Despite his ascetic, strict and stern reputation, he paid an interest in community matters and teaching, and was known for his compassion for the poor, which sometimes caused him to be depicted as an anti-establishment figure.
In many post-canonical texts, Mahākāśyapa decided at the end of his life to enter a state of meditation and suspended animation, which was believed to cause his physical remains to stay intact in a cave under a mountain called Kukkuṭapāda,[5] until the coming of Maitreya Buddha.
[9] Pāli accounts relate that Mahākāśyapa was born Pippali in a brahmana family in a village called Mahātittha, in the kingdom of Magadha, present-day India.
[15] In the Mūlasarvāstivāda version of the story, however, Pippali went to visit Bhadra, and without revealing his identity, told her that her future husband would be a bad choice for her, because he had no interest in sensual pleasures.
[52] Sri Lankan scholar Karaluvinna hypothesizes that Mahākāśyapa did this to dispel doubts about his role as leader of the saṃgha (Pali: saṅgha; monastic community).
This disputes eventually led Mahākāśyapa to charge Ānanda with several offenses during the First Buddhist Council, and possibly caused two factions in the saṃgha to emerge, connected with these two disciples.
[58][note 6] Pāli scholar Rune Johansson (1918–1981) argued that the events surrounding Mahākāśyapa, Ānanda and the bhikṣunīs prove that in Buddhism, enlightened disciples can still be seen to make mistakes.
[64] Anālayo notes that he did take an active concern in community matters, spent time teaching doctrine and persuaded fellow monastics to practice asceticism.
Studying Mūlasarvāstivāda texts of monastic discipline, Clarke points out that there is also an "in-house" perspective on Mahākāśyapa, which shows that he interacted with his former wife turned bhikṣunī frequently to mentor her.
[83] Pāli accounts state that the monk Anuruddha explained to them that deities prevented the funeral pyre from being lit until the arrival of Mahākāśyapa,[83][84] although sixth-century Chinese Buddhist texts say it was the spiritual power of the Buddha instead which caused the delay.
[96] In the first rains retreat (Sanskrit: varṣa, Pali: vassa) after the Buddha had died, Mahākāśyapa called upon Ānanda to recite the discourses he had heard, as a representative on this council.
[116] Buddhologist Jean Przyluski (1885–1944) argued that the earliest accounts placed Kauṇḍinya at the head of the saṃgha, and that originally, Mahākāśyapa was a conventional figure, with no administrative or leading role.
[104][120] On the other hand, archaeologist Louis Finot (1864–1935) and Indologist E. E. Obermiller [ru] (1901–1935) thought the account of the First Council was authentic, because of the correspondences between the Pāli texts and the Sanskrit traditions.
[15] In many Indian Sanskrit and East Asian texts, from as early as the second century CE, Mahākāśyapa is considered the first patriarch of the lineage which transmitted the teaching of the Buddha, with Ānanda being the second.
Korean studies scholar Sunkyung Kim does point out, however, that similar motifs can already be found in earlier Buddhist art, showing Buddha Gautama sitting.
Jikigyō (1671–c.1724), the leader of a chiliastic religious movement, locked himself in his monastic cell to starve to death, and have his mummified corpse meet with Maitreya Buddha in the future.
[186] Presently, the account of Mahākāśyapa's parinirvāṇa is not widely recognized in dominant Buddhist traditions in Thailand, but Lagirarde raises the question whether this is only a recent development.
[188] Tournier speculates that the story of Mahākāśyapa resolving that his body endure until the next Buddha is a "conscious attempt to dress the arhat in a bodhisattva (Buddha-to-be) garb".
[189] On a similar note, Strong argues the story shows sentiments that are at the root of the bodhisattva ideal, and may have led to the idea of the Eighteen Arhats (pinyin: lo-han) that "postpone" their death to protect the Buddhist teaching till the arrival of Maitreya.
[193] Silk also hypothesizes that the story was developed by Mahāyāna authors to create a narrative to connect the two Buddhas physically through Mahākāśyapa's paranirvāṇa and the passing on of the robe.
[195] Translator Saddhatissa, and with him Silk, argue that there is no equivalent account about Mahākāśyapa waiting in the cave that can be found in the Pāli tradition apart from a single reference in a post-canonical text.
[198] Indeed, Silk himself points at a Pāli sub-commentary to the Aṅguttara Nikāya which mentions that Mahākāśyapa retreated at age hundred twenty in a cave close to where the First Council was held.
[15] Silk argues that Mahāyāna polemicists used Mahākāśyapa as an interlocutor in their discourses, because of his stern conservative stance in the early texts and opposition of innovation, and his close association with Gautama Buddha.
Chan and Zen purport to lead their adherents to insights akin to that mentioned by the Buddha in the Flower Sermon (Chinese: 拈華微笑; pinyin: Nianhua weixiao; lit.
All the disciples just looked on without knowing how to react, but only Mahākāśyapa smiled faintly, and the Buddha picked him as one who truly understood him and was worthy to be the one receiving a special "mind-to-mind transmission" (pinyin: yixin chuanxin).
Chan therefore became a method of meditative religion which seek to enlighten people in the manner that Mahākāśyapa experienced:[207][208] "A special transmission outside the scriptures, directly pointing at the heart of man, looking into one's own nature."
It was incorporated as a meditative topic in the 1228 Chan text The Gateless Barrier (pinyin: Wumen Guan), in which the Buddha confirmed that the mind-to-mind transmission was complete.
[208] Since Chan Buddhism values the direct transmission from the teacher's mind to that of the student, more so than scriptures, the unbroken lineage of patriarchs is an important part of the tradition.
Mahākāśyapa assumes many roles and identities in the texts, that of a renunciant saint, a lawgiver, an anti-establishment figure, but also a "guarantor of future justice" in the time of Maitreya.
Drawing from Przyluski's textual criticism, Ray argues that when Mahākāśyapa replaced Kauṇḍinya as the head of the saṃgha after the Buddha's passing away, his ascetic saint-like role was appropriated into the monastic establishment to serve the need for a charismatic leader.