Mahkyapa'saasPrecedence to Ananda in the Rajagrha Council Keisho Tsukamoto The historicity of the Rajagrha Council was supported by Minayeff, Geiger, Poussin, Finot, Obermiller, Dutt, etc., and denied by Oldenberg, Przyluski, Frauwallner, Bareau, etc. The historicity of the event was inve- stigated in the following three points: 1. The historicity of the account of the event. 2. The historicity of a previous event which was regarded as the source of the account of the Council. 3. The historicity of a later event which was regarded as the source of the account of the Council. From these different fields of study, we see that the historicity of the account of the event and the background of the formation of the account of the council are different subjects of study. 1. The Accounts of the Rajagrha Council The accounts of the Rajagrha Council are: A: Cullavagga (Vibhajyavada-vinaya), XI. 1-5. B: Mi-sha-pu-ho-hsi-eu-lu 疏 彌 沙 塞 部 和 酪 五 分 律 (T.1421) 〔Mahisasaka-vina- ya〕tr. Buddhajiva & Chu Tao-sheng 竺 道 生 in 423-424A. D., T. Vo1. 22, P. 190, b13-p. 192, a25. C: sus-fen-lu 四 分 律 (T.1428) 〔Dharmagupataka-vinaya) tr. Buddhayaas & Chu Fo-nien 竺 佛 念 in 408A.D., T. Vo1. 22, p. 966, a15-p. 968, c17. D:pi-ni-nj-china 毘 尼 母 経 (T.1463)〔Hainavata-vinaya-matrka) tr. anonymous in 350-431 A.D., T. Vo1. 24, P. 817, b26-P. 819, b1. E: mo-ho-deng-chi-lu 摩 詞 僧 祇 律 (T.1425)〔Mahasamghila-vinaya〕tr. Buddha- bhadra & Fa-hsien 法 顯 in 416A.D., T. Vo1. 22, P. 489, c26-P. 492, c.17. F.shih-dung-lu 十 調 律 (T.1435)〔sarvastvada-vinayya〕tr. Pupyataa & Kuma- -824- (54) Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) rajiva in 404 A.D., T. Vol. 23, p. 445, c10-p. 450, a26. G: Ken-pen-shou-i-chieh-yu-pu-pi-nai-yeh-tsa-shih 根 本 説 一 切 有 部 毘 奈 耶 雑 事 (T. 1451)〔mulasarvastivada-viaya ksudrakavasru〕tr. 1-ching義 浄 in 710 A.D., T. Vol. 24, p.382, b29-p. 408, b25. H:a-y-wahg-dhi 阿 育 王 傳 (T.2042)〔Asokavadana, the history of the Sar- vastivadins of Mathura〕tr. AnFan-chin 安 法 欽 in 306A.D., T. Vo1.50, P. 111, b27-p. 114, a25. 1:A-yu-wang-ching 阿 育 王 経 (T.2043), tr. Salpghabhadr in 512A.D.,T. VoL 50, p.149, b22-p. 152, c8. J: cia-she-chieh-shing 迦 葉 結 経 (T.2027), tr. An Shih-kao 安 世 高 after 147A. D., T. Vol. 49, p. 4b-p. 7a. K: shuan-chi-san-sang-xi-tsa-tsang-chuan 撰 集 三 藏 及 雑 藏 傳 (T.2026), tr. anony- nous in 317-420 A.D., T. Vol. 49, p. 1a-p. 4a. L:fo-pa-ni-yuan-shing 佛 般 泥 漉 経 (T.5)〔mahaparinva〕tr. Pai Fa-tsu 白 法 祖 in 290-306A. D., T. Vo1. 1, 175, a25-c14. M: par-ni-yuan-ching 般 泥 涯輕(T.6), tr. anonyrnous in 317-420 A.D., T. Vol. 1, p. 170, c9-p. 191, a27. N: fen-pie-kung-te-lun 分 別 功 徳 論 (T.1507)〔said to be written by the Maha- samghikas or Mahayana), tr. anonymous before 220 A. D. (?), T. Vol. 25, p. 40, c 21-p. 41, a 5 ; p. 31, c 27-p. 32, b 12; p. 34, b 12-22. O: pu-sa-tsung-tot-shu-ten-ciang-shen-eu-tai-shuo-kuat-pu-ching 菩 薩 從 兜 術 天 降 紳 母 胎 説 廣 普 経 (T.385), tr. Chu Fo-nien in 350-417 A.D., T. Vo1. 12,P. 1058, a18-b24. P: ta-shish-tu-lun 大 智 度 論 (T.1509)〔mahaprajnaparanivsastra〕by Nagarjuna 〔attributed to Mahayana〕, tr. Kumaraliva in402-405A.D., T. Vo1. 25, p. 67, b8-p. 70, b12. Q: ta-pei-ching 大 悲 経 (T.380), tr. Narendrayaaas in 558A. D., T. Vo1. 12, p. 971, b11-c11. R: Dipavamsa (written by the Vibhajyavadins), IV. S: Mahavamsa (written by the Vibhajyavadins), III. T: Samantapasadika, by Buddhaghosa (attributed to the Vibhajyavadins), III. The arrangements of the elements of the story are different among those accounts. See Fig. 1. The elements of the accounts of the Rajagrha Council can be classified in the, following four groups: -823- Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) (55) (Fig. 1) Note: k. s.