What do you think?
Rate this book


1944 pages, Hardcover
Published October 16, 2012
The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta (DN16) gives us a connected account of the Buddha’s last days, culminating in his death and cremation.
In AN, we find explicit references to only two of the six Buddhas of the past that we know from other Nikāyas. Sikhī, the fifth back, is referred to at 3:80, and Kassapa, Gotama’s predecessor, at 5:180.
After his enlightenment, seeking in vain for someone to honor, he decided: “Let me honor, respect, and dwell in dependence only on this Dhamma to which I have become fully enlightened” (4:22).
In one place, he says that the unlimited expressions of the Dhamma converge on four things: understanding what is unwholesome and abandoning it, and understanding what is wholesome and developing it (4:188).
He also strongly criticized the “hard determinist” view that our decisions are irrevocably caused by factors and forces outside ourselves. [...] He insisted that there are such things as instigation, initiative, choice, and exertion, by reason of which people are responsible for their
own destiny (6:38).
Thus the suttas occasionally refer to the nine types of teaching into which the discourses were classified in the earliest period, before they were compiled into Nikāyas (4:102, 4:107, 5:73–74, etc.).
In one sutta, the Buddha gives instructions to the monks on the criteria for determining whether teachings reported after his passing are authentic or spurious (4:180).
[...] afflicted spirits (sometimes called “hungry ghosts”) [...].
There are six sensual heavenly realms: the heaven of the four divine kings, the Tāvatiṃsa devas, the Yāma devas, the Tusita devas, the devas who delight in creation, and the devas who control what is created by others (3:70, 6:10, 8:36, etc.). Above these are the brahmā world and still higher realms, spheres of rebirth for those who have mastered the meditative attainments.
Kamma thus denotes deeds that originate from volition, which may remain purely mental, creating kamma through our thoughts, plans, and desires [...].
[...] actions born from the wholesome roots are of two kinds, mundane and world-transcending. Mundane wholesome actions have the potential to produce a fortunate rebirth in the higher realms (6:39). The world-transcending or supramundane (lokuttara) wholesome actions—namely, the kamma generated by practicing the noble eightfold path and the seven factors of enlightenment—dismantles the entire process of karmic causation and thereby leads to liberation from the round of rebirths (3:34, 4:233, 4:237–38).
Although early Buddhism prescribes a path of self-cultivation leading to the extinction of suffering, the Buddha realized that spiritual development does not occur in a social vacuum but rests upon a healthy and harmonious social order that exemplifies the kinds of virtues that nurture the spiritual life.
But, almost unprecedented for his time, the Buddha also held that householders earning their living by “the sweat of their arms” and supporting a family could also advance spiritually and reach three of the four stages of awakening [...].
The seed of spiritual development is a triad of qualities consisting of faith (saddhā), confidence (pasāda), and reverence (gārava).
For a disciple endowed with faith, spiritual growth is furthered by associating with good friends, people who can give guidance and serve as inspiring models.
To steer his disciples away from their attachment to transient objects of clinging, the Buddha employs an arsenal of techniques intended to uncover the abyss that lies just beneath the apparently innocent joys of a virtuous life. These techniques are intended to instill in the aspirant a quality called saṃvega, a word without a precise English equivalent.
This is their danger, stemming from their impermanence (anicca), liability to suffering (dukkha), and nature to change and decay (vipariṇāmadhamma).
Even more, he says, the entire world system will dissolve along with its powerful deities. Understanding this, the wise disciple “becomes disenchanted and dispassionate toward the foremost, not to speak of what is inferior” (10:29 [...]).
As part of a diagnosis of the origin of suffering, the Nikāyas are replete with catalogues of the various defilements to which the mind is prey. In AN we find many such groups, which are usually given metaphorical names to indicate how they affect us: taints, hindrances, floods, fetters, and so forth.
When reading the Nikāyas, we are likely to be awed by the wide range of the defilements that are listed, and also to be confused about the distinctive roles played by the different groupings. To make sense of these lists, I have sorted them into three categories.
The first class are the defilements responsible for flawed behavior. These are the underlying motives of misconduct and unwholesome kamma. The most important of such groups are the three unwholesome roots: greed (or lust), hatred, and delusion [...].
In a monastic community that brings together people with sharply differing personalities and strong opinions, anger and resentment can also have a corrosive effect on group dynamics [...].
Anger and hostility jointly form the first of six “roots of dispute,” which the Buddha saw as a danger to the harmony of the Saṅgha (6:36).
The second class of defilements in this threefold scheme are those that impede the success of meditation. The most elementary in this group is the simplest: sheer laziness, resistance to the work of “arousing energy for the attainment of the as-yet-unattained, for the achievement of the as-yet-unachieved, for the realization of the as-yet-unrealized” (8:80). Once a meditator overcomes laziness and makes the endeavor to meditate, the defilements he or she is likely to encounter fall into a set known as the five hindrances [...].
