no Buddha (and no Buddha’s dispensation) is in existence.[n.4] [9] EĀ 50.10 at T II 814a14 even distinguishes between two types of aeon, one in which a Buddha appears in the world and the other when Paccekabuddhas appear; cf. above p. 234 note 62.

The discourse translated in the present chapter offers further perspectives on the motif of the Paccekabuddha, in particular linking it to the personality of Mahākassapa. The basic storyline in the discourse revolves around the Buddha inviting Mahākassapa to give up his ascetic conduct and live a more comfortable life style in view of his advanced age.[n.5] [11] The translated discourse is EĀ 12.6 at T II 570a23 to 570b19, which has already been translated into French by Huyên-Vi 1989: 124–126. The parallel SN 16.5 has the same setting, the Bamboo Grove at Rājagaha, whereas the parallels SĀ 1141, SĀ2 116, and EĀ 41.5 take place at Jeta's Grove. The same plot recurs in the Saṃyutta-nikāya, in two Saṃyukta-āgamas, as well as in another discourse in the Ekottarika-āgama,[n.6] [10] SN 16.5 at SN II 202,6 to 203,26, SĀ 1141 at T II 301c7 to 301c30, SĀ2 116 at T II 416b8 to 416c6, and EĀ 41.5 at T II 746a21 to 746c24. although without the Paccekabuddha motif being found in any of these versions.

---

Translation

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Rājagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Place, accompanied by a great community of five hundred monks.

At that time the venerable Mahākassapa was a forest dweller. When the time came, he begged for food without discriminating between poor and rich. [When meditating] he sat alone and in a solitary place, never moving or changing [posture], at the root of a tree, sitting out in the open, or in a wilderness area. He wore robes of [at least] five patches, keeping to three robes [only]. [At times] he stayed in a cemetery. He took a single meal, eating it [before] noon. [In spite of] being old and advanced in age, he was undertaking [such] ascetic practices.

At the time right after the meal, the venerable Mahākassapa went and in turn [sat] under a tree [to practise] meditative concentration. Having [practised] meditative concentration, he rose from his seat, arranged his robes, and approached the Blessed One.[n.7] [12] Among the parallel versions, only SĀ 1141 at T II 301c9 and SĀ2 116 at T II 416b10 report that he had been sitting in meditation before he approached the Buddha. Then the Blessed One saw from afar that Kassapa was coming. The Blessed One said: "Welcome, Kassapa."[n.8] [13] In none of the parallels does the Buddha explicitly welcome Mahākassapa in this way. Then Kassapa approached the Blessed One, paid respect with his head at [the Blessed One's] feet, and sat to one side.

The Blessed One said: "Kassapa you are now old and advanced in age, you are feeble and worn out. You can now give up begging for food … up to … undertaking [such] ascetic practices. You can also accept invitations by householders and accept [ready-made] robes."[n.9] [14] EĀ 12.6 at T II 570b5: 可受諸長者請, 并受衣裳; the translation by Huyên- Vi 1989: 125 "et prendre s'il faut le train d'un bourgeois aisé et reprendre la vie d'un laïc" does not do justice to the original.

Kassapa replied: "I will not follow the Tathāgata's injunction now.[n.10] [15] In SN 16.5 at SN II 202,16, SĀ 1141 at T II 301c13, and SĀ2 116 at T II 416b15 Mahākassapa does not openly declare that he will not follow the Buddha's instruction, but instead points out that he has for a long time been observing ascetic practices and recommending them to others. In EĀ 41.5 at T II 746a24, however, he also openly expresses disagreement, here formulated in terms of his inability to accept (householders' gifts of) robes and food because he enjoys rag robes and begging for alms. SN 16.5 provides a listing of his forms of conduct which mentions forest dwelling, begging for alms, rag robes, three robes, as well as several praiseworthy mental qualities. SĀ 1141 lists just forest dwelling, rag robes, and begging for alms, and SĀ2 116 mentions only rag robes. The reason is that, if the Tathāgata had not accomplished supreme and right awakening, I would have accomplished Paccekabuddhahood.[n.11] [16] EĀ 12.6 at T II 570b6: 當如來不成無上正真道者, 我則成辟支佛; the translation by Huyên-Vi 1989: 125 "si je ne parvenais au stade de Bouddha, je deviendrais un Pratyekabouddha" is not correct.

