Introduction

In the present chapter I study the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel, which records a set of insight instructions given by Sāriputta to the terminally sick lay disciple Anāthapiṇḍika. At the end of the discourse, Anāthapiṇḍika sorrowfully remarks that he never received such profound instructions earlier. This remark leads me to a closer look at the teachings that according to early Buddhist texts in general and the Majjhima-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama in particular were given to lay disciples.

In the early discourses, Anāthapiṇḍika stands out as an exceptionally munificent patron who supports the monastic community to the best of his abilities. Famous as the donor of Jeta's Grove,[n.1] Several accounts of this gift report that he spread a large amount of money on the ground in payment for Jeta's Grove, an act illustrated in plate 1 below p. 593 (references to further illustrations can be found in Schlingloff 1981: 135 note 137). Textual records of the gift of Jeta's Grove can be found in, e.g., MĀ 28 at T I 461a13, T 202 at T IV 419c20, T 374 at T XII 541b1, T 375 at T XII 786c1, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, T 1428 at T XXII 939c10, the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Gnoli 1978: 19,26, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, T 1435 at T XXIII 244c18, and the Theravāda Vinaya, Vin II 159,3 (cf. also Jā I 92,21); cf. also T 1507 at T XXV 35b25. Shimada 2012: 20f explains that in general gardens, such as Jeta's Grove, "had important functions for courtship and … as a place where one met lovers and courtesans", wherefore such gardens "tended to be located at the 'periphery' of or 'interstices' between more densely settled areas". Given that "both gardens and monasteries required quiet, sheltered surroundings, but also easy access from or to the city centre … a garden could, thus, easily be converted into a monastery. It provided an ideal space for accommodating the Buddhist saṃgha within an urban setting." Anāthapiṇḍika ranks foremost among lay supporters in the listings of outstanding disciples given in the Aṅguttara-nikāya and the Ekottarika-āgama.[n.2] AN 1.14.6 at AN I 25,32 + 26,3: etad aggaṃ, bhikkhave, mama sāvakānaṃ upāsakānaṃ … dāyakānaṃ, yadidaṃ sudatto gahapati anāthapiṇḍiko, EĀ 6.1 at T II 559c9+14: 我弟子中第一優婆塞 … 大檀越主, 所謂須達長者是 (following a variant which adds 第一優婆塞). The same position has similarly been highlighted in modern writings. Karunaratna 1965: 563 begins an article on Anāthapiṇḍika by stating that he was "famous for his liberal support of the Buddha and his disciples". Similarly Malalasekera 1937/1995: 67 starts his entry on Anāthapiṇḍika by indicating that he "became famous because of his unparalleled generosity to the Buddha". In a survey of eminent disciples, Ñāṇaponika and Hecker 1997: 335 have "the Buddha's Chief Patron" as header for the biography of Anāthapiṇḍika.

Due to his devoted services to the monastic community, he figures as an exemplary lay disciple in the discourses and thus should certainly have been considered worthy of receiving the gift of instruction in return. Yet, the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya reports that, at the conclusion of a set of instructions on detachment in regard to all aspects of experience, the dying Anāthapiṇḍika is in tears since, in spite of all the services he has rendered, he had never heard such penetrative teachings before.[n.3] MN 143 at MN III 261,19: "even though for a long time I have attended on the teacher and the monks of developed mind, so far I never heard a talk of this type on the Dharma", api (Be, Ce, and Se add ca) me dīgharattaṃ satthā payirupāsito, manobhāvanīyo (Be, Ce, and Se: manobhāvanīyā) ca bhikkhū, na ca (Se without ca) me evarūpī dhammī kathā (Se: dhammikathā) sutapubbā. Falk 1990: 130 notes that "Anāthapiṇḍika responds as if a whole new world has opened for him."

