Mahaparinibbāna-sutta and Cullavagga

Summary

The opening article of this issue investigates the relationship between the well‑known Mahāparinibbāna‑sutta of the Dīgha‑Nikāya and the Cullavagga sections of the Vinaya‑pitaka. The Mahāparinibbāna‑sutta narrates the last journey, teachings and death of the Buddha and the events that followed immediately afterwards. The Cullavagga, in contrast, is a legal code that contains disciplinary rules for monks and nuns, including a lengthy chapter describing the first Buddhist councils at Rājagaha and Vesāli. Scholars have long noticed that the narrative material in Cullavagga XI–XII follows the same sequence as the Mahāparinibbāna‑sutta, but the canonical texts themselves give no explanation for this overlap. Louis Finot examines the hypothesis that the two sections were originally parts of a single chronicle and were separated only when the Vinaya and the Sutta collections were arranged. He analyses internal evidence: the continuity of events, the shared vocabulary and the absence of introductory nidānas. In both texts Mahā Kassapa plays a prominent role; the narratives explain how he learnt of the Buddha’s death, how he convened the council, and how he admonished the monks who wished to relax the discipline. Finot points out anomalies such as the sudden beginning of Cullavagga XI with the words “Once I was travelling along the road” and the lack of a proper conclusion in the Mahāparinibbāna‑sutta. Such features suggest that the texts were cut apart and placed in separate canonical compartments. The paper surveys parallels in the Sarvāstivādin and Mahāsāṃghika traditions and notes that other schools preserved a unified “Chronicle of the last journey” that combined the Parinibbāna narrative with the councils. Finot concludes that the Theravādins must once have had a similar chronicle. His argument illuminates how early Buddhists used narrative history to legitimise disciplinary decisions and demonstrates that the canonical divisions between Sutta and Vinaya were not always observed when texts were first composed. The essay thus offers an important contribution to the study of Buddhist textual history and the formation of the Pāli Canon.