"Paccekabuddhas are all forest dwellers.[n.12] [17] This whole paragraph has no counterpart in the parallel versions, which do not refer to Paccekabuddhas at all. When the time comes, they beg for food without discriminating between poor and rich. [When meditating] they sit alone and in a solitary place, never moving or changing [posture], at the root of a tree, sitting out in the open, or in a wilderness area. They wear robes of [at least] five patches, keeping to three robes [only]. [At times] they stay in a cemetery. They take a single meal, eating it [before] noon. They undertake [such] ascetic practices. I will not venture to give up my original practice now to train in other forms of conduct instead."[n.13] [18] In SN 16.5 at SN II 203,4, SĀ 1141 at T II 301c16, and SĀ2 116 at T II 416b19 he describes the two benefits of his mode of practice, namely a pleasant abiding for himself and his compassionate concern for others by setting an example. The second of these benefits receives more detailed coverage in EĀ 41.5 at T II 746a25, where Mahākassapa depicts the predicament of future monks who are attached to good food and nice robes.

The Blessed One said: "It is well, it is well, Kassapa, you are benefitting many, causing countless human beings to cross over, so that all devas and human beings far and wide can cross over [saṃsāra].

"Kassapa, the reason is that if these ascetic practices exist in the world, then my Dharma will also exist for a long time in the world. If the Dharma exists in the world, then the paths to heaven will increase and the three evil destinies will in turn decrease; and stream-entry, once-return, non-return, and the paths of the three yānas will all be preserved in the world.[n.14] [19] The parallel versions differ considerably; cf. the discussion below.

"Monks, you should all train just as Kassapa practises. Monks, you should train in this way."[n.15] [20] The parallel versions do not have a comparable injunction that the monks should emulate the example of Mahākassapa.

Then the monks, having heard what the Buddha said, were delighted and received it respectfully.

---

Study

A central motif in the different versions of this discourse is Mahākassapa's ascetic conduct,[n.16] [21] The listing of outstanding disciples, AN 1.14.1 at AN I 23,18 and EĀ 4.2 at T II 557b8, reckons him foremost in the undertaking of ascetic practices. His eminency in this respect is also recorded in the Divyāvadāna, Cowell and Neil 1886: 395,23, and in the Mahāvastu, Senart 1882b: 64,14. thrown into relief as something he wants to continue to observe even when the Buddha has personally invited him to live a more comfortable life in view of his advanced age. The version translated above stands alone, however, in reporting that the Buddha explicitly reckoned the ascetic practices as a factor that will ensure the longevity of the Dharma.[n.17] [22] For a study of the notion of the decline of the Dharma cf. Nattier 1991. The Saṃyutta-nikāya version has no general statement by the Buddha on the ascetic practices. It only records that the Buddha permitted Mahākassapa to continue the practices of wearing rag robes, begging for food, and dwelling in the forest.[n.18] [23] SN 16.5 at SN II 203,23. The two Saṃyukta-āgama versions go a step further and proclaim that one who disparages the ascetic practices disparages the Buddha.[n.19] [24] SĀ 1141 at T II 301c25 and SĀ2 116 at T II 416b28, both of which continue by indicating that one who praises ascetic practices praises the Buddha. The reason given in both discourses is that the Buddha himself had spoken in praise of undertaking ascetic practices. The other Ekottarika-āgama discourse launches into a long description of the deterioration of conditions after the Buddha's demise, one aspect of which is failure to undertake the ascetic practices.[n.20] [25] EĀ 41.5 at T II 746b9.