The extant versions of the discourse are as follows:

• the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda-sutta of the Majjhima-nikāya,[n.4] MN 143 at MN III 258,1 to 263,12.
• a discourse in the Saṃyukta-āgama,[n.5] [4a] SĀ 1032 at T II 269c8 to 270a6.
• a discourse in the Ekottarika-āgama.[n.6] [4b] EĀ 51.8 at T II 819b11 to 820c2. Akanuma 1929/1990: 171 also lists MĀ 28 at T I 458b28 to 461b14 as a parallel to MN 143. However, the instructions given by Sāriputta to Anāthapiṇḍika in MĀ 28 rather parallel SN 55.26 at SN V 380,17 to 385,11, a discourse that also agrees with MĀ 28 in reporting that Anāthapiṇḍika recovered from his disease. Hence MĀ 28 and a Sanskrit fragment parallel to this discourse, SHT VI 1397, Bechert and Wille 1989: 116f, are better reckoned as counterparts to SN 55.26 (cf. Wille 2008: 428). Whereas SĀ 1032 only parallels the first part of MN 143, EĀ 51.8 also reports Anāthapiṇḍika's post-mortem visit to the Buddha, which is recorded as well in SN 2.20 at SN I 55,9 to56,12, SĀ 593 at T II 158b24 to c29, and SĀ2 187 at T II 441a27 to 442a17 (SĀ2 187 also covers the events that took place before Anāthapiṇḍika's passing away, although according to its account it was the Buddha himself who went to visit the householder on his deathbed, not Sāriputta).

In what follows I translate the Saṃyukta-āgama discourse.

---

Translation

[Discourse to Anāthapiṇḍika]

1. Thus have I heard. At one time, the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park.

2. At that time, the venerable Sāriputta heard that the householder Anāthapiṇḍika was in severe bodily pain.[n.8] According to MN 143 at MN III 258,5, a messenger had informed Sāriputta of Anāthapiṇḍika's sick condition, inviting him to visit the ailing householder. EĀ 51.8 at T II 819b12 agrees with SĀ 1032 that Sāriputta had come to know on his own about Anāthapiṇḍika's condition, differing in that he had found this out with the help of the divine eye. Having heard this, he said to the venerable Ānanda: "Did you know that the householder Anāthapiṇḍika is in severe bodily pain? We should go together to see him."[n.9] EĀ 51.8 at T II 819b14 also reports that Sāriputta invited Ānanda to come with him to visit Anāthapiṇḍika. MN 143 does not mention any conversation between Sāriputta and Ānanda, only indicating at MN III 258,32 that Sāriputta approached Anāthapiṇḍika's house with Ānanda as his attendant, pacchāsamaṇa, literally as the "[junior] recluse who [walks] behind", an expression that has a counterpart in the paścācchramaṇa in the Mahāvyutpatti §8740, Sakaki 1926: 562; cf. also Silk 2008: 68.

The venerable Ānanda agreed by remaining silent. Then the venerable Sāriputta and the venerable Ānanda went together to the house of the householder Anāthapiṇḍika.

4. On seeing from afar the venerable Sāriputta, the householder tried to get up from his bed … up to the description of three aspects of the experience [of being sick] described in full in the discourse to Khema.[n.10] SĀ 1032 at T II 269c14: 叉摩修多羅. This appears to be a reference to SĀ 103 at T II 29c16. On being visited by another monk, the monk Khema illustrates his ailing condition with three examples: strong men tighten a rope around the head of a weak person, a butcher carves up the belly of a living cow, and two strong men roast a weak person over a fire; for a translation of SĀ 103 cf. Anālayo 2014h: 4ff. The "three aspects of the experience [of being sick]" mentioned in SĀ 1032 would be these three similes in SĀ 103 which thus need to be supplemented to Anāthapiṇḍika's reply to Sāriputta to depict the intensity of the headache, of the stomach pain, and of the highly feverish condition of the sick person. In addition to these three similes, MN 143 at MN III 259,9 (to be supplemented from MN II 193,1) describes a strong man who with a sharp sword cleaves one's head open, an additional illustration of the headache condition. EĀ 51.8 at T II 819b20 has no similes at all. The three similes found in SĀ 1032 recur in SĀ2 187 at T II 441b5, where, as already mentioned above, the Buddha himself has come to visit the sick Anāthapiṇḍika. Elsewhere in the Saṃyukta-āgama the same reference to 叉摩修多羅 for filling up the standard description of a sick person's condition occurs in SĀ 1031 at T II 269b22, SĀ 1034 at T II 270a23, and SĀ 1266 at T II 347b27. Other references for supplementing the standard passage on the state of a diseased person speak of the source discourse in differing ways: SĀ 540 at T II 140c4: 叉摩經, SĀ 554 at T II 145b7: 叉摩比丘經, SĀ 1265 at T II 346b28: 又摩比丘修多羅 (with 叉 as a variant for 又), SĀ 1030 at T II 269b9: 差摩修 多羅, SĀ 1025 at T II 267c17 and SĀ 1036 at T II 270b25: 差摩迦修多羅, and SĀ 994 at T II 259c27: 焰摩迦修多羅. The last is probably an error; the monk Yamaka, 焰摩迦, occurs in SĀ 104 at T II 30c13, but without any description of illness. The phonetically similar 叉摩 or 差摩 would refer to the same monk Khema, 差摩比丘 (where 差摩迦 would then correspond to Khemaka, presumably an alternative way of referring to him).

