BSRV 31.

2 (2014) 165178
doi: 10.1558/bsrv.v31i2.165

Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (print) 0256-2897

Buddhist Studies Review ISSN (online) 1747-9681

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

The Problem of Khaggavisa Revisited
Dhivan Thomas Jones
assisTanT LecTurer, open universiTy
thomas @dhivan.net

absTracT
The P li ex ression khaggavisakappo a either ean like the
rhinoceros or like the horn of the rhinoceros . t occurs in the
refrain eko care khaggavisakappo at the end of each stan a of the
Khaggavisa-sutta and its arallels, and the refrain has been translated b so e as one should wander alone like the rhinoceros
but b so e, including . R. or an, as one should wander alone
like the horn of the rhinoceros . . R. or an has howe er set out
his reasons for regarding like the rhinoceros horn as the correct
translation, and like the rhinoceros as wrong. The resent article
criticall discusses or an s reasons, concluding that the ex ression khaggavisa a be regarded as a deliberatel a biguous co ound eaning both the rhinoceros and its horn, or erha s as a
single ex ression eaning rhinoceros . The oological facts are considered, as well as the difficult et olog of khaggavisa, its contextual eaning, its eaning in ain arallels, and its discussion in P li
co
entaries. The article concludes that like the rhinoceros is in
fact a correct translation.
e words
khaggavisa, khagavia, khaggavisakappo, Khaggavisa-sutta, solitude
The Khaggavisa-sutta of the Sutta-nipta consists in 41 stan as, each of which
exce t one ends with the refrain eko care khaggavisakappo.1 These stan as reco
end a solitar , editati e, renunciate lifest le, and e lo a ariet of nat1.

Sn . 5 5 also at
1 , where the stan as are attributed to the paccekabuddhas. The
exce tional erse, Sn .45, has the refrain, careyya tenattamano satim, one should wander
with hi
indful, satisfied .

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014, Office 415, The Workstation, 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX

Dhivan Thomas Jones

uralistic i ages and eta hors. The are co

ented u on in the Cullaniddesa,
which also co
ents u on ost of the stan as in the Paryanavagga. The
Niddesa is itself included in the P li canon, which indicates that the stan as of
the Khaggavisa-sutta are so e of the oldest exa les of Buddhist literature
a awickra a 1 , 2
or an 1 , 5 or an 2001, 1 2 . s aller nu ber
of related or si ilar stan as are reser ed in Sanskrit in the Mahvastu,2 with
the refrain, eko care khagaviakalpo. These Sanskrit stan as in the Mahvastu
are called khagaviagth, which ro ose to translate rhinoceros stan as .
et another ersion of the rhinoceros stan as, in the ndh r dialect of iddle
ndo r an, has recentl a eared, ha ing been edited b Richard Salo on fro
birch bark anuscri ts written in the first centur ce, and then buried, robabl
in fghanistan. The are now conser ed b the British useu .3 These 40 stanas, which are si ilar to, but not identical with, the P li and Sanskrit ersions,
ha e the refrain eko care khargaviaagapo. The rhinoceros stan as were therefore
alued and reser ed b se eral earl Buddhist schools, and the belong to the
earliest hase of Buddhist literature.
The question is, should the refrain, eko care khaggavisakappo in P li, or its
equi alents in Sanskrit and ndh r , be translated one should wander alone like
the rhinoceros or, one should wander alone like the horn of the rhinoceros
oes the co ound khaggavisa refer to the rhinoceros or to its horn 4 The co ound is a biguous, and, as will be ex lained, a be understood either wa .
owe er, translators ust ake a choice, and ost ha e referred like the rhinoceros , robabl artl because one should wander alone like the rhinoceros
sounds ore natural in English.5 e ertheless, in one of the two English translations of the Sutta-nipta now in rint, .R. or an has gi en the translation
one should wander solitar as a rhinoceros horn 2001, 5ff , and in an i ortant
article he has resented argu ents for the correctness of this translation.7 n the
resent article will raise so e doubts in relation to Prof. or an s argu ents, in
order to conclude that the co ound khaggavisa re ains a biguous, and a
therefore correctl be translated rhinoceros as well as horn of the rhinoceros ,
and that therefore the translation rhinoceros is ustified. This conclusion will
confir what see s to ha e been the intuition of ost translators and co
entators of recent ears, though not all. ence, this conclusion will ha e re laced
2.
.
4.

5.

.
.

u 5 , where the stan as are also attributed to the pratyekabuddhas.

Salo on 2000. The stor of the birch bark anuscri ts is gi en in Salo on 1 .
The literature on translating khaggavisa is discussed in or an 1 . Salo on 2000, 10 14
re iews it all again, and, while concluding that khaggavisa is best translated rhinoceros ,
has so e isgi ings about going against the authoritati e and e hatic o inion of .R. oran .1 n.11 .
s en. Thanissaro uts it, rhinoceros horns don t wander ccess to nsight, htt
www.
accesstoinsight.org ti itaka kn sn sn .1.0 .than.ht l, accessed Oct 2014 , and, as Ste hanie a ison uts it, the idea of a horn wandering alone con ures u an unintentionall
co ic icture a ison 1 , 25 n.1 .
or an 2001 and Saddhatissa 1 5. translation b Thanissaro is a ailable online ccess to
nsight, htt
www.accesstoinsight.org ti itaka kn sn sn .1.0 .than.ht l, accessed Oct
2014 .
or an 1
ore brie in or an 2001, 1 2 .
s well as or an, Ste en ollins 1 2, 2
in a highl critical re iew article of Wiltshire

