This is a modern-English version of The Diamond Sutra (Chin-Kang-Ching) or Prajna-Paramita, originally written by Unknown. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

[Illustration]

THE
DIAMOND SUTRA

(CHIN-KANG-CHING)

(CHIN-KANG-CHING)

OR

OR

PRAJNA-PARAMITA

Prajna Paramita

TRANSLATED FROM THE CHINESE
WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

TRANSLATED FROM THE CHINESE
WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

BY

BY

WILLIAM GEMMELL

WILLIAM GEMMELL

金剛經

Diamond Sutra

LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRÜBNER & CO., LTD.
BROADWAY HOUSE, 68–74 CARTER LANE, E.C.
1912

LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRÜBNER & CO., LTD.
BROADWAY HOUSE, 68–74 CARTER LANE, E.C.
1912

THIS VOLUME
IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED TO
MY FRIEND
WILLIAM NIVEN, Esq.,
BY
THE AUTHOR.

THIS VOLUME
IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED TO
MY FRIEND
WILLIAM NIVEN, Esq.,
BY
THE AUTHOR.

PREFACE

This English version of The Diamond Sutra,1 translated from the Chinese text of Kumarajiva, owes its inception to successive conversations with a friend, profoundly interested in the interpretation of oriental systems of philosophy. During those conversations renderings into English were made of numerous passages from the works of Confucius, Mencius, and Lao-Tsz.

This English version of The Diamond Sutra,1 translated from the Chinese text of Kumarajiva, originated from ongoing discussions with a friend who was deeply interested in understanding Eastern philosophical systems. Throughout those conversations, we translated many excerpts from the writings of Confucius, Mencius, and Lao-Tzu into English.

Having surveyed briefly those fertile fields of thought, we passed, by a natural transition, into the delectable Buddhist realm. Some passages from the Chinese Sutras, comprising texts and annotations, were consecutively examined, and variously considered. Eventually it was suggested that The Diamond Sutra, perhaps one of the most metaphysical of the works ascribed to Buddha, be conveniently rendered into the English language.

Having briefly explored those rich ideas, we smoothly moved into the fascinating world of Buddhism. We looked at some excerpts from the Chinese Sutras, including texts and notes, and discussed them in different ways. Eventually, it was proposed that The Diamond Sutra, possibly one of the most philosophical works attributed to Buddha, be translated into English for easier access.

In order that the rather unfamiliar text might assume due intelligibility, parallel passages and numerous annotations were subjoined, as the pleasant work of translating proceeded. The idea of printing and publishing the text seemed to follow as a natural sequence.

To make the somewhat unfamiliar text easier to understand, parallel passages and many annotations were added as the enjoyable task of translating progressed. The idea of printing and publishing the text seemed like a natural next step.

Already there exist in the English language, renderings of The Diamond Sutra from the Sanscrit by Max Müller, and from the Chinese by Beal. This new version does not seek to enter into rivalry with those erudite works; and a possible apology which might readily be offered for the publication of this modest volume is, that the scholarly productions of Müller and Beal, in their present forms, are perhaps slightly inaccessible to the general English reader.

Already, there are translations of The Diamond Sutra from Sanskrit by Max Müller and from Chinese by Beal available in English. This new version isn’t trying to compete with those scholarly works; a reasonable excuse for publishing this simple volume could be that Müller’s and Beal’s scholarly writings, in their current forms, may be a bit hard for the average English reader to access.

It would appear that the peculiar charm of the Buddhist philosophy, and the remarkable purity of the Buddhist faith, are becoming more generally appreciated in Europe. Should this imperfect rendering of The Diamond Sutra, even in the faintest degree, confirm this just sense of appreciation, or prove a gentle incentive to further enquiry, then its unexpected publication may prove to be not entirely unjustified.

It seems that the unique appeal of Buddhist philosophy and the genuine purity of Buddhist faith are being more widely recognized in Europe. If this imperfect version of The Diamond Sutra even slightly validates this growing appreciation or encourages further exploration, then its surprising release might not be entirely unwarranted.

In recording our many obligations to those scholars whose works were frequently consulted, we also give expression to a hope that nothing of importance is omitted which ought to be gratefully acknowledged.