The Saṃyutta-nikāya discourse makes it clear that undertaking ascetic practices was actually an expression of Mahākassapa's compassion for later generations, explained in the discourse itself as implying that later generations will follow his example.[n.21] [26] SN 16.5 at SN II 203,5: pacchimaṃ ca (Be, Ce, and Se: pacchimañ ca) janataṃ anukampamāno, appeva nāma pacchimā janatā diṭṭhanugatiṃ (Be, Ce, and Se: diṭṭhānugatiṃ) āpajjeyyuṃ (Ce and Se: āpajjeyya). Shults 2014: 248f, in a review of Anālayo 2012d, assumes that the implications of the expression pacchimañ ca janataṃ anukampamāno can be clarified only by resorting to the Pāli commentaries, which he therefore considers to be the background for my entry on viveka for the Encyclopedia of Buddhism. According to the editorial guidelines, my task was just to summarize relevant information from the Pāli texts and avoid footnoting, hence I just briefly referred to two occurrences of the phrase pacchimañ ca janataṃ anukampamāno in MN 4 at MN I 23,32 and AN 2.3.9 at AN I 61,1 in relation to the Buddha's viveka, without further discussion. However, a digital search for the phrase would have led Shults to the passage in SN 16.5. An alternative route would have been consultation of relevant scholarship, such as the detailed study of anukampā in Pāli sources by Aronson 1980/1986, who p. 11 indeed refers to SN 16.5 and explains that "Mahākassapa, like [the] Buddha, … undertook beneficial activities with the hope that others would follow him and benefit similarly." Given that Shults 2014: 248 states that he "certainly would like to know the real significance of the phrase pacchimañ ca janataṃ anukampamāno", each of these avenues of research could have easily clarified the issue for him. In the two Saṃyukta-āgama parallels to the discourse translated above, Mahākassapa describes how future generations will recall that monks at the time of the Buddha undertook and spoke in praise of forest dwelling, wearing rag robes, and begging for alms.[n.22] [27] SĀ 1141 at T II 301c18 and SĀ2 116 at T II 416b21. The other Ekottarika-āgama version describes in detail how future monks would feel free to indulge their desires and attachments if they were to think that monks at the time of the Buddha were also living in a lax manner. It concludes that this would lead to their downfall and eventual rebirth in hell.[n.23] [28] EĀ 41.5 at T II 746a27. In sum, in different ways the parallel versions throw into relief the importance of Mahākassapa's ascetic conduct as a source of inspiration.

Mahākassapa's inspirational role in adopting ascetic conduct is also reflected in the Mahāgosiṅga-sutta and its parallels, which agree that he not only engaged in ascetic practices himself, but also encouraged others to do so.[n.24] [29] MN 32 at MN I 214,2 and its parallels MĀ 184 at T I 727c2, EĀ 37.3 at T II 711a7, and T 154.16 at T III 81b16.

In the present case, however, it is noteworthy that this role of Mahākassapa in providing a source of inspiration for future generations comes in conjunction with his proclamation that he would have become a Paccekabuddha, had the Buddha not attained full awakening.[n.25] [30] In what appears to be a partial commentary on the Ekottarika-āgama, Mahākassapa is presented as formerly having been a Paccekabuddha; cf. T 1507 at T XXL 30c5: 迦葉以本是辟支佛 (cf. also T XXL 31b20 and 39a17 as well as the discussion in Palumbo 2013: 185–188). Since a Paccekabuddha will not be reborn, this form of presentation must have originated with someone not too familiar with Buddhist doctrine, making it probable that it reflects the editorial influence of a Chinese hand, instead of stemming from an Indian original.

The other versions neither bring in the motif of the Paccekabuddha, nor do they refer to the three yānas. The present Ekottarika-āgama discourse is in this respect in line with a general tendency evident elsewhere in this collection to incorporate later elements not found in this way in other Chinese Āgamas or their Pāli discourse parallels, in particular material related to emerging Mahāyāna thought.[n.26] [31] For a survey of Mahāyāna elements in the Ekottarika-āgama cf. below p. 443ff. Another general tendency in Ekottarika-āgama discourses is that the motif of the Paccekabuddha is considerably more prominent as an actual form of practice or ideal than in other early discourses found outside of this collection.

Given that in the present episode the notion of Paccekabuddhahood forms the counterpart to what in the other versions is the inspirational role of a chief disciple of the Buddha, it seems fair to conclude that the notion of the Paccekabuddha could have had an inspirational function similar to that of Mahākassapa.[n.27] [32] On the inspirational role of Paccekabuddhas cf., e.g., Wiltshire 1990: 66f and 76ff.

Such an inspirational role also seems to underlie other passages. Another discourse in the Ekottarika-āgama reports how someone in a situation of danger and great distress takes refuge in all Paccekabuddhas in the hope that they will be able to release him from this hardship: "I also take refuge in all Paccekabuddhas, who awaken on their own, without a teacher. May I be released from this disaster!"[n.28] [33] EĀ 24.2 at T II 615c5: 諸辟支佛無師自覺亦復自歸, 使脫此厄. According to EĀ 32.1 at T II 674a6, the path to such awakening on one's own as a Paccekabuddha has in common with other types of awakening that it requires the cultivation of the five faculties. EĀ 38.11 at T II 727a15 and EĀ 51.3 at T II 815c12 report actual instances of awakening as a Paccekabuddha as the result of contemplation of impermanence; cf. above p. 228 notes 41 and 42. That Paccekabuddhas are of course also themselves subject to the law of impermanence and will pass away is made explicit in EĀ 26.9 at T II 641a20. Another discourse in the same collection indicates that even just worshipping the relics of a Paccekabuddha has the potential to lead to rebirth in the heaven of the Thirtythree.[n.29] [34] EĀ 51.3 at T II 817a2; cf. also Legittimo 2009: 1203.