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

ere intuition or guesswork with ust the kind of hilological rigour that Prof.
or an hi self has reco
ended in the stud of P li texts 200 , 10 14 .
Since will structure this article around Prof. or an s argu ents, will first
quote his conclusion regarding the translation of khaggavisa as horn of the
rhinoceros
When the P li can be so translated, when the earliest inter retations take it that
wa , when the ain tradition su orts it, and when the ndian rhinoceros is unique
a ong ani als in ndia in ha ing onl one horn, it see s certain to e that the
reference is to the single horn 1 , 1

This list con enientl ro ides four to ics for

discussion in re arranged
order of how Prof. or an s conclusion is uch less certain than it a ears i
the facts about rhinoceroses ii the P li of the sutta itself iii e idence fro the
ain tradition and i the earliest inter retations of the sutta, i.e. the Cullaniddesa,
and also the later co
entaries.

The facts about rhinoceroses

n the other English translation of the Sutta-nipta now in rint, en. Saddhatissa
renders the refrain eko care khaggavisakappo as Let one li e alone like a unicorn s horn 1 5, 4ff. . Part of the reason for this translation is his istaken
idea that the rhinoceros is gregarious. n a note, Saddhatissa ex lains that in
iew of the gregarious nature of the ndian s ecies, called Rhinoceros unicornis,
ha e chosen the latter ter to e hasi e solitariness s bolicall 1 5,
n.1 . owe er, the fact is that the ndian rhinoceros is not gregarious indeed,
the er o osite is the case. dult rhinoceroses usuall roa and gra e alone,
though the occasionall for s all grou s to gra e or wallow Laurie et al. 1 ,
4 . The fact that the rhinoceros is a solitar wanderer is also so ething that Prof.
or an does not discuss, and of which he a ossibl ha e been unaware.10
The lifest le of the rhinoceros in fact ro ides a er a t si ile for the lifest le
of the sage de icted in the Khaggavisa-sutta, who is en oined to wander alone,
exce t to en o the co an of a wise co anion.11
nother rele ant fact about the ndian rhinoceros is that it has onl one horn
unicornis ,12 and it is this fact that Prof. or an finds ore significant than
1 0, states that khaggavisakappo eans like the single horn of the rhinoceros , against
Wiltshire s like a rhinoceros .
.
is istake a relate, howe er, to Sinhalese tradition, since, according to ana onika,
in a note to his er an translation of the Sutta-nipta n e lon there is a tradition that
khaggavisa does not refer to the rhinoceros, but instead to a horse like ani al with a horn
on its forehead see The Buddhist , olo bo, a 1 4 . The Sinhalese na e for this is
kangavea or kagavea see arter s Sinhalese English dictionar . t would thus see to be
an ani al related to the
thical unicorn. The legend of the unicorn for its art howe er
ight ha e arisen fro the first garbled re orts of the rhinoceros.
ana onika 1 55, 24 ,
trans. . llen also regards khaggavisa as referring to the horn of the rhinoceros, because
he erroneousl belie es that oologists ha e ne er described this ani al as being other than
gregarious 1 5 , .
10. The ost he acknowledges is that it would a ear that the ndian rhinoceros does not ha e
a articularl gregarious nature or an 1 , 1 .
11. See e.g. Sn .45, 5 .
12. Laurie et al. 1 , 1 horns of u to 5 2
along the cur e ha e been recorded.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Dhivan Thomas Jones

the rhinoceros solitar wandering. e understands eko, solitar , single , of the

refrain eko care khaggavisakappo to refer to the eko, single , horn of the rhinoceros, and not to the eko, solitar , lifest le of the beast, though he does so for
hilological reasons, which will ex lain below. owe er, assu ing that the earl
Buddhists co osed the refrain eko care khaggavisakappo ha ing obser ed the
natural world around the , it is inconcei able that if the had noticed that the
rhinoceros had onl one horn that the should not also ha e obser ed its solitar habit of life. oreo er, the solitar wanderer of the rhinoceros stan as is
also co ared to the solitar
ale ele hant Sn .5 , h 2 , discussed below ,
as well as to the lion which is not in fact a solitar ani al Sn . 1 2,
1 ,
discussed below . These co arisons are thus with the habits of ani als, rather
than with arts of their anato , aking it natural to su ose that khaggavisa
originall referred to the ani al and not to its horn.1
The facts about rhinoceroses cannot, of course, b the sel es deter ine the
eaning of the ex ression khaggavisa, which should be decided b hilological
and not oological argu ent. owe er, should it be concluded that khaggavisa
reall is a biguous, and a ust as well ean rhinoceros as horn of the rhinoceros , then these facts about rhinoceroses will take on a new significance.
The would i l that so eone fa iliar with rhinoceroses who was to hear the
refrain, eko care khaggavisakappo, would naturall hear the co arison i lied
b the refrain as being between the Buddhist renunciate and the solitar beast,
not onl with its horn. With this in ind, turn to the ex ression khaggavisa
itself.