[Anāthapiṇḍika said]: "The severe bodily pains are increasing, they are not decreasing."

5. The venerable Sāriputta said to the householder: "You should train like this:[n.11] EĀ 51.8 at T II 819b21 precedes this with instructions by Sāriputta on recollecting the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. I will not be attached to the eye and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the eye-element.[n.12] MN 143 at MN III 259,13 simply speaks of consciousness not depending on the eye, na me cakkhunissitaṃ viññāṇaṃ bhavissati, without spelling out that such dependence would involve lust and desire. EĀ 51.8 at T II 819c5 does not take up the senses at all, but directly turns to their objects, in relation to which it also speaks simply of consciousness not depending on them. I will not be attached to the ear … the nose … the tongue … the body … the mind and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the mind-element.

6. "I will not be attached to forms and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the element of forms. I will not be attached to sounds … odours … flavours … tangibles … mind objects and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the element of mind objects.[n.13] MN 143 at MN III 259,27 stands alone in also taking up the consciousness, the contact, and the feeling that arise in relation to each of the six senses.

10. "I will not be attached to the element of earth and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the element of earth. I will not be attached to the element of water … the element of fire … the element of wind … the element of space … the element of consciousness and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the element of consciousness.

11. "I will not be attached to the aggregate of form and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the aggregate of form. I will not be attached to the aggregate of feeling … of perception … of formations … of consciousness and in my consciousness there will be no arising of lust and desire in dependence on the aggregate of consciousness."[n.14] MN 143 at MN III 260,33 continues by mentioning the four immaterial attainments, this world and the next, and what is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, searched for, and reflected on. Of these, only "this world and the next" occur also in EĀ 51.8 at T II 819c9. EĀ 51.8 then continues with craving, which it shows to be the condition for grasping, becoming, etc., after which EĀ 51.8 proceeds with instructions on the nature of the senses and with a full treatment of the twelve links of dependent arising.

15. Then the householder Anāthapiṇḍika was sad and in tears. The venerable Ānanda asked the householder: [n.15] In EĀ 51.8 at T II 819c25 it is Sāriputta who asks Anāthapiṇḍika why he is in tears. "Are you now afraid?"

The householder replied to Ānanda: "I am not afraid. I was just reflecting to myself that I have been supporting the Buddha for over twenty years, yet I never heard the venerable

Sāriputta give [such] deep and sublime teachings, as I have just heard."

The venerable Sāriputta said to the householder: "I also do not [recall] giving such teachings to householders for a long time."[n.16] In MN 143 at MN III 261,22 Anāthapiṇḍika is told that such instructions on the Dharma are not given to householders, but only to those who have gone forth, na kho, gahapati, gihīnaṃ odātavasanānaṃ evarūpi (Be, Ce, and Se: evarūpī) dhammī kathā (Se: dhammikathā) paṭibhāti, pabbajitānaṃ kho (Se without kho), gahapati, evarūpī dhammī kathā (Se: dhammikathā) paṭibhāti. EĀ 51.8 at T II 819c30 differs in that here it is Ānanda who replies to Anāthapiṇḍika by explaining: "householder, you should know that in the world there are two types of people, as declared by the Tathāgata. What are the two? The first knows pleasure, the second knows pain", 長者當知, 世間有二種之人, 如來之所說. 云何為二? 一者知樂, 二者知苦. Ānanda then goes on to illustrate these two types with the example of two monks. Unlike SĀ 1032 and MN 143, EĀ 51.8 thus does not take a stance on the instructions that are usually given to lay disciples.