The Aṅguttara mentions other sets of defilements that obstruct meditation practice. These include the three kinds of unwholesome thoughts (4:11), the five kinds of mental barrenness (5:205), and the five mental bondages (5:206).
(3) The defilements of the third type are the deepest and the most obstinate. These are the defilements lodged at the base of the stream of consciousness that maintain bondage to the cycle of rebirths.
The most primordial of these fundamental defilements are called the āsavas, inadequately translated as “taints.” These consist of craving for sensual pleasures, craving for continued existence, and ignorance (6:63 [...]). They are fully eradicated only with the attainment of arahantship, and thus the fruit of arahantship is described as “the taintless liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom achieved with the destruction of the taints.”Other groups of fundamental defilements include the four bonds (4:10), identical in content with the three āsavas but augmented by the bond of views; the seven underlying tendencies (7:11–12); and the ten fetters, whose eradication in clusters marks the attainment of the successive stages of awakening (10:13).
The graduated course of monastic training is treated in greatest detail in the Dīgha and Majjhima Nikāyas, but the same sequence also appears once in AN (4:198).
He should be content with the simplest requisites, yet without priding himself on his austerity (4:28).
In this version of the training, the first two higher knowledges are not mentioned, and the process of mental development is continued through all nine meditative attainments. Yet, despite this difference, both conclude with the destruction of the āsavas.
These two suttas also correlate the threefold training with the four stages of awakening: the stream-enterer and once-returner fulfill virtuous behavior but not the other two trainings, the non-returner fulfills virtue and concentration but not wisdom, and the arahant fulfills all three trainings.
The monastic quest does not always culminate in the nirvanic realization that inspired the monk to embark on the life of renunciation. The Nikāyas show a keen awareness of human weakness and thus ring precautionary alarms.
Another discourse says that any bhikkhu or bhikkhunī who gives up the training and reverts to lay life does so because of insufficient faith, moral shame, moral dread, energy, and wisdom (5:5).
Serenity brings the tentative abandoning of lust and results in liberation of mind. Insight brings the abandoning of ignorance and results in liberation by wisdom (2:31). Jointly, “liberation of mind” and “liberation by wisdom” constitute arahantship, the final goal.
The disciple Ānanda states that all those who attain arahantship do so in one of four ways: either by developing serenity first and then insight (the standard sequence), by developing insight first and then serenity, by developing the two in conjunction, and by emerging from “restlessness about the Dhamma” and achieving a unified mind (4:170).
The Book of the Ones includes a virtual “catalogue” of themes and attainments pertaining to meditation practice [...].
Suttas in AN describe many of the familiar meditation subjects that receive more detailed treatment in such works as the Visuddhimagga.
Of particular interest is the emphasis AN places on the “perceptions” (saññā), meditation subjects that initially involve a fair amount of reflection rather than bare mindful observation. AN 7:49, for instance, mentions seven perceptions, which are said to “culminate in the deathless, to have the deathless as their consummation.” The seven are the perception of unattractiveness, the perception of death, the perception of the repulsiveness of food, the perception of non-delight in the entire world, the perception of impermanence, the perception of suffering in the impermanent, and the perception of non-self in what is suffering.
In AN the higher states of consciousness achieved through meditation are often mentioned. The most frequent, of course, are the four jhānas. In addition we also come across such sets as the eight bases of overcoming (8:65), the eight emancipations (8:66), and the nine progressive abidings (9:31–61). Success in meditation is sometimes shown to culminate in the three true knowledges, the tevijjā (3:58–59), which the Buddha himself attained on the night of his enlightenment (8:11). Elsewhere meditation brings attainment of the six kinds of superior knowledge later known as the abhiññās (3:101–2, 5:23, 6:2). Five of these involve psychic powers, while the sixth is the world-transcending knowledge of the destruction of the āsavas.
The superior states of concentration generate powerful wholesome kamma, which can lead to rebirth in the form or formless realm—the realms of super-divine stature—depending on the attainments reached during the meditator’s human existence.
One sutta enumerates eight conditions for acquiring and maturing the wisdom that pertains to the spiritual life (8:2).
Among the four Nikāyas, it is perhaps AN that places the greatest emphasis on learning. Learning is described as one of the five kinds of wealth (5:47) [...].
But learning does possess intrinsic value, and those who excel in learning and also obtain the four jhānas and the three true knowledges are regarded as especially worthy of respect (10:97).
Interestingly, several suttas in AN add a fourth theme of contemplation: contemplating nibbāna as happiness (6:101, 7:19).