The Pli term khaggavisa and its context

The co ound khaggavisa or khagavia in Sanskrit, or khargaviaa in the
ndh r Prakrit is a biguous and can be anal sed in two different wa s See
argaret one, OP , 42 . s Prof. or an uts it
The P li word khagga Sanskrit khaga has two eanings rhinoceros and sword .
f khagga is taken in the eaning rhinoceros , then the co ound can be interreted as a tatpurua de endent co ound, eaning the horn of a rhinoceros . f khagga is taken in the eaning sword , then it can be taken as a bahuvrihi
ossessi e co ound, eaning ha ing a sword as a horn , i.e. a rhinoceros .
onsequentl , fro the for of the word we cannot be certain whether it is the
rhinoceros or its horn which is single. 1 , 1 4

e ertheless, des ite this uncertaint about the eaning of khaggavisa,

Prof. or an, while acknowledging that the co ound is in itself a biguous,
as we will see refers to inter ret it as a tatpurua, firstl , because the co
entaries a ear to take it as such, and, secondl , because a ain arallel a ears
to take it that wa too. B contrast, Edgerton had taken B S khagavia to be
a bahuvrihi eaning rhinoceros rather than its horn.14 B wa of re l , Prof.
1 .
oint ade b a awickra a 1 , 22 .
14. B S
.202
Since Skt. kha ga and Pali khagga eans rhinoceros, the Pali co
. on Sn
ara hrases kh is a b rhinoceros-horn. But actuall the c d. eans rhinoceros Skt.
kha gin, originall having a sword like horn. The co arison is to the ani al, not to its
horn.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

or an has argued that the B S tradition had forgotten the original eaning
of the co ound, that is, as a tatpurus 1 , 40 .15
i en the a biguit of the co ound khaggavisa, it see s reasonable to
su ose that the co oser s of the Khaggavisa-sutta may have intended the
co ound to be understood in both senses si ultaneousl , both as a tatpurua
eaning rhinoceros horn and as a bahuvrihi eaning rhinoceros . Ria
lo enborg 1 4, 5 0 has in fact ro osed exactl such an inter retation,
but Prof. or an res onded to this ro osal with the criticis
find this line
of argu ent hard to follow, unless she eans that khaggavisa is to be taken
in both wa s si ultaneousl in a la u on words lea 1 , 1 5 . s we will
see below, Prof. or an s criticis of lo enborg, and his re ection of the ossibilit of deliberate a biguit , is based on his argu ents, to be considered and
to so e extent re ected below, b which he decides that khaggavisa should be
originall considered a tatpurua and not a bahuvrihi. owe er, Richard Salo on
is kinder to lo enborg, co
enting
While it is true that lo enborg s state ent is not entirel clear, think that it
should still be taken seriousl . t a not be question of lea in the stricter technical sense of the ter s in the ex ression khaggavisakappo, but it is certainl
reasonable to think that both inter retations like the rhinoceros and like the
rhinoceros horn are in fact i lied si ultaneousl . 2000, 1 1

With this encourage ent in ind, let us ex lore further the exed question
of the et olog of khaggavisa.
einrich L ders aintained that khagga and khaga should be regarded as
abbre iations of khaggavisa and khagavia, in the sa e wa that Sanskrit
scika, stinging insect , can be regarded as an abbre iation of scimukha, ha ing a outh like a needle , i.e. stinging insect 1 40, 42 and in the sa e wa
that Sanskrit iuka- P li susu or susuka , dol hin , crocodile , can be regarded
as abbre iations of iumra, child killer 1 42, 1 . Prof. or an has re ected
this ossibilit , citing the works of ui er 1 4 , 1 and a rhofer 1 5 , 2 ,
who show that khaga is a robabl a Proto unda word that was borrowed into
Sanskrit. or an writes, The original eaning of khaga was rhinoceros when
it was first borrowed into ndo r an, and it is not an abbre iation for khagavia as has been suggested b L ders 1 , 1 40 and 2001, 1 .1 owe er,
ore recent work b
a rhofer which or an does not cite does not su ort
or an s oint of iew. a rhofer concludes
Because it can be assu ed that both the edic khag- and also the khaga sword
of the ounger language originate fro a word borrowed fro another language
Kulturwort , a connection between sword and rhinoceros in an undeter ined
original language cannot be ruled out it is for now un ro able 1 2, 444 .1
15. cf. a rhofer 1 2, 44 4 , who also regards Edgerton s et olog as istaken.
1 . cf. Le an 2012 , who shows that P li pahitatta is a deliberatel a biguous co ound,
eaning both of resolute will and ha ing abandoned self .
1 . ui er a ears not to disagree with or an s criticis of L ders, co
enting that an e idence of the su osed older for of khagavisa in the eaning rhinoceros is wanting
1 4 ,1 .
1 . an thanks to Br an Le an and Robert lark for hel with the translation.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

1 0

Dhivan Thomas Jones

i en this uncertaint o er the original eaning of khaga, L ders ro osal,

des ite the lack of corroborati e e idence for it in the ndic languages, a not
necessaril be incorrect. ndeed, L ders ro osal that khaggavisa was not in
fact a co ound but a single ex ression denoting rhinoceros has recei ed ore
recent su ort fro Prof. . . Wright, who has obser ed that the e idence resented b
a rhofer and ui er suggests that there was a re r an word for
rhinoceros , of which both khaga and khagavia are ada tations, co arable
to ew Persian karg, kargadan, and reek . e co ares khagavia
with mganbhi, deer s na el , which in Sanskrit denotes both usk and the
usk deer Wright 2001, 5 W . 2 .
While the et olog of khaggavisa re ains uncertain, it see s clear that
Prof. or an has not sufficientl considered the ossibilit that the co ound
was originall intended to be deliberatel a biguous, and the further ossibilit
that the ex ression khaggavisa was originall understood as a single ex ression
eaning rhinoceros . n regard to the latter ossibilit , Prof. or an has also not
considered the ad ittedl late e idence of the Abhidhnappadipika a Bur ese
lexicon of P li b oggall na khaggakhaggavis tu palsdo ca gaako, eaning,
khagga and indeed khaggavisa ean rhinoceros .1 This too suggests the ossibility that khaggavisa was understood as a single ex ression eaning rhinoceros .20
i en these se eral wa s to understand khaggavisa as a tatpurua horn of a
rhinoceros , as a bahuvrihi ha ing a horn which is a sword , that is, rhinoceros ,
as deliberatel a biguous both rhinoceros and horn of a rhinoceros , or as a
single ex ression eaning rhinoceros the question is, which is the correct wa
to understand khaggavisa in the refrain of the rhinoceros stan as nfortunatel ,
as Prof. or an has obser ed, there are no clues about how to inter ret the ex ression fro the refrain itself. nd the recentl edited ndh r ersion of the rhinoceros stan as has shed no new light at all on this atter Salo on 2000, 1 . or an
looks to a ain arallel and to the earliest co
entar to decide. But before we look
at these, let us consider the Buddhist and oetic context for the refrain. irstl ,
there are a air of erses in the Khaggavisa-sutta Sn 45 which are also found
in the Dhammapada 2 2 and elsewhere, exce t for a different final line 21
sace labhetha nipakam sahyam
saddhim caram sdhuvihri dhiram
abhibhuyya sabbni parissayni
careyya tenattamano satima