The householder said to the venerable Sāriputta: "There are lay disciples who live in the household and have superior faith, superior recollection, and superior delight [in the Dharma]. Not getting to hear [such] deep teachings, they [might] give rise to regress. It would be well if the venerable Sāriputta were to give [such] deep and sublime teachings to lay disciples living in the household, out of compassion! Venerable Sāriputta, [please] take today's meal here."[n.17] Instead of an invitation to a meal and the subsequent serving of it, MN 143 at MN III 261,29 and EĀ 51.8 at T II 820a14 report that Sāriputta and Ānanda left, soon after which Anāthapiṇḍika passed away. Reborn in a heavenly realm, the former Anāthapiṇḍika then paid a visit to the Buddha and spoke stanzas in praise of Jeta's Grove and Sāriputta's wisdom. This narration has a counterpart in another discourse in the Saṃyukta-āgama, SĀ 593 at T II 158b24 to 158c29, as well as in SN 2.20 at SN I 55,9 to 56,12 and in the (later part of) SĀ2 187 at T II 441c12 to 442a17. An offering of food by the sick Anāthapiṇḍika to Sāriputta, after having heard a discourse from the latter, is recorded in SN 55.26 at SN V 384,15 and its parallel MĀ 28 at T I 461b3.

The venerable Sāriputta accepted the invitation by remaining silent. A variety of pure and pleasant food and beverages were set out and respectfully offered to him. When the meal was completed, [the venerable Sāriputta] gave a variety of teachings to the householder, instructing, teaching, illuminating, and delighting him.

16. Having instructed, taught, illuminated, and delighted him, [the venerable Sāriputta] rose from his seat and left.

---

Study

In what follows I will focus on the remark by Anāthapiṇḍika that so far he had not received such instructions. According to the Saṃyukta-āgama, in reply to this remark Sāriputta explains that for a long time he had not given such instructions to householders. In the Majjhima-nikāya account, Anāthapiṇḍika is told in more general terms that such instructions are not given to householders.[n.18] Cf. note 16 above. For my discussion, the Ekottarika-āgama version of the reply given to Anāthapiṇḍika is not relevant, as it does not make a pronouncement on the type of instructions that are given to laity.

As already pointed out by other scholars, the assumption of a rigid division between monastics as recipients of liberating teachings and laity instructed in the gaining of merit and the way to a good rebirth does not accurately reflect early Buddhist thought.[n.19] Cf., e.g., Samuels 1999 or Bluck 2002. However, pace Schumann 1982/1999: 217, Harvey 1990: 218, Samuels 1999: 238, and Somaratne 2009: 153, the listing of accomplished householders in AN 6.119–120 at AN III 450,21 to 451,24 does not imply the existence of lay arahants. The indication that each of the lay disciples listed has "come to a firm conclusion in relation to the Tathāgata, seen the deathless, and proceeds having realized the deathless", tathāgate niṭṭhaṃ gato (Be and Se: niṭṭhaṅgato) amataddaso amataṃ sacchikatvā iriyati (Ce: irīyati) in these discourses only implies that they had reached at least stream-entry, not that each of them must be an arahant. This can be seen from the inclusion of Anāthapiṇḍika in the listing found in AN 6.120 at AN III 451,8, as according to MN 143 and its parallels (cf. note 17 above) he was reborn in a heavenly realm and thus could not have been a lay arahant. Other examples from AN 6.120 at AN III 451,13 are Pūraṇa and Isidatta, who according to AN 6.44 at AN III 348,3+5 passed away as once-returners, making it clear that they were also not lay arahants. Thomas 1933/2004: 26 neatly sums up the situation: "It has been a matter of discussion whether a layman can win arahatship. The question is not properly put, for the real question is whether he can exercise the necessary training while living in a house. If he can and does, then he becomes an arahat, but he at the same time ceases to be a layman." For a detailed study of teachings to lay disciples cf. Kelly 2011. Yet the above replies given to Anāthapiṇḍika suggest just such a pattern.

To investigate this further, I will at first survey the respective discourse collections – the Majjhima-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama – in order to see if they bear out what the statements in their version of the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda suggest. After that, I will examine other Pāli discourses addressed to Anāthapiṇḍika.

Teachings to Laity in the Majjhima-nikāya

One of the first discourses in the Majjhima-nikāya reports how a brahmin receives a detailed autobiographical exposition on the Buddha's own attainment of absorption and of the three higher knowledges.[n.20] MN 4 at MN I 21,34, a presentation similarly found in its parallel EĀ 31.1 at T II 666b12. Parts of this presentation have also been preserved in SHT IV 32 folio 37 and 38, Sander and Waldschmidt 1980: 131–133, SHT IV 165 folio 15, Sander and Waldschmidt 1980: 190–191, and SHT IX 2401, Bechert and Wille 2004: 195. The fragments cover the Buddha's attainment of the first absorption, the fourth absorption, and his recollection of past lives.