-kgudranulcgudraii sikgapadani; p=partly nil, x=nil; *=The Hirnalaya Council; O=Kasyapa chose 999 Arhats. -822- (56) Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) I. The elements given in the Appendix to the Mahaparinirvanasutra. II. The holding of the Rajagrha Council and the recitation of the Dha- rma and the Vinaya. III. The blame of Ananda for his violating the ksudranuksudrani siksa- padani. IV. The episode of Purana and Channa. The second group is found in all the documents, but the other groups are not. Therefore, the second group may be the original form of the ac- count of the Rajagrha Council. It is not certain whether four groups were made at the same time, or whether the groups I, III & IV were inserted into the second in later times. Frauwallner pointed out that the position of Ananda and Mahakasyapa in the Agama was given differently in the account of the Rajagrha Council (especially, in the Skandhaka of the Vinayapitaka). He says: "The author of the account of the council, i. e. the author of the Skandhaka, has pro- needed to a deep reaching modification and revaluation of the tradition (1) concerning the position of Ananda and Mahakasyapa." His opinion is worth noting, because it verifies Oldenberg's theory that the original account of the Rajagrha Council was written after the event of the Vaisali Council. But Frauwallner's proof is not always sufficient. Therefore,' we must in- vestigate it further. What role Ananda played on in the Rajagrha Council, and from what standpoint the authors of the account described Ananda, are described very (2) differently by the different schools. The Sarvastivadins and the Mahasam- ghikas do not blame Anada so bitter as the other schools. In order to understand this difference, we must research for what purpose the accounts of the Council were compiled. First we must examine the faults of Ananda. (1) E. Frauwallner: The Earliest Vinaya and the Beginnings of Buddhist Literature, Serie Orientale Roma VIII, Roma 1956, pp. 161 f. {2) A. Bareau: Les premiers. conciles bouddhiques, Annales du Musee Guimet LXe, Paris 1955, pp. 7-15. -821- Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) (57) 2. The Faults of Ananda According to the above-mentioned elements of the accounts III, after recitingthe Dharma,Ananda told Mahakasyapa:"Buddha said to me at his death-bed that ksudranuksudrani siksapadani may be *given up if the samg ha wants to." Ananda did not know what it was. The elders discussed it, but it was not solved. Mahakasyapa said to the monks : "No clause of the rules is to be given up, or the samgha shall be blamed by others who are not Buddhists." Then Ananda was blamed for his carelessness and his faults were enumerated as follows: (Fig. 2) Note: (1) The faults are not described, except the first which is explained in ten points. (2) The other faults are not described. (3) The total of faults is not given: only the word 'great faults' is given. (3) For k. A., see Fig. 1, note. (3) According to the Ssu-ffen-lu and the Tsa-shih, before reciting the Dharma, Ananda told it to Mahakasyapa. -820- (58) Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) The arrangements of Ananda's faults are classified into four groups. The group a (1-7) begins with the fault 1, the group b (8-12) with the fault 6, the group c (13-15) with the fault 2 and the group d (16) with the fault 9. The authors of the group c of documents refer to Ananda's faults, but do not describe them. The authors of the documents Q, R, S & T (in Fig. 1) do not refer to Ananda's faults. Therefore, it seems that the documents in which Ananda's faults are described belong to the Skan- dhaka of the Vinayapitaka except the historical records such as the Chia-she- chieh-chink and the Asokavadana. 3. The Precedence between Ananda and Mahakasyapa The documents referring to Ananda and Mahakasyapa in Malalasek- era's Dictionary of Pali Proper Names (London 1937) are as fllows: (Fig. 3) It is an established fact that there are more pieces of literature refer- ring to Ananda than those referring to Mahakasyapa. Nevertheless, only in the account of the Rajagrha Council Ananda is blamed with the descri- ption of his faults. In the Chia-she-chieh-china (in the group a in Fig. 2) translated into Chinese in the second century A. D., Ananda's faults are arranged systematically. It says that Mahakasyapa, acting as the chairman -819- Mahakasyapa's Precedence to Ananda (K. Tsukamoto) (59) of five hundred monks, compiled the Sutrapitaka and the Vinayapitaka in Rajagrha. The recitation of the Dharma by Ananda is described, but not the recitation of the Vinaya by Upali. It may be that, when the author described the event, he intended: 1. To give Mahakasyapa the leadership of the 500 monks, by making him the chairman of the Rajagrha Council, and thus giving him the precedence to Ananda, and 2.