f one should find a wise co anion

good to li e and wander with, resolute,
o erco ing e er danger,
one should wander with the , indful, satisfied.

no ce labhetha nipakam sahyam

saddhim caram sdhuvihri dhiram
rj va rattham vijitam pahya
eko care khaggavisakappo

f one cannot find a wise co anion

good to li e and wander with, resolute,
like a king lea ing a conquered kingdo ,
one should wander alone like the khaggavisa.

1 .

bh . 1 , cited in OP . 42 gaako and palsdo are words for rhinoceros gaako is the
sa e in Skt., usuall taken to ean ossessing swellings in reference to the knobbl hide,
though ui er 1 4 , 1
suggests an ustro siatic origin palsdo is gi en in PE under
palsata and a be equi alent to edic parasvat.
20. The English word rhinoceros resents erha s a co arable case. The word co es fro
the reek - (rhino- , eaning nose , and (keras , horn . n English s eaking erson
a sa rhinoceros nose horn , cf. er an ashorn , or use the shortened for rhino ,
but the words equall refer to the sa e ani al.
21.
,
154, in 50, a 4 .

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

1 1

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

The last line in the Dhammapada ersion, howe er, reads eko care mtagarae
va ngo, one should wander alone like an ele hant in the ele hant forest
khaggavisa is thus equi alent to the ele hant. s a awickra a has argued,
the co arison in the whole refrain is thus between the solitar wandering of
the renunciate and that of an ani al a rhinoceros or ele hant , not an ob ect a
horn 1 , 22 . nother iece of e idence not so far roduced that oints in
the sa e direction is found in the Apadna 1
.52 , in a stan a that follows the
rhinoceros stan as, and describes the paccekabuddhas
mahantadhamm bahudhammaky The are great, with large har a bodies,
cittissar sabbadukkhoghati
udaggacitt paramatthadassi

lords of ind, who ha e crossed the

all ain,
inds exalted, seeing the ulti ate,

ood of

sihopam khaggavisakapp

the are like lions, the are like khaggavisas.

The co arison of paccekabuddhas with lions and with khaggavisas again

i lies that the latter are ani als and not things. These oints do not of course
ro e that khaggavisa does not ean horn of the rhinoceros , but onl that,
gi en this usage, we would certainl need so e strong e idence to su ose that
khaggavisa does not ean rhinoceros .
Secondl , we should note that Prof. or an s inter retation of khaggavisa
as horn of the rhinoceros i lies that we ust inter ret khaggavisakappo in
the refrain eko care khaggavisakappo as qualif ing onl the word eko, alone, and
not the erb care, since the horn a be eko, but it cannot wander. or an concludes, think there is no roble if we translate Let hi wander all b hi self eko adutiyo ha ing a rese blance to the rhinoceros horn, which is also eko
adutiyo 1 , 1 . That is to sa , that or an s inter retation requires us to
think of the gra
ar of the refrain as
One should wander alone, as the horn of the rhinoceros is alone.

Rather than as
One should wander alone, as the rhinoceros wanders alone.

While or an s inter retation is erfectl intelligible and gra

aticall ossible, it i lies that the conce t of being solitar in the hrase eko care could be
se arated fro the conce t of wandering. This i lication, howe er, is hard
to reconcile with the wa solitar wandering , ekacariy, a ears as a unitar
conce t in Buddhist oetr . or instance, in the Sutta-nipta we read of siham
vekacaram ngam, the n ga Buddha who wanders alone like a lion 1 , and
ekam carantam munim, the uni Buddha who wanders alone 21 .22 Whether
the ad ecti e eko and the erbal construction cariy are co ounded or not,
22. See also e.g. Sn 21 muni idha ekacariyam daham kayir, a uni should ake his solitar
wandering fir , h
ekacaram, wandering alone of the ind , h 1 ekacariy, solitar
wandering , h 05 eksanam ekaseyyam eko caram atandito | eko damayam attnam vanante
ramito siy, one who sits alone, slee s alone, wanders alone, strenuous, who subdues hi self
alone, ight delight in the forest , h 2 eko care mtagarae va ngo, one should wander
alone like an ele hant in the
ta ga forest , h
0 eko care na ca ppni kayir, appossukko
mtagarae va ngo, one should wander alone, one should not do e il, as unconcerned as
an ele hant in the
ta ga forest , d . ekacaro sa bhikkhu, he is a bhikkhu, who wanders