Yet another Ekottarika-āgama discourse reflects a cult of Paccekabuddhas as one of four types of living beings that are considered worthy of a stūpa (the other three are a Buddha, the disciple of a Buddha, and a wheel-turning king).[n.30] [35] EĀ 52.1 at T II 823b13. Another such reference in the Ekottarika-āgama explains that Paccekabuddhas deserve a stūpa because they have awakened on their own, without having had the assistance of a teacher.[n.31] [36] EĀ 26.9 at T II 642b20.

References to stūpas for Paccekabuddhas are found not only in the Ekottarika-āgama, however, but also in Pāli discourses.[n.32] [37] DN 16 at DN II 142,16 (cf. also the parallels DĀ 2 at T I 20b23 and T 7 at T I 200a24) and AN 4.245 at AN II 245,17; cf. also Kloppenborg 1974: 23. The Paccekabuddha in fact features regularly in the early discourses in lists of those who are worthy of gifts. Such lists present Paccekabuddhas as superior to arahants or other noble disciples, but inferior to a fully awakened Buddha.[n.33] [38] MN 142 at MN III 254,29 and its parallels MĀ 180 at T I 722b16, D 4094 ju 255b2 or Q 5595 tu 291a3, Tocharian fragment YQ 1.20 1/2 a6, Ji et al. 1998: 182, and Uighur fragment folio 9a 2684, Geng and Klimkeit 1988: 202; cf. also SHT III 979 R6, Waldschmidt et al. 1971: 242, which refers to this type of presentation. AN 9.20 at AN IV 395,1 and its parallels MĀ 155 at T I 677c8, T 73 at T I 879c2, and T 74 at T I 881b12. AN 10.16 at AN V 23,4. Lists of this type in the Ekottarika-āgama can be found, e.g., in EĀ 23.1 at T II 609b19, EĀ 47.3 at T II 781b24, and EĀ 48.5 at T II 792a24; cf. also EĀ 27.5 at T II 645b6 which, although not corresponding to the pattern found in the other passages listed above, is also related to the theme of making offerings to Paccekabuddhas. Another instance relevant to the present topic is EĀ 41.4 at T II 739b3, where Ānanda is puzzled by the fact that the Buddha has given a list of those worthy of merit without mentioning Paccekabuddhas or disciples at various levels of awakening. The placing of the Paccekabuddha between the arahant and the Buddha recurs also in EĀ 28.5 at T II 653a10 and EĀ 42.3 at T II 751a18 in a list of levels of awakening (cf. also T II 552b7, which is part of the introduction to the collection), as well as in a listing of seats in EĀ 24.6 at T II 625c5. Moreover, EĀ 43.5 at T II 761b1, EĀ 51.3 at T II 816c9, and EĀ 52.1 at T II 823b13 list the Paccekabuddha alongside the sāvaka (cf. also T II 551a21, which is part of the introduction to the collection). EĀ 17.3 at T II 583a5 reckons the Paccekabuddha as one of two persons that rarely arise in the world, the other of course being a Buddha. By integrating the Paccekabuddha, as an awakened one from the past or the distant future, into what otherwise comprises the present Buddha and his disciples, the hierarchy of gifts becomes invested with a timeless validity that applies to past, present, and future times. In the absence of a living Buddha, a Paccekabuddha then becomes the topmost recipient of gifts. Other discourses suggest that such concern with worthiness to receive gifts was a significant issue in the tradition, as they report occasions when a gift given to a former Paccekabuddha yielded abundant fruit for its giver.[n.34] [39] SN 3.20 at SN I 92,4 and its parallels SĀ 1233 at T II 337c8, SĀ2 60 at T II 394b15, and EĀ 23.4 at T II 613a5 report the fruitfulness of giving to a former Paccekabuddha combined with the dire consequence of not having had an attitude of faith towards him; cf. also Ud 5.3 at Ud 50,16, where not giving to a Paccekabuddha and instead behaving disrespectfully has disastrous results. Another instance of a similar type can be found in MĀ 66 at T I 508c26, which reports that in a past life Anuruddha offered food to a Paccekabuddha, as a result of which he reaped abundant merit. Parallels to this tale in the Chinese canon are, e.g., T 44 at T I 829b19, T 190 at T III 928b21, and T 203 at T IV 470c25. In the Pāli tradition, versions of this tale are found only in the commentaries; cf. a short reference in Th-a III 72,23 (commenting on Th 910) and a more detailed version in Dhp-a IV 120,23. For another tale involving an offering to a Paccekabuddha cf. EĀ 52.2 at T II 824b18.

