Why there is Buddhānusmṛti and not of all Ancient Buddhas


So we have many recollections. Even in Majjhima Nikaya the recollection of Hermit Buddhas names. How come in Vimuttimagga already they give recollection of Siddhartha Buddha only? And in Nikayas there is no recollection of Buddhas. How come recollecting deities seemed more important than recollecting Buddhas?

1 Like

In Anguttara 11.13, the Buddha advises his cousin to recollect the qualities of the Buddha

That’s what I mean the recollection of the Buddha started as something for the founder of Buddhism. There is not a special sutta where Buddha recommends to recollect all the Ancient Buddhas.

So either we have to believe that recollection he meant for all Buddhas or that the list of Buddhas is a later tradition. They didn’t think to make a sutta of recollecting Buddhas.

That means the idea of Hermit Buddhas seems to predate the ones of many Full Buddhas.

It seems it was about Hermit Buddhas at first.

It’s interesting that the recollection of Buddha is in AN. Because I think those seems early suttas.

And then in Khuddaka Nikāya has texts about hermit Buddhas. Like the avadanas.

And we have the tradition of the sutta of verses of hermit Buddhas.

And then there this in Petakopadesa


But that there is no recollection of the ancient full Buddhas. What indication that must be for us?

Vimuttimagga goes in detail of course in recollecting the deities. Meaning focus on various. But of Buddha it doesn’t seem for all.

Maybe the believe all is one?

But it can be that the many Buddhas came from a generation that was not in recollections.

Do you mean all seven ancient Buddhas?
Vipassi, Sikhi, Vessabhu, Kakusandha, Konagamana, and Kassapa in addition to Gautama Buddha?

Yes. I am noticing that was not part of early Buddhism. I didn’t find it in Petakopadesa. And also there is no special sutta saying to recollect their names by Buddha. It’s just telling their story and the other which dispensation lasted longer.

So because this sutta is really awesome and strong. I am assuming EBT started with a hermit Buddhas movement. I assume they believed other wise. They where not Awakened for themselves as sutta say. Even commentary say they just don’t establish a sasana. They teach. But I believe there must have been a belief where special ones decide to make a sasana. Or just that they where born in a age to do that.

Think of the reaction the nikayas have of Buddha after Awakening. Sounds like a hermit Buddha.

I shall declare the names of the Buddhas awakened for themselves; I shall extol the names of the Buddhas awakened for themselves; I shall teach the names of the Buddhas awakened for themselves. Listen and pay close attention, I will speak.”

I imagine that sutta was changed a bit but it’s very mystical. I like it. :heart:

Btw your in EBT. Never found it strange only Kassapa Buddha is in Suttanipata? Even that sutta is explained by a Author to be corruption. Maybe from Mahakassapa nikaya sutta they made a similar in suttanipata.


Are you suggesting that the seven Buddhas are a later addition?

I’m suggesting that it actually started with Hermit Buddhas, and not much later the full Buddhas. I actually just read the parallel. There is a contrary believe. It says the hermit Buddhas had to leave the earth before 2 years, because there can’t be two Supreme Ones on earth. But that doesn’t make sense. Since they are more hermit Buddhas. :thinking: seems they tried to propagate this doctrine. But before Buddhism probably had faith in many hermit Buddhas being able to live at the same time. It’s like the parallel treating hermit Buddha and Full Buddhas the same.

It’s interesting. But also there mention of Bodhisattvas, Arahants, Buddhas. As if that was the three paths. But it’s obvious late addition. Probably Mahasanghika

What started this way?

I think this was referring two “full” Buddhas at the same time.
I don’t think this was excluding the possibility of two “hermit” Buddhas.
I am not sure about whether a “hermit” Buddha and a “full” Buddha can co-exist at the same time though.

That’s the tradition that came probably later @Gabriel_L @SeriousFun136 I edited didn’t respond as I meant

As the Later Agama says

At that time, the Paccekabuddhas cremated their bodies while they were up in space and attained final Nirvā􏰃a. Why? There cannot be two [persons] called Buddhas in the world [at the same time]. This is the reason they attained Nirvā􏰃a. [Just as] among travelling merchants there cannot be two leaders, or in one country there cannot be two kings, so in one Buddha-field there cannot be two [persons] called ‘Supreme One’.


But what started it. Obviously Buddha was hermit Buddha. Meaning living alone

In the jatakas (Ja408) we have the account of more than one paccekabuddha being there at the same time:

1 Like

Where is this from?
This sounds suspiciously like later literature.

It is probably. I gave the link already. The pdf. It’s from later Agama

Also remember we have Muni Sutta.

Again I say the reason maybe the tradition was that Buddha didn’t first want to teach, is because it was about hermit Buddhas. :thinking:

I also see the monks going in solitude after they have mastered concentration. Because that’s when Buddha allowed living in forest.

What do you mean “it”?

What is “it”? What was?

Thanks for linking that. In the PDF I shared above Bhikkhu Analayo mentioned them. Isn’t it incredibly? It seems that’s how Insights happen. :heart:

Here it a interesting observation in Udana

Khīṇasaṁyojanā Buddhā,26 te ve lokasmiṁ brāhmaṇā” ti.
The Buddhas who have destroyed the fetters, truly they are brāhmaṇas in the world

Footnote of Ānandajoti Bhikkhu

26 Buddha is applied here to all who have attained Awakening: disciples, individual Buddhas, and Perfect Sambuddhas.

That’s why there is another tradition that we have to become Buddha. Go figure :rofl: :thinking:

This is Buddha explaining how was his practice before

And there came to me spontaneously this stanza never heard before:

"Chilled by night and scorched by day, Alone in awe-inspiring groves,
Naked, no fire to sit beside,
The hermit still pursues his quest.

M. 12




Another observation

Here one of them preached.

Standing in the air he preached to the multitude, and then went through the sky to the mountain cave Nandamula in the Upper Himalaya.

I have finish reading still. Sinking them slowly.

I mean it for tradition.

Was because as you know things are corrupt now. But I’m not coming to any conclusions here. Just for food for thought.

Just because King Asoka mentioned the stupa of Buddha Koṇāgamana I still have faith in the Ancient Buddhas.

It’s just that it seems to me now Arahants was just a title for Buddhas.

Then its probably about being Awakened. (Buddhas) and Arahant was maybe a stage achieved before finally becoming full Awakened.

Maybe we wrongly accused early Vaipulya (Pre-mahayana). It was just different interpretations.

Thank you for clarifying.

I think he meant the seven “full” Buddhas only.

No, Arahant means “Worthy One” and seems to be applied to any being who attained fourth stage of Nibbana - I don’t think the early texts are unclear about this.

Just to clarify, are you thinking that maybe the Buddha was first a hermit Buddha and then later on he became a full Buddha? :thinking:

Prior to the Buddha arising in the world, the “tradition” was not in existence anymore.

A different “Buddhist” tradition might have been existence during the times of the previous Buddhas, but I think those died out prior to the arising of Gautama Buddha.

Can you please clarify further what your hypothesis is?