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

1 2

Dhivan Thomas Jones

the conce t denoted is the sa e. nice exa le is fro the Mahvastu a seer
called
a a had a child, and he, Re e bering the sa ing, the one horned
beast wanders all alone , the seer ga e the child the na e Eka nga ekacaram
mgakam jtanti tena i ekamgo ti nmam ktam 144 .2 i en these exa les
of the unitar conce t of solitar wandering in Buddhist oetr , it see s ost
likel that a reader of the refrain eko care khaggavisakappo would understand it
to ean one should wander alone, as the khaggavisa wanders alone . n which
case, khaggavisa ust ean rhinoceros. The fact that rhinoceroses do indeed
wander alone akes this reading rather difficult to resist, unless there is so e
co elling e idence that it ust ha e been understood differentl .24

Evidence from the Jain tradition

Let us now exa ine the reasons Prof. or an belie es khaggavisa is a tatpurua
eaning horn of the rhinoceros , and not a bahuvrihi eaning rhinoceros .
irstl , he cites a ain arallel to the khaggavisa refrain.
ong a list of raiseworth qualities of the ain founder, ah ira, found in the Jinacaritra is (in
Prakrit khaggi-visam va ega-je, translated b acobi, he was single and alone
like the horn of a rhinoceros .25 s or an sa s, the gra
atical for of khaggivisam is neuter singular, and therefore does not allow the co ound to be
anal sed as a bahuvrihi, which would agree with the asculine sub ect of the sentence, indicated b je. s Prof. or an writes, this effecti el ro es the oint
that khaggavisa is a tatpurua eaning horn of the rhinoceros 1 , 1 .
Two factors, howe er, cast doubt on this oint. irst, if the P li ex ression
khaggavisa can be considered a non co ounded ex ression denoting rhinoceros , ha ing a neuter gender, then the Prakrit khaggi-visam ight si ilarl be
considered a neuter ex ression eaning rhinoceros . Second, the context of the
e ithet khaggi-visam is a series of co arisons with ani als in acobi s translation, his senses were well rotected like those of a tortoise he was single and
alone like the khaggi-visam he was free like a bird he was alwa s waking like
the fabulous bird Bh runda, alorous like an ele hant, strong like a bull, difficult
to attack like a lion 1 , 2 . This rather suggests that khaggi-visam refers to
the ani al rather than to its horn. ollette aillat akes the further oint that
the rose assage in the Jinacaritra is followed b a erse su
ar which states,
vihage khagge ya bhrume a bird, a rhinoceros, and Bh ru a , in acobi s translation , which again suggests that the co arison is with the ani al 200 ,
n.5 0 .2 The atter is of course far fro certain, but the oints ade b aillat
do raise doubts about the degree to which the ain arallel to the P li refrain eko

2 .
24.
25.
2 .

alone , il 105 paccekabuddh ekacarino khaggavisnakapp, solitar buddhas who wander

alone like the khaggavisa .
Trans. ones 1 5 , 140 . ones re arks n. the horned beast is here taken to denote the
ndian one horned rhinoceros . owe this reference to Wiltshire 1 0, .50 n.2 .
We should note also that, according to W, .22 , ekacara can ean rhinoceros .
or an 1 , 1
citing acobi 1 , 2 , Jinacarita 11 . The hrase is also found in the
Aupaptikastra, Leu ann 1 , 2 , cited in Baut e, 1 5, 414, n.21 .
See also .4 , n. 0. aillat also argues that P li kappa in khaggavisakappo ight be taken to
retain a ore substanti e sense, following ain testi on concerning ascetics who follow the
rule kalpa of ah ra which includes solitar wandering. ence we ight translate following the habits of the rhinoceros . .

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

care khaggavisakappo allow us to conclude that khaggavisa
ha e eant horn of the rhinoceros rather than rhinoceros .

ust originall

Interpretations in the Niddesa and commentaries

Secondl , Prof. or an s translation of khaggavisa as horn of the rhinoceros
relies es eciall , as he tells us, u on the Cullaniddesa and the later co
entaries, since these works una biguousl ex lain the co ound as a tatpurua 1 ,
1 . The Niddesa co
ents on khaggavisakappo like this
yath khaggassa nma visam ekam hoti adutiyam, evam eva paccekasambuddho takkappo tasadiso tappatibhgo. idd. 12

Which Prof. or an translates as follows

s the horn of the rhinoceros is single, solitar , so the pratyekabuddha is like that,
rese bling that, si ilar to that. 1 , 1

The Paramatthajotik, the later co

entar on the Sutta-nipta, ex lains
khaggavisakappo in a different wa to the Niddesa. t sa s ettha khaggavisam
nma khaggamigasigam P
5 , which or an translates ere the horn of
the rhinoceros eans the horn of the ani al called rhinoceros 1 , 1 .
This is of course clear e idence that the later co
entators also understood the
word khaggavisa as a tatpurua. The Paramatthajotik clearl does not anal se
khaggavisa as a bahuvrihi, since khagga in khaggamigasiga cannot be taken to
ean sword .
There is one exce tion to this co
entarial line of inter retation. The co entar on the Apadna uniquel ex lains khaggavisakappo as a bahuvrihi
a
20 khaggam visam yassa migassa soyam migo khaggaviso, the ani al whose
horn is a sword is the sword as horn , that is, the rhinoceros tr. or an
1 , 1 . This howe er is less of an exce tion than it first looks, since the
Apadna co
entar also re roduces the anal ses of khaggavisa as a tatpurua
gi en in the Niddesa and the Paramatthajotik.2 ts ex lanation of khaggavisa
as a bahuvrihi, taken in con unction with its re roductions of the ex lanation
of the co ound as a tatapurua, a be an atte t to ex lain how this word
khagga, which eans sword , can also ean rhinoceros ,2 for it goes on to sa
khaggavisakapp khaggavisamigasigasadis gaasagaikbhven ti attho
a 204 . Prof. or an translates Like the khaggavisa eans like the horn
of the ani al called khaggavisa, because of the absence of co
unication
with a grou 1 , 140 . The idea of the horn of the ani al called khaggavisa
is, howe er, er strange.
There is therefore no doubt that the Niddesa, the earliest co
entar on the
rhinoceros stan as, as well as later co
entaries, anal ses khaggavisa as a
tatpurua. There is ne ertheless roo for so e doubt about what exactl the
Niddesa intends with its anal sis of khaggavisa. Such doubt has been raised b
Prof. . . Wright. e notes that the Niddesa continues its co
ents on the refrain
eko care khaggavisakappo b ex laining the eaning of -kappa, and then con2 .
2 .