Artistic representations confirming a cult of Paccekabuddhas are not easily identified. Owing to their outward resemblance to Buddhas or monks in general, it is only when an associated inscription contains explicit indications that it becomes possible to determine that a particular image is indeed intended to represent a Paccekabuddha.[n.35] [40] Kloppenborg 1974: 27 comments that "the fact that the paccekabuddha is described as having the outward appearance of a monk … sheds some light on the problem of why images or representations of paccekabuddhas are so strikingly rare. Most probably representations in art of paccekabuddhas occurred, but they cannot be distinguished from those of monks, unless an inscription shows that these are indeed images of paccekabuddhas." Skilling 2013: 132 note 64 adds that although "to aspire to Pratyekabodhi does not seem to have been a popular option … there is occasional epigraphical or other evidence for this." One such case is extant from Thailand, where the inscription makes it clear that the figure is indeed a Paccekabuddha.[n.36] [41] Cf. below p. 651. Given the absence of an uṣṇīṣa, the image could alternatively only have been of a monk, similar to image 100, Plate LIII in Griswold 1957. However, it is not entirely clear if the absence of an uṣṇīṣa is characteristic of representations of Paccekabuddhas in general; cf. also Zin 2003 for cases documenting that not only Buddhas were depicted with an uṣṇīṣa.

Regarding the function of the Paccekabuddha motif taken over by Buddhists from common ancient Indian lore, I doubt that this served to accommodate non-Buddhist sages within the Buddhist fold.[n.37] [42] This has been suggested, e.g., by Kloppenborg 1974: 6: "the concept of the paccekabuddha … presented the opportunity to include pre-buddhist recluses and seers in Buddhism … in order to find a legitimate place within Buddhist teaching, these ascetics had to fit in the system." The early discourses show a recurrent tendency to set the followers of the Buddha apart from those of other traditions; in fact the Buddha's claim to awakening is explicitly based on the statement that he had realized what had been unheard of before.[n.38] Cf. below p. 293ff. In other words, he openly claimed to have made a new discovery. This does not seem to require authentication by integrating ancient Indian sages into the Buddhist fold.

Besides, once the notion of past Buddhas was in place, there would not have been any need to provide further authentication from the past. Given the ranking of recipients of gifts discussed above, it would indeed be rather surprising if such ancient Indian sages were placed in a position superior to arahants. Yet this is precisely the position of the Paccekabuddha.

In some passages famous ancient brahmin sages are not included in the Buddhist fold, but instead are quite openly dismissed as bereft of true vision.[n.39] [44] Cf., e.g., DN 13 at DN I 238,21 and its parallels DĀ 26 at T I 105b24 and an as yet unpublished Dīrgha-āgama Sanskrit fragment of the Vāsiṣṭha-sūtra, folio 449r (I am indebted to Jens-Uwe Hartmann for kindly providing me with a preliminary draft transliteration of the fragments). The three versions agree in providing a list of ancient Indian seers who are then disqualified as being blind and bereft of true vision. Had there been a felt need to include non-Buddhist sages in the Buddhist tradition, these ancient sages could have been turned into Paccekabuddhas, instead of being brushed aside as blind and unknowing. The same tendency continues with jātakas where ancient Indian ascetics are clearly shown to be inferior to Paccekabuddhas, instead of being identified with them.[n.40] [45] Two examples are Jā 490 at Jā IV 328,23, where a Paccekabuddha humbles the pride of an ascetic by rising into the air and letting dust from his feet fall onto the other's matted hair, and Jā 496 at Jā IV 372,1, where a Paccekabuddha is shown to be a superior recipient of gifts compared to an ascetic endowed with the five higher knowledges (abhiññā).