Several AN suttas show that the monastic Saṅgha did not always measure up to the criteria the Buddha had set for it. In 2:42–51 a series of contrasts is drawn between pairs of assemblies, one censurable, the other laudable. The two assemblies are specifically described in terms of bhikkhus. The censurable arm of each pair includes the shallow assembly, in which the bhikkhus are “restless, puffed up, and vain”; the inferior assembly, in which they are luxurious and lax; the dregs of an assembly, in which they enter a wrong course on account of desire, hatred, delusion, or fear; and the assembly that values worldly things, not the good Dhamma.
The monastics are obliged to provide an inspiring model of disciplined conduct to the laity, behaving in such a way that “those without confidence gain confidence and those with confidence increase in their confidence” (8:54; see too 4:245 [...]).
In one sutta another term is added to the list of eight, the gotrabhū or “clan member” (9:10; see too 10:16). Strangely, the relationship of this figure to the others is not explained in the Nikāyas.
Though the explanations in the texts are often phrased in terms of bhikkhus, laypeople are also able to attain the first three fruits and even the fourth. In the last case, however, tradition says that they either attain arahantship on the verge of death or almost at once leave the household life for homelessness.
Another method of distinguishing the noble ones into seven types is mentioned at 7:14, where they are simply listed without explanation; explanations are found in MN 70. The seven are the one liberated in both respects, the one liberated by wisdom, the body witness, the one attained to view, the one liberated by faith, the Dhamma follower, and the faith follower. The first two are arahants, who are distinguished in that the former can also attain the “peaceful formless emancipations” (the formless meditations and the attainment of cessation) while the latter cannot. The middle three are types of sekhas, disciples in higher training, who are distinguished according to their dominant faculty.
At the end of 7:56, the Buddha mentions another “seventh person” in place of the faith follower. This type is called “one who dwells in the markless” (animittavihārī), a term unexplained in the sutta itself and never taken up for elaboration in the post-canonical Buddhist tradition. The commentary simply identifies this figure with the faith follower, but that may be an attempt to fit unusual ideas into the slots of an established system.
One distinction drawn among persons should dispel a misconception about early Buddhism that in recent years has receded but may not be completely extinct: namely, that in its stress on personal responsibility it was narrowly individualistic. In later times, this misconception (which might have been fostered by attitudes that prevailed in certain sections of the Saṅgha) led to the designation Hīnayāna, or “Little Vehicle,” being ascribed to the schools that adhered to the ancient scriptures. A series of suttas, 4:95–99, distinguishes persons into four types ranked by way of ascending excellence: (1) one who is practicing neither for his own welfare nor for the welfare of others; (2) one who is practicing for the welfare of others but not for his own welfare; (3) one who is practicing for his own welfare but not for the welfare of others; and (4) one who is practicing both for his own welfare and for the welfare of others.
Whether such an account is historically trustworthy has been questioned by modern-day scholars, for it contains anachronisms hard to reconcile with other chronological information in the canon and commentaries.
At 7:56 the Buddha reports that two deities informed him that a number of bhikkhunīs have been “well liberated without residue remaining.”
Among the four Nikāyas, AN has the largest number of suttas addressed to women, but a small number of discourses in the collection testify to a misogynistic attitude that strikes us as discordant, distasteful, and simply unjustified.
The number of suttas in AN is increased by several techniques that amplify the amount of material without adding much significantly new to the content.
Still another interesting feature of AN (noticeable, too, in the Saṃyutta Nikāya) is the use of what I call “auditor-setting variants.” With this technique, a discourse having the exact same content is given to several people.
This is ascribed to the great Buddhist commentator Ācariya Buddhaghosa, who came from South India to Sri Lanka in the fifth century c.e. and compiled the commentaries to the canonical texts on the basis of the ancient Sinhala commentaries (no longer extant) that had been kept at the Mahāvihāra in Anurādhapura.
The other exegetical work to which I occasionally refer is the subcommentary, the Aṅguttara Nikāya-ṭīkā, also known as the Manorathapūraṇī-ṭīkā (Mp-ṭ) and under its proper name, the Sāratthamañjūsā IV-ṭīkā, “The Casket of the Essential Meaning, Part IV.” This subcommentary does not belong to the set of “old subcommentaries” (purāṇaṭīkā), known as the Līnatthappakāsinī and ascribed to Ācariya Dhammapāla, the (seventh-century?) South Indian author of the subcommentaries to the other three Nikāyas. It is ascribed, rather, to the great Sri Lankan elder Sāriputta, who worked during the reign of King Parakramabāhu I (1153–86) at the capital Polonnaruwa. Since the sutta and commentary are usually sufficiently clear on their own, I have not had to refer to the ṭīkā as often as I did to the Saṃyutta Nikāyapurāṇaṭīkā in my notes to the Connected Discourses of the Buddha. Words in bold in Pāli citations from the commentary and ṭīkā represent the lemma, the word or phrase being commented upon.