a .1 re roduces the co
entar on khaggavisakappo fro
.15 re roduces that at P
. 5.
owe this obser ation to argaret one.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

the Niddesa, and

1 4

Dhivan Thomas Jones

cluding eko adutiyo muttabandhano samm loke carati, single, solitar , he wanders
ro erl in the world, freed fro ties . With this in ind, Wright co
ents on
the gra
ar of the Niddesa assage as follows
t is an interesting attestation of the correlation of tat- in the osterior clause i.e.
in takkappo with the geniti e khaggassa as the logical sub ect of the rior clause,
for it is not ob ious how the horn could share with the indi idual the qualit
of lack of encu brance i.e. muttabandhano The iddesa can be atte ting to
co bine the text s rational eaning with its ex lanation of the word khaggavisa
rhinoceros as one horned khagga, hence he should be ini all encu bered
like the one horned rhinoceros 2001, 4 .

f Wright is correct, we should translate the Niddesa assage as

s the horn of the rhinoceros is single, solitar , so the pratyekabuddha is like that
one horned rhinoceros , rese bling it, si ilar to it.

owe er, it is ossible to ob ect that Prof. Wright is reading too uch into
the Niddesa here, and muttabandhano in the extract abo e refers onl to the paccekabuddha.
e ertheless, the Niddesa does continue to use khaggavisa in such a wa that
it is natural to su ose it refers to the ani al and not ust to its horn. n exa le
is its exegesis of the word nga in Sn 5 . The original stan a runs
ngo va ythni vivajjayitva
sajtakhandho padumi uro
yathbhirantam vihare arae
eko care khaggavisakappo

The Niddesa

4 co

Like an ele hant, forsaking the herds,

assi el built, s otted, huge,
ight li e as it wishes in the forest,
one should wander alone like the khaggavisa.

ents

yath so hatthingo ythni vivajjetv eko va araa-vana-majjhe ajjhoghetv carati

paccekasambuddho pi gaam vajjetv eko care khagga-visa-kappo araa-vanapatthni
Like that ele hant forsaking the herds like one who wanders alone ha ing
lunged into the iddle of the forest the pratyekabuddha also, abandoning the
grou
should wander the forest wildernesses alone like the khaggavisa.

t would see natural to su ose that the Niddesa is here co aring the
khaggavisa with the nga, and that it takes the conce t of ekacariy to have
a unitar sense. would therefore suggest that Prof. Wright s co
ent on the
eaning of the Niddesa exegesis of khaggavisakappo is not without so e contextual su ort, and that it is ossible that the Niddesa co ares the paccekabuddha
not to the horn of the rhinoceros, but to the solitar wandering ani al.
Likewise, there is indirect e idence that, in its co
entar on Sn 5 , the
Paramatthajotik also see s to understand khaggavisa to ean rhinoceros
and not its horn. o
enting on the stan a concerning the ele hant forsaking
the herds, quoted abo e, it sa s yath cesa ythni vivajjetv ekacariyasukhena
yathbhirantam viharam arae eko care khaggavisakappo P 10 and like that
ele hant , forsaking the herd because of the bliss of solitar wandering, li es as
it wishes in the forest, one should wander alone like the khaggavisa . t is clear

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

1 5

that the co
entar understands ekacariy to be a unitar conce t, which would
see to i l that it understands khaggavisa to ean the solitar wandering
horned rhinoceros and not ust its single horn, since the horn can be single but
cannot wander, as Prof. or an hi self acknowledges.
Therefore, while the Niddesa and the Paramatthajotik certainl take
khaggavisa as a tatpurua, it would a ear that the anal sis is at odds with the
co arison that the su ose the ex ression khaggavisakappo i lies. E en the
Apadna co
entar s discussion of khaggavisa, discussed abo e, ad its of this
sa e a biguit . When we read in or an s translation , Like the khaggavisa
eans like the horn of the ani al called khaggavisa, because of the absence
of co
unication with a grou , it ust be said that horns do not co
unicate with grou s, and the absence of such acti it would again suggest that
khaggavisa refers to the unco
unicati e ani al and not erel to its horn.2
To conclude this co lex discussion of the co
entarial anal sis of
khaggavisa while there is no doubt that the co
entaries treat the co ound as a tatpurua eaning horn of the rhinoceros , the also see to treat the
ex ression as if it refers to the ani al and not erel its horn. While the o inion
of the Niddesa certainl gi es us the earliest anal sis of khaggavisa, it does not
see to e entirel certain that e en the Niddesa su oses that the ex ression
refers to the horn of the rhinoceros and not to the ani al itself.