The references above give the impression that the Paccekabuddha had a more specifically Buddhist function than the mere accommodating of non-Buddhist sages. Given that the Paccekabuddha is so prominent in the Ekottarika-āgama collection, the function of this motif could have had some relation to developments within Buddhist thought at a stage preceding and overlapping with the initial stages of the emergence of the bodhisattva ideal and Mahāyāna thought, reflected in several Ekottarika-āgama discourses. The various passages found in this collection give the impression that, perhaps only for a brief period, the concept of the Paccekabuddha was of considerable relevance.

Here it seems to me significant that in the discourse translated above the Paccekabuddha motif takes the place of what in the parallel versions is Mahākassapa's role as a source of inspiration for future generations.

A different approach to the role of Mahākassapa in relation to future generations can be seen in the other Ekottarika-āgama version, which continues after the plot common to the parallel versions by relating Mahākassapa to the future Buddha Maitreya.[n.41] [47] EĀ 41.5 at T II 746c13. This seems to be an allusion to a tale found elsewhere in the Ekottarika-āgama and in a number of other sources, according to which Mahākassapa will remain until the time of the future Buddha Maitreya, to whom he will pass on the Buddha's robe.[n.42] [48] EĀ 48.3 at T II 789a6, preceded by a reference to his undertaking of ascetic practices (= T 453 at T XIV 422b18; cf. Anālayo 2013i: 39f note 112). For studies and translations of this tale cf., e.g., Przyluski 1914: 521–528, Lévi and Chavannes 1916: 193–197, Leumann 1919: 22, Przyluski 1923: 331–334, Lévi 1929: 40–46, Lamotte 1944/1981: 191–195, Jaini 1988/2001: 475–477, Ray 1994: 114f, Deeg 1999: 153–169, Silk 2003: 181–207, Klimburg-Salter 2005: 543–545, and Tournier 2014: 5–18. Here Mahākassapa's function is to bridge the period between one Buddha and the next, thereby clearly acting as an emblem of the continuity of the Dharma. His role of ensuring the continuity of the Dharma is also central in the accounts of the first saṅgīti.[n.43] [49] The different Vinayas agree in presenting Mahākassapa as the convenor of the first saṅgīti; cf. the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, T 1428 at T XXII 966c18, the (Haimavata?) *Vinayamātṛkā, T 1463 at T XXIV 818a11, the Mahāsāṅghika Vinaya, T 1425 at T XXII 490b28, the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, T 1421 at T XXII 190b28, the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, T 1451 at T XXIV 402c19, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, T 1435 at T XXIII 447b5, the Theravāda Vinaya, Vin II 285,4, and for a comparative study that takes into account other relevant texts as well the classic by Przyluski 1926.

In the discourse translated above, he proclaims that he would have become a Paccekabuddha, had there been no Buddha. In this way Mahākassapa quite plainly states that for one like himself full awakening was certain, independent of whether or not a Buddha existed. This goes a step further than just setting an example for future generations, in that it affirms the possibility of attaining awakening in the absence of a Buddha.

Several Ekottarika-āgama discourses report actual predictions that someone will become a Paccekabuddha in the distant future.[n.44] [50] Instances of such predictions can be found in EĀ 35.7 at T II 700b23 (attainment after sixty aeons), EĀ 38.11 at T II 726a16 (attainment after twenty aeons), and EĀ 49.9 at T II 804c12 (attainment after sixty aeons). A description of the manifestation of light at the time a Buddha predicts that someone will in the future become a Paccekabuddha occurs in EĀ 43.2 at T II 758b17. Such predictions fall into the same category, in that they clearly convey the message that awakening will always be possible, even when the Buddha and his teaching have disappeared.[n.45] [51] Oldenberg 1881/1961: 299 comments on the function of the Paccekabuddha in general: "der Begriff des Paccekabuddha sollte wohl in erster Linie eben dies besagen, daß auch in solchen Zeiten der Zugang zu Erlösung ernstem und kraftvollem Streben nicht verschlossen ist." The same theme recurs in the context of the relation between making offerings and a Paccekabuddha. According to two discourses in the Ekottarika-āgama, undertaking the practice of giving and making offerings can act as a support for oneself to become a Paccekabuddha in the future.[n.46] [52] EĀ 32.10 at T II 681a26 and EĀ 43.2 at T II 757a14.