This is not the only such instance, as five other Majjhima-nikāya discourses given to laity cover the gradual path. These discourses thereby provide detailed instructions on the whole course of practice from morality via meditation practice all the way up to the attainment of full awakening.[n.21] MN 27 at MN I 179,1 (and its parallel MĀ 146 at T I 656c27, which differs in so far as, instead of mentioning all of the three higher knowledges, it proceeds directly from the attainment of the fourth absorption to the destruction of the influxes), MN 53 at MN I 354,32, MN 60 at MN I 412,25, MN 100 at MN II 211,27 (with a Sanskrit fragment parallel edited in Zhang 2004: 13), and MN 107 at MN III 2,7 (with parallels in MĀ 144 at T I 652b1 and T 70 at T I 875b6).

The need to go beyond sensuality is also expounded to householders,[n.22] MN 14 at MN I 92,13 and its parallels MĀ 100 at T I 586b18, T 54 at T I 848b22, and T 55 at T I 849c13, as well as MN 54 at MN I 364,12 and its parallel MĀ 203 at T I 774a20. in fact several Majjhima-nikāya discourses addressed to a lay audience deliver teachings on the development of concentration that cover not only the brahmavihāras,[n.23] MN 97 at MN II 195,2 and its parallel MĀ 27 at T I 458b1, as well as MN 99 at MN II 207,15 and its parallel MĀ 152 at T I 669c5. but also the attainment of the cessation of perceptions and feelings.[n.24] MN 30 at MN I 204,22, where the partial parallel EĀ 43.4 at T II 759b29 covers the development of concentration only in a summary fashion, without mentioning any specific attainment. EĀ 43.4 also differs from MN 30 in being addressed to a group of monks (in fact EĀ 43.4 is more a parallel to MN 29 than to MN 30). Another example is MN 44 at MN I 301,31 and its parallels MĀ 210 at T I 789a28 (which differs from the other two versions as here the lay disciple who receives the discourse is a female) and D 4094 ju 8b6 or Q 5595 tu 9b7, in all of which a discussion of the attainment of cessation is part of a series of questions and answers touching on various profound and intricate topics.

In one Majjhima-nikāya discourses a king receives a set of enigmatic stanzas on impermanence and the lack of satisfaction inherent in the world.[n.25] MN 82 at MN II 68,18, with counterparts in MĀ 132 at T I 626c11, T 68 at T I 871a26, T 69 at T I 874a13, and D 1 kha 108b6 or Q 1030 ge 100a7. In another discourse a carpenter is given an analysis of different types of liberation of the mind.[n.26] MN 127 at MN III 146,13 and MĀ 79 at T I 550a9. Yet another Majjhima-nikāya discourse reports that a householder asked about how to reach the final goal. In reply to this question, he received an exposition of eleven alternative approaches for attaining full awakening.[n.27] MN 52 at MN I 350,10 and AN 11.17 at AN V 343,19, where the Chinese parallels, MĀ 217 at T I 802b27 and T 92 at T I 916c8, have an additional twelfth approach by way of insight into the fourth immaterial attainment. In sum, these Majjhima-nikāya discourses do not give the impression that liberating teachings were withheld from the laity.[n.28] My selection of teachings given to laity in the Majjhima-nikāya does not take into account discourses or passages spoken to wanderers (e.g. MN 35, MN 36, MN 57, and MN 71– 80) or to devas (e.g. MN 37, MN 49, and MN 50). In this I differ from a related investigation undertaken by McTighe 1988, who includes paribbājakas under the general heading of laity.

Sāriputta's Teachings to Laity in the Saṃyukta-āgama

Since in the case of the Saṃyukta-āgama the reply to Anāthapiṇḍika makes a pronouncement on the nature of the teachings given to laity by Sāriputta in particular, I will only survey discourses attributed to him in this collection. Besides delivering a set of stanzas to a potter,[n.29] SĀ 1357 at T II 372b25. Another relevant instance could be a couplet of stanzas addressed by Sāriputta to a drunken Nigaṇṭha in SĀ 1347 at T II 371b6, where it is probable but not entirely clear if this is a lay follower of the Nigaṇṭhas. Sāriputta addresses two lay disciples in the Saṃyukta-āgama.