Conclusion
ha e resented e idence to cast doubt on Prof. or an s certaint that the
a biguous co ound khaggavisa is a tatpurua eaning horn of the rhinoceros .
The facts about rhinoceroses would suggest the er o osite e idence fro the
ain tradition is not co elling and the e idence of the earliest co
entar is not
altogether con incing. The co ound khaggavisa therefore re ains a biguous.
Richard Salo on, discussing this a biguit , concludes ositi el
the a biguit of khaggavisa a not be the result of a hilological roble
rather, the ex ression can be seen as a doubl eaningful si ile. Perha s it was so
intended b its original co oser, who, if this is correct, cle erl took ad antage
of the natural fact that the ndian rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis is alone eko in
two res ects as a solitar beast and as ha ing an unusual single horn. 2000, 1

Salo on, howe er, did not consider the ossibilit that khaggavisa is a single ex ression eaning rhinoceros , as suggested b L ders and Wright, based
on the work of ui er and a rhofer. While this ossibilit re ains a atter of
s eculation, if it were actuall the case, it would strengthen Salo on s ositi e
conclusion, since it need not be su osed that the original co oser relied on
a le a or un, which ight well ha e been obscure to the original audience. f
khaggavisa is a single ex ression eaning rhinoceros as well as a co ound
eaning horn of the rhinoceros , the creati e a biguit of the ex ression would
work without recourse to the so histication of unning. To return finall to the
question of translation, if the ex ression khaggavisa is a biguous, and was
intended erha s deliberatel to be so, it is therefore ost elegant, as well as
2 . ndeed, taking khaggavisa to
ean the ani al, we
ight refer to translate
gaasagaikbhven not as because of the absence of co
unication with a grou
oran , but as because of not being in contact with the crowd .

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Dhivan Thomas Jones

not incorrect, to translate it as rhinoceros . footnote indicating the a biguit

of the ex ression, and the consequent ossibilit of translating it horn of the
rhinoceros , would co lete the task of translation, to the satisfaction of both
hilologists and oets.
will conclude with a tentati e suggestion concerning the wider i lications
of understanding khaggavisa to ean rhinoceros as well as horn of the rhinoceros . f we were to su ose that khaggavisa eant onl horn of the rhinoceros , then the rhinoceros stan as as a whole would a ear to reco
end a
for of solitude co arable to the solitar state of the rhinoceros horn, that is,
an absolute for of solitude. f, howe er, we su ose that khaggavisa means
rhinoceros as well as horn of the rhinoceros , then the stan as reco
end
a for of solitude co arable to the solitar lifest le of the ani al. This for
of solitude is not absolute, but relati e, since rhinoceroses do in fact congregate
occasionall to wallow and gra e. f we were to understand the refrain eko care
khaggavisakappo to ean one should wander solitar as a rhinoceros horn , and
therefore the stan as to be reco
ending absolute solitude, then it would be difficult to reconcile such a reco
endation with the teaching of the Buddha in the
Nikyas, which reco
ends a onastic lifest le in ol ing artici ation in co unit life and s iritual friendshi kalya mittat . owe er, if we understand
the refrain to ean one should wander solitar as a rhinoceros , and the stan as
to be reco
ending a relati e solitude, unctuated b
eaningful interactions
with fellow renunciates, then the discourse no longer a ears to reco
end a
lifest le at odds with that which was taught b the Buddha. fter all, considering
that we ha e ersions of the Khaggavisa-sutta in P li, Sanskrit and ndh r languages, it was e identl o ular a ong onastic reciters, who did not of course
li e in solitude. This o ularit is best ex lained b su osing that those reciters understood the discourse to be reco
ending a for of solitude which the
the sel es could ractise, at least occasionall on retreat. e ertheless, it ust
be said that the attribution fro earl ti es of the rhinoceros stan as to the paccekabuddhas, e ident in the Mahvastu as well as in the Apadna and Claniddesa,
suggests that the solitar lifest le reco
ended b the stan as see ed to the
earl Buddhists not to be an ideal to which the could racticall as ire. owe er,
the to ic of the rece tion of the rhinoceros stan as in earl Buddhis deser es
a fuller account than is ossible here.

Acknowledgements
would like to thank argaret one, not ust for her acute co
ents on an
earlier ersion of this article, but for her atient hel fulness o er se eral ears
of reading P li with e. Thanks also to Br an Le an for his encouraging and
ex ert co
ents on the re ised ersion of this article. a also grateful to Prof.
or an for the gift of so e of his books, including an of those which include
discussion of khaggavisn.

Abbreviations
bh

Abhidhnappadipika Subh ti, 1 00

Apadna Lille , 1 25 2

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Like the Rhinoceros, or Like Its Horn?

a
B S
h
OP
a
il
u
W
idd
P
Sn
Sv
d
in

Apadna-atthakath (Apadna co
entar
odaku bura, 1 54
Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary Edgerton, 1 5
Dhammapada on in ber and or an, 1 4
Dictionary of Pli, vol.1 one, 2001
Jtaka with its co
entar
ausb ll, 1
Majjhima-nikya Trenckner
hal ers, 1
1 02
Milindapaho Trenckner, 1 0
Mahvastu Senart, 1
.
A Sanskrit-English Dictionary onier Willia s, 1
.
Cullaniddesa co
entar on Pryanavagga and Khaggavisa-sutta
Stede, 1 1
Paramatthajotik (Sutta-nipta co
entar S ith, 1 1 1
Sutta-nipta ndersen S ith, 1 1
Sumagalavilsini (Digha-nikya co
entar
Rh s a ids
ar enter, 1
1 2
Udna Steinthal, 1 5
Vinaya-pitaka Oldenberg, 1