In acknowledging our many debts to the scholars whose work we often referenced, we also express a hope that we haven't overlooked anything significant that deserves to be recognized with gratitude.

It may also be permissible to express admiration of the piety, and appreciation of the friendship, of those learned monks in Central China, to whom we are everlastingly indebted for even a slight initiation into those inexhaustible truths, which are alike the heritage, and the glory, of the disciples of Buddha. Amongst those we should like to specify are Chang-Ming, the chief monk (Seng-Kwan) of Chen-Chou prefecture, Hu-Nan, and the aged and affectionate Chioh-Hsien.

It might also be acceptable to express our admiration for the devotion and appreciation for the friendship of those knowledgeable monks in Central China, to whom we are forever grateful for even a small introduction to those endless truths, which are both the heritage and the pride of Buddha's disciples. Among those we would like to mention are Chang-Ming, the head monk (Seng-Kwan) of Chen-Chou prefecture, Hu-Nan, and the wise and caring Chioh-Hsien.

WM. GEMMELL.

WM. GEMMELL.

Pollokshields, Glasgow,
  6th September 1912.

Pollokshields, Glasgow,
6th September 1912.

1 A learned Chinese commentator thus explained the rather striking title: “As the diamond exceeds all other precious gems in brilliance and indestructibility; so, also, does the wisdom of The Diamond Sutra transcend, and shall outlive, all other knowledge known to philosophy.”

1 A knowledgeable Chinese commentator explained the notable title this way: “Just as a diamond outshines all other precious gems in brilliance and durability, the wisdom of The Diamond Sutra surpasses and will endure beyond all other knowledge recognized in philosophy.”

INTRODUCTION

The Diamond Sutra is one of the most valued and widely read philosophical works in Buddhist literature. It is very popular amongst ardent Buddhists in China, and excepting the Lotus of the Good Law, and the Leng-Yen-Ching,1 perhaps no other Sutra ascribed to Buddha is regarded by the Chinese with so great esteem.

The Diamond Sutra is one of the most treasured and frequently read philosophical texts in Buddhist literature. It's especially popular among dedicated Buddhists in China, and aside from the Lotus of the Good Law and the Leng-Yen-Ching,1 perhaps no other sutra attributed to Buddha is held in such high regard by the Chinese.

In Japan, The Diamond Sutra appears to be perused extensively by what Max Müller2 termed the Shin-Gon sect, founded by Ko-Bo, a disciple of the renowned pilgrim Hiuen-Tsang, about the year 816 a.d.

In Japan, The Diamond Sutra seems to be widely studied by what Max Müller2 referred to as the Shin-Gon sect, established by Ko-Bo, a student of the famous traveler Hiuen-Tsang, around the year 816 AD

The Diamond Sutra was written originally in Sanscrit, and in process of time translated into the Tibetan, Chinese, Mongol, and Manchu languages. It represents the Mahayana school of Buddhist thought, a school founded by Nagarjuna,3 which flourished primarily at Tchakuka, and thereafter influenced appreciably a considerable part of the Buddhist Church.

The Diamond Sutra was originally written in Sanskrit and over time translated into Tibetan, Chinese, Mongolian, and Manchu. It represents the Mahayana school of Buddhist thought, a school founded by Nagarjuna, 3 which thrived mainly at Tchakuka and subsequently had a significant influence on a large part of the Buddhist Church.

In the year 1836, Csomo Körösi published an account of the Tibetan translation, which interesting document may be consulted in Vol. XX. of the Asiatic Researches. The Diamond Sutra is therein designated “The Sutra of Wonderful Effects,” a treatise by means of which Sakyamuni Buddha instructs Subhuti, one of his conspicuous disciples, in The Prajna-Paramita of transcendent wisdom.4

In 1836, Csomo Körösi published a report on the Tibetan translation, which can be found in Vol. XX of the Asiatic Researches. The Diamond Sutra is referred to as "The Sutra of Wonderful Effects," a text where Sakyamuni Buddha teaches Subhuti, one of his prominent disciples, about The Prajna-Paramita of transcendent wisdom.4

To Kumarajiva,5 a native of Kashmir, who gained distinction as a monk of the later Chin dynasty6 (a.d. 384–417), is conceded the honour of having first translated The Diamond Sutra into the Chinese language. Of subsequent Chinese translations, perhaps the most noteworthy is the text ascribed to the scholarly Hiuen-Tsang, and completed about the middle of the seventh century.7

To Kumarajiva, a native of Kashmir, who became well-known as a monk during the later Chin dynasty (a.d. 384–417), is credited with being the first to translate The Diamond Sutra into Chinese. Among later Chinese translations, the one attributed to the learned Hiuen-Tsang, completed around the middle of the seventh century, is probably the most significant.