The fact that a Paccekabuddha embodies the possibility of attaining awakening independently of the existence of a Buddha would have acquired increasing significance once the Buddha Gotama had passed away and his followers were struggling to ensure the survival of their tradition alongside competing groups in ancient India. The lack of direct contact with the living Buddha as the object in which to take refuge as a Buddhist disciple must have made itself acutely felt, leading to a range of developments in the Buddhist traditions. As an emblem of the possibility of attaining awakening by relying entirely on oneself, in such a setting the figure of the Paccekabuddha could easily have become a worthy object of worship and a source of inspiration.

Needless to say, to feel inspired by the Paccekabuddha motif does not necessarily imply aspiring to become a Paccekabuddha oneself. It could just have served as an inspiration for those aiming at attaining arahantship by relying on the teachings left behind by Gotama Buddha, as well as their followers and supporters. In their aspiration to reach this goal, the notion that full awakening is always possible, even when the teachings have disappeared, would have offered a strong source of support. It would have provided a sense of security precisely at a time when the followers of the deceased Buddha were struggling to preserve these teachings.

With the growing prominence of the bodhisattva ideal and the increasing popularity of the possibility of becoming a fully awakened Buddha oneself,[n.47] [53] On this development cf. in more detail Anālayo 2010b and 2017b. the symbol of the Paccekabuddha would have in turn lost importance.[n.48] [54] Bareau 1985: 649 comments that "le culte des pratyekabuddha … paraît avoir diminué depuis le voyage de Fa-hien." Perhaps of interest here is also that at times listings of recipients of gifts, such as for example EĀ 23.1 at T II 609b19, list one on the path to Paccekabuddhahood, followed by a Paccekabuddha, then one on the path to becoming a Tathāgata (i.e. a bodhisattva), and a Buddha. Such listings show the parallelism of the two concepts and at the same time place the bodhisattva in a hierarchically superior position vis-à-vis the Paccekabuddha. This new ideal no longer needed the Paccekabuddhas as an emblem of self-reliant awakening. From the viewpoint of the bodhisattva, Paccekabuddhas would have lost the significance they perhaps had earlier, instead of which past Buddhas would have come to the foreground in their function of predicting and confirming the bodhisattva's progress on the path to Buddhahood.

Probably as a remnant of its former significance, the Paccekabuddha has its place in standard references to the three yānas of practising for arahantship, for becoming a Paccekabuddha, or for attaining full Buddhahood, such as found in the discourse translated above.[n.49] [55] References to these three yānas abound in the Ekottarika-āgama. For occurrences where the Paccekabuddha is explicitly mentioned (leaving aside instances that just refer to the three yānas, 三乘) cf., e.g., EĀ 24.6 at T II 626a21 (which uses the rendering 緣覺, instead of the phrase 辟支佛 used elsewhere in the Ekottarika-āgama), EĀ 32.10 at T II 681a26 (adopting a variant reading that adds 佛道 to the list), EĀ 43.2 at T II 757a14, EĀ 45.5 at T II 773b9, and EĀ 48.5 at T II 792b11 and c2. On the three yānas cf. also, e.g., Nattier 2003a: 138–141 and Dhammajoti 2011.

Given the much more powerful inspiration provided by the idea of becoming a fully awakened Buddha oneself, the motif of the Paccekabuddha would have naturally become more like a fossil carried along by the tradition. In this way, the Paccekabuddha might have served as an important source of inspiration during a brief period, soon to be eclipsed by the bodhisattva ideal.

At present this is just a hypothesis based on surveying the early discourses, where in general the Paccekabuddha appears to be somewhat peripheral, but then acquires considerably more prominence in the Ekottarika-āgama.[n.50] [56] A more detailed study of the Paccekabuddha motif as part of an examination of the notion of mahākaruṇā is at present under preparation by Dhammadinnā. Nevertheless, supposing my admittedly hypothetical reconstruction to be correct, the fact that the standard sequence arahant / Paccekabuddha / Buddha as an ascending hierarchy of recipients of gifts became a hierarchy of spiritual aspirations would to some degree reflect a historical development. This development would have proceeded from aspiring to arahantship at a time when the Buddha was alive, via an interim period of aspiring to attain awakening even at a time when a Buddha was no longer alive but his teachings were still available, or perhaps even no longer available, to the wish to become a Buddha oneself.