Bibliography
llen, . . 1 5 . The Buddhas Philosophy. London eorge llen and nwin.
ndersen, . and W. Stede, ed. 1 1 . Sutta-nipta. London Pali Text Societ .
Baut e, . 1 5. The Proble of the ha ga Rhinoceros nicornis in the Light of
rchaeological inds and rt . n South Asian Archaeology 1983, ol. 1, edited b
anine Schots ans and auri io Taddei, 405 4 . a les stituto uni ersitario
orientale.
aillat, . 200 . leanings fro a co arati e reading of earl canonical Buddhist and
ain texts . Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 2 1 25 50.
ollins, S. 1 2. Re iew rticle Proble s with Pacceka buddhas . Religion 22 2 1 2 .
htt
dx.doi.org 10.101 004 21X 2 0022
one, . 2001. A Dictionary of Pli ol. . Oxford Pali Text Societ .
Edgerton, . 1 5 . Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary. ew a en, T ale ni ersit Press.
ausb ll, ., ed. 1
. The Jtaka together with its commentary. London Pali Text Societ .
odaku bura, ., ed. 1 54. Visuddhajanavilsini (Apadna-atthakath). London Pali Text
Societ .
acobi, . 1 . The Kalpastra of Bhadrabhu. Lei ig Brockhaus.
a ison, S. W. 1 . Rhinoceros Toes, anu .1 1 , and the e elo ent of the har a
S ste . Journal of the American Oriental Society 11 2 24 25 . htt
dx.doi.
org 10.2 0 05
a awickra a, . 1 .
ritical nal sis of the Sutta i ta art . Pali Buddhist Review
2 1 14 41 htt
ukabs.org.uk resources ournal archi es ali buddhist re iew
ones, . 1 5 . The Mahvastu ol. . London Lu ac.
lo enborg, R. 1 4. The Pacceka-buddha: a Buddhist Ascetic. Leiden Brill.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014

Dhivan Thomas Jones

ui er,

. 1 4 . Proto-Munda Words in Sanskrit.

sterda
oord ollandsche
itge ers aatscha i .
Laurie, W. ., E. . Lang and .P. ro es. 1 . Rhinoceros unicornis . Mammalian Species
211 1 . htt
dx.doi.org 10.2 0 504002
Leu ann, E. 1 . Das Aupaptika Stra erstes Upnga der Jaina. Lei ig.
Le an, Br an. 2012. What does the P li hrase ahitatta ean Thai International Journal
of Buddhist Studies 5 4.
Lille , ., ed. 1 25 1 2 . Apadna 2 ols, with consecuti e agination . London Pali Text
Societ .
L ders, . 1 40. Philologica Indica. ttingen andenhoeck Ru recht.
. 1 42. on indischen Tieren . Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlndischen Gesellschaft
2 1.
a rhofer, . 1 5 . Kurzgefates etymologisches Wrterbuch des Altindischen
ol. 1 .
eidelberg arl Winter.
. 1 2. Etymologisches Wrterbuch des Altindoarischen ol. 1 . eidelberg arl Winter.
onier Willia s, S. . 1 . A Sanskrit-English Dictionary new ed. . Oxford Oxford
ni ersit Press.
or an, . 1 . Pli Literature. Wiesbaden Otto arrassowit .
. 1 . Solitar as a rhinoceros horn . Buddhist Studies Review 1 2 1 142 htt
ukabs.org.uk resources ournal archi es buddhist studies re iew ols 1 22
. 2001. The Group of Discourses 2nd ed. . Oxford Pali Text Societ .
. 200 . A Philolological Approach to Buddhism. Lancaster Pali Text Societ .
ana onika. 1 55. Sutta-nipta. onstan
erlag hristiani.
Oldenberg, . ed. . 1
. Vinayapitaka. London Pali Text Societ .
Rh s a ids, T. and . E. ar enter, eds. 1
1 2. Sumagalavilsini (Dighanikyaatthakath)
ols . London Pali Text Societ .
Saddhatissa, . 1 5 . The Sutta-nipta. London ur on.
Salo on, R. 1 . Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhara. London The British Librar .
. 2000. A Gndhri Version of the Rhinoceros Stra. ni ersit of Washington Press.
Senart, . 1 . Le Mahvastu ol. . Paris.
S ith, ., ed. 1 1 1 . Paramatthajotik II (Sutta-nipta-atthakath)
ols . London Pali
Text Societ .
Stede, W., ed. 1 1 . Cullaniddesa. London Pali Text Societ .
Steinthal, P., ed. 1 5. Udna. London Pali Text Societ .
Subh ti, W., ed. 1 00. Abhidhnappadipik. olo bo Pali Text Societ .
Thanissaro. n.d. . Khaggavisana Sutta: A Rhinoceros. Retrie ed 01 Se 201 , fro
ccess
to nsight htt
www.accesstoinsight.org ti itaka kn sn sn .1.0 .than.ht l
Trenckner, . and R. hal ers, eds. 1
1 02. Majjhimanikya
ols . London Pali Text
Societ .
Trenckner, ., ed. 1 0. Milindapaho. London Pali Text Societ .
on in ber, O. and . R. or an, eds. 1 4. Dhammapada. Oxford Pali Text Societ .
Wiltshire, . . 1 0. Ascetic Figures before and in Early Buddhism. Berlin outon de ru ter.
htt
dx.doi.org 10.1515
110 5 5
Wright, . 2001. The andhari Prakrit ersion of the Rhinoceros S tra . Anusamdhn 1
1 15.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2014