In each case, he delivers instructions on the true nature of the five aggregates. In one case he does so by way of the three characteristics – impermanence, dukkha, and not-self – and in the other case in terms of their arising and passing away, their advantage, their disadvantage, and the release from them. Both lay disciples attain stream-entry at the conclusion of his instructions.[n.30] According to SĀ 107 at T II 33b20, Nakulapitā attained stream-entry after being instructed by Sāriputta on the arising and passing away of the five aggregates, their advantage, their disadvantage, and the release from them (the parallel SN 22.1 at SN III 5,17 concludes a related instruction on not identifying with the five aggregates without reporting Nakulapitā's stream-entry. According to Mp I 400,ult. he attained stream-entry together with his wife after a teaching given to him by the Buddha, which would thus have been on another occasion. For a translation of SĀ 107 cf. Anālayo 2014h: 27ff. In SĀ 30 at T II 6b25 Soṇa attains stream-entry after receiving a teaching from Sāriputta on each possible instance of the five aggregates being impermanent, therefore unsatisfactory, and therefore not-self. Teachings by Sāriputta to the same lay disciple on the development of insight in regard to the five aggregates are also reported in SĀ 31 at T II 6c8 and SĀ 32 at T II 7a14. In the Pāli parallels to SĀ 30 and SĀ 31, SN 22.49 at SN III 49,9 and SN 22.50 at SN III 50,18, the instructions are instead given by the Buddha. For a translation of SĀ 30, 31, and 32 cf. Anālayo 2012h: 48 ff. Judging from these Saṃyukta-āgama discourses, the teachings given by Sāriputta to laity appear to have been of a rather profound nature.

Hence the reply given to Anāthapiṇḍika in the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda-sutta and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel does not seem to point to a general pattern in the respective discourse collections that teachings on insight are not given to laity. Perhaps the indication given in these two discourses may instead be related more specifically to Anāthapiṇḍika.

Anāthapiṇḍika as Depicted in Pāli Texts and Their Parallels

In the Pāli discourses in which Anāthapiṇḍika takes part, on one of the rare occasions when he does put a question to the Buddha,[n.31] Dhp-a I 5,8 explains that Anāthapiṇḍika did not ask the Buddha questions due to concern that this might fatigue the Buddha. he enquires about worthy recipients of gifts.[n.32] AN 2.4.4 at AN I 63,4 and its parallels MĀ 127 at T I 616a9 and SĀ 992 at T II 258c13. This conveys the impression that giving was a topic of particular interest for him. Several other discourses delivered to him take up similar mundane concerns, such as the karmic reward for munificence, the conditions for fame and a heavenly rebirth, or how to obtain, protect, and properly use wealth.[n.33] AN 4.58 at AN II 64,1, AN 4.60 at AN II 65,5, AN 4.61 at AN II 66,1, AN 4.62 at AN II 69,7, AN 5.41 at AN III 45,7, AN 5.43 at AN III 47,18, and AN 10.91 at AN V 177,1, where the last has parallels in MĀ 126 at T I 615a12 and T 65 at T I 863b17 (which differ from AN 10.91 in as much as the exposition is given in reply to a corresponding enquiry by Anāthapiṇḍika). Several discourses also report that the Buddha instructs him about the importance of keeping the precepts and of protecting the mind; cf. AN 3.105 at AN I 261,17 (where in the parallel EĀ2 2 at T II 875c21 the Buddha's exposition is in reply to a corresponding question), AN 3.106 at AN I 262,21, and AN 5.174 at AN III 205,3.

In a discourse in the Aṅguttara-nikāya, the Buddha tells Anāthapiṇḍika that, in addition to supporting the monks, he should also develop the bliss of meditation.[n.34] AN 5.176 at AN III 207,1, with counterparts in SĀ 482 at T II 123a6 and D 4094 nyu 73b3 or Q 5595 thu 118a8. In another discourse from the same collection, the Buddha explains to Anāthapiṇḍika that to develop awareness of impermanence even for a moment is more fruitful than providing the Buddha and his monks with food and lodging.[n.35] AN 9.20 at AN IV 396,1, where the parallels differ slightly in regard to what the most fruitful activity is: in MĀ 155 at T I 678a4 and T 73 at T I 879c16 awareness of impermanence is combined with awareness of the other two characteristics; in D 4094 ju 172a1 or Q 5595 tu 198a3 diligent contemplation of impermanence leads on to dispassion, cessation, and disappearance; in T 72 at T I 878c26 and EĀ 27.3 at T II 645a6 the theme is absence of delighting in (anything) in the whole world; and in T 74 at T I 882a10 it is signlessness. These two discourses read as if the Buddha is trying to tell Anāthapiṇḍika that he should not rest content with mere giving, but should also develop tranquillity and insight.