A rendering into English of Kumarajiva’s Chinese translation was accomplished by the Rev. S. Beal, and published in The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1864–65. The text and German translation of the Tibetan version were published in 1873 by M. Schmidt, in The Mémoires de l’Académie St Pétersbourg. The Mongolian translation was presented by the Baron de Constadt to the library of the Institut de France. The Manchu translation is in the possession of M. de Harlez, who, with the aid of the Tibetan, Manchu, and Chinese versions, published a French translation of the Sanscrit text of The Diamond Sutra in the Journal Asiatique, 1892.8 It has been observed9 that “at first sight it may seem as if this metaphysical treatise hardly deserved the world-wide reputation which it has attained.” Regarding this descriptive “world-wide reputation,” devout Buddhists might suggest in extenuation, that throughout many centuries, the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra produced in countless minds a “conscious blessedness of perfect peace.” This “spiritual wisdom” also appeared to be a “strong incentive to holiness,” and a grateful inspiration to those who had entered “the path which leads to Nirvana.” In a few renowned monasteries of Central China, our Buddhist friends frequently affirmed that, by contemplating the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra, the mind would inevitably become “transfused with the mellow light of imperishable truth.”

A translation into English of Kumarajiva’s Chinese version was done by Rev. S. Beal and published in The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1864–65. The text and German translation of the Tibetan version were published in 1873 by M. Schmidt in The Mémoires de l’Académie St Pétersbourg. The Mongolian translation was donated by Baron de Constadt to the library of the Institut de France. The Manchu translation is held by M. de Harlez, who, with the help of the Tibetan, Manchu, and Chinese versions, published a French translation of the Sanskrit text of The Diamond Sutra in the Journal Asiatique, 1892.8 It has been noted9 that “at first glance it might seem as though this metaphysical treatise hardly deserves the global reputation it has gained.” Concerning this so-called “global reputation,” devout Buddhists might argue that for centuries, the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra has cultivated in countless minds a “conscious blessedness of perfect peace.” This “spiritual wisdom” also appeared to be a “strong incentive to holiness” and a thankful inspiration for those who had embarked on “the path which leads to Nirvana.” In several famous monasteries in Central China, our Buddhist friends often stated that by contemplating the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra, the mind would inevitably become “filled with the warm light of everlasting truth.”

In the preface to The Vagrakkhedika, Max Müller made a critical observation regarding certain peculiarities of “‘style’ adopted in this treatise by the Buddhist philosophers who wished to convince their hearers of the truth of their philosophy.” From the Sanscrit text, perhaps it is difficult to realise fully what Asvaghocha10 described as the “persuasiveness of Buddha’s eloquence”;11 yet we may quite appreciate the academic instinct of Kumarajiva, whose work on The Diamond Sutra bears evidence of a laudable endeavour to produce a classic, which in the Chinese language is almost entirely beyond reproach.

In the preface to The Vagrakkhedika, Max Müller made an important point about some unique aspects of the “‘style’ used in this text by Buddhist philosophers who wanted to persuade their audience of the truth of their philosophy.” From the Sanskrit text, it might be challenging to fully grasp what Asvaghocha10 referred to as the “persuasiveness of Buddha’s eloquence”;11 however, we can appreciate the scholarly vision of Kumarajiva, whose work on The Diamond Sutra shows a commendable effort to create a classic that is almost entirely flawless in the Chinese language.

In all our aspirations to translate or to interpret Buddhist texts, perhaps it might prove advantageous to bear in mind the significant words incorporated in the Light of Asia:—

In all our efforts to translate or interpret Buddhist texts, it might be helpful to keep in mind the important words found in the Light of Asia:—

And time hath blurred their script and ancient sense,
 Which once was new and mighty, moving all.

