Structure Of Anguttara Nikaya

Unpacking the Structure of the Aṅguttara Nikāya

In the Aṅguttara Nikāya (AN), a fascinating pattern emerges: many suttas lack the familiar introductory formula, “Thus I heard,” which is consistently found in other collections like the Ekottarika Āgama (EĀ). While this omission might seem like a shortcut for a collection containing numerous short suttas, deeper implications are worth exploring.

Artificial Grouping of Suttas

A close look at AN I 6–7 reveals that the redactors often used creative methods to divide and rearrange content. For instance, they took similar words and phrases, juxtaposed them in slightly different ways, and ended up with 20 suttas. This process allowed them to form structured groups of ten suttas, known as vaggas, even when the material could arguably belong together as a single sutta.

This mechanical grouping is particularly evident in the Book of Ones (Ekaka-nipāta). Content that logically fits in higher books, like the Fours or Fives, was broken down into individual elements to create material for the Ones. This approach was likely motivated by a desire to produce a full “Book of Ones,” despite the lack of original doctrinal sets that naturally consist of a single item.

The Twos and Beyond

The Book of Twos (Duka-nipāta) in AN also demonstrates extensive artificial division. Many of its suttas are nearly identical, differing only in contrasting details. These appear to be two parts of a single sutta that were separated and presented as distinct texts. In other cases, entire vaggas contain ten or twenty suttas elaborating on contrasting pairs within a single theme. Again, this suggests they were originally part of one repetitious sutta, subdivided to fit the structure of the Twos.

As we move to higher books, such as the Sixes and Elevens, these artificial divisions become less frequent but are still present. In some instances, the defining number for a book is a sum of smaller numbers representing sets of doctrinal items found in the same sutta. The Book of Elevens is a notable case, likely added later to expand the collection beyond the original Book of Tens.

Comparing AN and EĀ

When comparing AN to EĀ, we find intriguing differences in structure. For example, the Book of Sevens in EĀ (EĀ7) clusters shared suttas with AN at the beginning, while unshared suttas are grouped toward the end. This pattern suggests that the artificial subdividing of AN’s material occurred before EĀ incorporated these suttas, retaining their original arrangement.

One striking example involves a group of ten suttas in AN’s Book of Threes, all dealing with the three trainings (sikkhā). These suttas have counterparts in the Saṁyukta Āgama (SĀ) that form the Sikkhā-saṁyutta. This indicates that in the Pāli tradition, what is now a vagga in AN may have originally been a saṁyutta in SN, further highlighting how the AN evolved through restructuring.

Final Thoughts

The Aṅguttara Nikāya and Ekottarika Āgama are both structured collections, but AN shows a more pronounced tendency toward artificial subdivision and mechanical grouping. This editorial approach aimed to create neat sets of suttas, even if the original material didn’t naturally fit these patterns. By comparison, the Ekottarika Āgama often retains a more straightforward and genuine structure, especially in sections like the Book of Ones.

Understanding these editorial processes sheds light on how early Buddhist texts were preserved, adapted, and organized. It reminds us that the form of these collections is as much a product of historical and practical concerns as it is of doctrinal content.