In sum, the way these discourses portray Anāthapiṇḍika indicates that he may not have had as keen an interest in the insightrelated teachings of the Buddha as some other householders, who in the Majjhima-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama, as well as in other discourses, receive such teachings.

In agreement with a range of parallels, the Pāli Vinaya reports that Anāthapiṇḍika had become a stream-enterer during his first meeting with the Buddha.[n.36] Vin II 157,2, with parallels found, e.g., in MĀ 28 at T I 460b29, SĀ 592 at T II 158b6, SĀ2 186 at T II 441a15, T 196 at T IV 156b16, T 202 at T IV 419b11, T 374 at T XII 541a9, and T 375 at T XII 786b7, the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, T 1421 at T XXII 167a9, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, T 1428 at T XXII 939a18, the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Gnoli 1977: 170,1, and the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, T 1435 at T XXIII 244b13; cf. also T 1509 at T XXV 732b24. The events that precede their meeting recur in SN 10.8 at SN I 210,29. Thus from an early Buddhist perspective he would have been on safe ground as someone who already had acquired firm insight into the core of the teachings and was certain of eventually reaching full awakening.[n.37] Anāthapiṇḍika's attainment of penetrative insight into the law of dependent arising underlies AN 10.93 at AN V 187,1, where he skilfully deals with the views proposed by heterodox wanderers. A noble disciple's insight into dependent arising is also the theme of SN 12.41 at SN II 70,7 (= SN 55.28 at SN V 388,21) and AN 10.92 at AN V 184,5. AN 5.179 at AN III 213,16 (with a parallel in MĀ 128 at T I 616b13) and AN 9.27 at AN IV 407,12 refer to a noble disciple's freedom from the prospect of an evil rebirth. All these discourses are addressed to Anāthapiṇḍika or given in his presence. In view of this, it is perhaps understandable if teachings given to him were adjusted to what seems to have been his personal interests, instead of trying to force insight on him.

A comparable instance can be found in a discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya, which reports how a group of lay followers, headed by the stream-enterer Dhammadinna, come to see the Buddha and request instruction.[n.38] SN 55.53 at SN V 408,5 notes that Dhammadinna was a stream-enterer, whereas according to SĀ 1033 at T II 270a13 he was even a non-returner. In reply, the Buddha recommends the profound discourses he had given on the subject of emptiness. Dhammadinna replies that, for them as householders who live in the midst of their family and enjoy sensual pleasures, studying such profound discourses is not an easy thing to do. So he asks the Buddha to give them a different type of teaching instead.

In this instance, too, it is not because of any unwillingness to teach on the part of the Buddha, but due to a lack of interest or receptivity on the side of the lay followers that certain topics are not taught to them in more detail.

Such a different interest or receptivity would also underlie a discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya and its parallels in the two versions of the Saṃyukta-āgama, according to which monastic disciples are a superior field for sowing seeds, whereas lay disciples are comparable to a field of lesser quality.[n.39] SN 42.7 at SN IV 315,18, SĀ 915 at T II 231a17, and SĀ2 130 at T II 424b1. In other words, although the seeds of insight are the same, owing to their lifestyle most lay followers may not be as receptive to certain teachings as they would be if they had gone forth which – at least in the ancient Indian context – was seen as a natural expression of wanting to practise the deeper aspects of the Buddha's teachings.

Applying the results of the above survey to the Anāthapiṇḍikovāda-sutta and its Saṃyukta-āgama parallel, it seems that Anāthapiṇḍika would have received such teachings earlier if he had shown an interest in them. His sadness is thus probably best understood as an expression of his deathbed repentance for having missed out on evincing an interest in deeper teachings on earlier occasions.

In other words, Anāthapiṇḍika's remark that, in spite of all his services, he had not heard such penetrative teachings before need not be taken to imply that certain teachings were in principle restricted to monks and nuns. Instead, it only appears to indicate that teachings on deeper insight were not forced on those who did not show an interest in them.