Max Müller stated12 that The Diamond Sutra represents a treatise on “metaphysical agnosticism,” and he excused its “endless repetition of the same process of reasoning” on the assumption, that the subject-matter of the Sutra was probably “perfectly familiar to children and ignorant persons.”

Max Müller stated12 that The Diamond Sutra represents a discussion on “metaphysical agnosticism,” and he justified its “endless repetition of the same process of reasoning” on the belief that the subject of the Sutra was likely “perfectly familiar to children and unaware individuals.”

By referring to our Chinese text, we are led to suppose that The Diamond Sutra was “delivered expressly for those who had entered the Path which leads to Nirvana,” and for those who are “attaining to the ultimate plane of Buddhic thought.” Our Chinese annotators also appear to be unanimous in suggesting, that the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra is understood only in its rudimentary forms, by those of immature or uninitiated mind.

By looking at our Chinese text, we can assume that The Diamond Sutra was “delivered specifically for those who have started on the Path to Nirvana,” and for those who are “reaching the highest level of Buddhic thought.” Our Chinese commentators also seem to agree that the “spiritual wisdom” of The Diamond Sutra is only grasped in its basic forms by those who have immature or untrained minds.

Concerning what has been termed the “agnosticism” of The Diamond Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha, when he admissibly delivered the text, indicated clearly that there is a sense in which the “highest perfect knowledge”13 may be referred to as “unknown.” Dante appears to have had a similar difficulty regarding “knowledge” and “power” wherewith to express the higher forms of spiritual experience; and the following lines, constituting the opening stanzas of The Paradiso, may serve to elucidate the Buddhist position, and make it perhaps more intelligible to those who are as yet unfamiliar with its peculiar modes of thought:—

Concerning what has been called the “agnosticism” of The Diamond Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha, when he delivered the text, clearly indicated that there is a way in which “highest perfect knowledge” 13 can be referred to as “unknown.” Dante seems to have faced a similar challenge with “knowledge” and “power” in articulating the higher forms of spiritual experience; and the following lines, which are the opening stanzas of The Paradiso, may help clarify the Buddhist perspective and make it perhaps more understandable to those who are not yet familiar with its unique ways of thinking:—

La gloria di colui che tutto move
 Per l’universo penetra, e risplende
 In una parte più, e meno altrove.
Nel ciel che più della sua luce prende
 Fu’io; e vidi cose che ridire
 Nè sa nè può qual di lassù discende;
Perchè, appressando sè al suo disire,
 Nostro intelletto14 si profonda tanto,
 Che retro la memoria non può ire.15

In order to appreciate fully the philosophy of The Diamond Sutra, doubtless it is necessary to interpret aright the meaning of the Buddhist terminology. In this connection, the Sanscrit Dharma—usually rendered into Chinese by “Fah,” and into English by “Law”—appears to merit our immediate attention.

To fully appreciate the philosophy of The Diamond Sutra, it's essential to correctly interpret the meaning of Buddhist terminology. In this context, the Sanskrit Dharma—typically translated into Chinese as “Fah” and into English as “Law”—deserves our immediate attention.

Max Müller, with his ample knowledge, stated that Dharma, “in the ordinary Buddhist phraseology, may be correctly rendered by Law; and thus the whole teaching of Buddha is named Saddharma—‘The Good Law.’ What The Diamond Sutra wishes to teach is that all objects, differing one from the other by their Dharmas, are illusive, or as we should say, phenomenal and subjective, that they are, in fact, of our own making, the products of our own mind.” With those noteworthy observations, there is embodied in the preface to The Vagrakkhedika, the following interesting suggestion, that the Greek εῖδος—whatever is seen, form, shape, figure—appears to be the equivalent of the Sanscrit Dharma.

Max Müller, with his extensive knowledge, said that Dharma, “in common Buddhist language, can be accurately translated as Law; and so the entire teaching of Buddha is called Saddharma—‘The Good Law.’ What The Diamond Sutra seeks to convey is that all objects, which differ from one another by their Dharmas, are illusions, or as we would say, phenomenal and subjective, meaning they are, in reality, products of our own minds.” In those insightful comments, there is a compelling idea presented in the preface to The Vagrakkhedika, suggesting that the Greek εῖδος—everything that is seen, form, shape, figure—seems to be the equivalent of the Sanskrit Dharma.

Spence Hardy, a distinguished writer on Buddhism, made a suggestion of perhaps equal importance, with reference to the correct interpretation of Dharma. In his well-known volume Eastern Monachism, there occurs the following relevant passage: “The second of the three great treasures is called Dhammo, or in Singhalese Dharmma. This word has various meanings, but is here to be understood in the sense of truth.”

Spence Hardy, a respected writer on Buddhism, made a suggestion that’s possibly just as important regarding the proper interpretation of Dharma. In his famous book Eastern Monachism, he includes the following relevant passage: “The second of the three great treasures is called Dhammo, or in Singhalese Dharmma. This word has several meanings, but here it should be understood as truth.”

Rhys Davids in his useful volume Buddhism, indicated that “Dharma (Pali Dhamma) is not law, but that which underlies and includes the law—a word often most difficult to translate, but best rendered here by Truth and Righteousness.”16

Rhys Davids, in his helpful book Buddhism, pointed out that “Dharma (Pali Dhamma) isn’t just law, but what supports and encompasses the law—a term that’s often tricky to translate, but can best be understood here as Truth and Righteousness.”16

Perhaps it may be opportune to remark, that had Kumarajiva regarded “form,” “truth,” or “righteousness,” as expressing adequately the Sanscrit Dharma, these familiar terms being obviously at his command, might have been utilised at pleasure. Like the cultured Asvaghocha, Kumarajiva may have regarded the “nature” of the Law as “co-extensive with the illimitable ocean of being”;17 and within that ample compass, perhaps he thought there might synthetically be included those beautifully-defined concepts “form,” “truth,” and “righteousness.”

Perhaps it's worth noting that if Kumarajiva had seen "form," "truth," or "righteousness" as accurately representing the Sanskrit Dharma—terms he clearly had access to—he could have used them freely. Like the educated Asvaghocha, Kumarajiva might have viewed the "nature" of the Law as "co-extensive with the limitless ocean of being";17 and within that broad scope, he may have believed those well-defined ideas of "form," "truth," and "righteousness" could all be included synthetically.

Chinese annotators of The Diamond Sutra seldom criticise adversely its classic terminology, or suggest many inapplicable alternative renderings. They appear to have surveyed the realm of “spiritual wisdom” enunciated by Sakyamuni Buddha, and thereafter to have become greatly impressed by the thought that, in its Essence, it might possibly be inexhaustible. This may in part explain their motive for incorporating in the commentary a familiar passage from Lao-Tsz, “Infinite truth is inexpressible”18—which in a measure illustrates the appreciable difficulty of stating, in exact terms of philosophy, the equivalent of the Buddhic “Law.”

Chinese annotators of The Diamond Sutra rarely criticize its classic terminology or propose many unsuitable alternative translations. They seem to have explored the concept of “spiritual wisdom” expressed by Sakyamuni Buddha and then became deeply impressed by the idea that, in its Essence, it might be truly unlimited. This could partly explain their reason for including in the commentary a well-known passage from Lao-Tsz, “Infinite truth is inexpressible”18—which somewhat illustrates the significant challenge of articulating, in precise philosophical terms, the equivalent of the Buddhic “Law.”

In our intercourse with Buddhist monks, we heard the rather engaging suggestion, that the familiar Christian phrase, “the law of the spirit of life,” contains a spiritual concept which appears to approximate closely to the idea of the “Law” of Buddha. Those monks seemed to believe that the “Law”19 enters quietly and operates imperceptibly within every natural and spiritual sphere; and that they have at least a semblance of reason for their belief, the following exquisite lines clearly indicate:—

In our conversations with Buddhist monks, we heard the interesting suggestion that the well-known Christian phrase, “the law of the spirit of life,” embodies a spiritual concept that closely resembles the idea of the “Law” of Buddha. Those monks seemed to think that the “Law”19 quietly enters and operates unnoticed in every natural and spiritual realm; and the following beautiful lines clearly indicate they have some justification for their belief:—

This is its touch upon the blossomed rose,
 The fashion of its hand shaped lotus-leaves.
That is its painting on the glorious clouds,
 And these its emeralds on the peacock’s train.
Out of the dark it wrought the heart of man,
 Out of dull shells the pheasant’s pencilled neck.
It spreadeth forth for flight the eagle’s wings
 What time she beareth home her prey.
This is its work upon the things ye see
 The unseen things are more; men’s hearts and minds,
 The thoughts of peoples and their ways and wills,
 Those, too, the great Law binds.”20

As we consider the manifold operations of this “Law which moves to righteousness,” perhaps we may gradually appreciate the dignified mind of Sakyamuni, when he addressed Subhuti, saying: “What is usually referred to as the ‘Law’ of Buddha, is not in reality a ‘Law’ attributive to Buddha, it is merely termed the ‘Law’ of Buddha.”21

As we think about the various workings of this "Law that leads to righteousness," we might slowly come to understand the noble perspective of Sakyamuni when he spoke to Subhuti, saying: "What people commonly call the 'Law' of Buddha is not truly a 'Law' that belongs to Buddha; it's just called the 'Law' of Buddha."21

The Sanscrit term Samgna,22 usually rendered into Chinese by “Ming” and into English by “Name,” seems to deserve our further attention. Like the term Dharma, a clear knowledge of “Samgna” is indispensable for a correct understanding of our text.

The Sanskrit term Samgna, 22 typically translated into Chinese as “Ming” and into English as “Name,” warrants our closer examination. Similar to the term Dharma, a solid understanding of “Samgna” is essential for accurately grasping our text.

In one of the opening passages of The Diamond Sutra, we find that Sakyamuni Buddha, in reply to an enquiry by Subhuti, suggests that by means of this “wisdom,” enlightened disciples shall be enabled to bring into subjection every inordinate desire.

In one of the opening passages of The Diamond Sutra, we find that Sakyamuni Buddha, in response to a question from Subhuti, suggests that through this “wisdom,” enlightened disciples will be able to control every excessive desire.

Every species of life, whether hatched in the egg, formed in the womb, evolved from spawn, produced by metamorphosis, with or without form or intelligence, possessing or devoid of natural instinct—from these changeful conditions of being I command you to seek deliverance in the transcendental concept of Nirvana. Thus you shall obtain deliverance from the idea of an immeasurable, innumerable, and illimitable world of sentient life; but, in reality there is no idea of a world of sentient life from which to obtain deliverance. And why? Because, in the mind of an enlightened disciple, there have ceased to exist such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality.

Every form of life, whether born from an egg, developed in the womb, evolved from larvae, transformed through metamorphosis, with or without shape or intelligence, and having or lacking natural instincts—from these ever-changing states of existence, I urge you to seek liberation in the profound idea of Nirvana. This way, you will find freedom from the concept of an endless, countless, and boundless world of living beings; however, in truth, there is no concept of a world of sentient life from which to find liberation. And why is that? Because, in the mind of an enlightened follower, the arbitrary notions of things like entity, being, living being, or personality have ceased to exist.

A similar process of reasoning appears to permeate the whole of The Diamond Sutra, and whether appertaining to a living being,23 a virtue,24 a condition of mind,25 a Buddhist kingdom,26 or a personal Buddha,27 there is implied in each concept a spiritual essence, only imperfectly described, if not entirely overlooked, in the ordinary use of each particular name. Shakespeare enquired, “What’s in a name?” and in a thought inspired by the rose and its delicious fragrance, suggested with Buddha, that there is little, or nothing, in a name which explains the real nature of an object. Even a “particle of dust” seems, to the Buddhist mind, to embody in its composition a subtle spiritual element, entirely “inscrutable,” and quite “incomprehensible.”

A similar way of thinking seems to run throughout The Diamond Sutra, whether it relates to a living being, 23 a virtue, 24 a state of mind, 25 a Buddhist realm, 26 or an individual Buddha, 27 each concept carries an implied spiritual essence that is only partially explained, if at all, in the everyday use of each specific term. Shakespeare asked, “What’s in a name?” and drawing inspiration from the rose and its lovely scent, suggested along with Buddha that there is little or nothing in a name that reveals the true nature of an object. Even a “particle of dust” seems, to a Buddhist perspective, to contain a subtle spiritual element that is completely “inscrutable” and entirely “incomprehensible.”

According to the Mahayana School of Buddhist thought, objects and their respective names are alike unreal and illusory. Objects and names, in the abstract, represent merely the products of untutored and unenlightened minds. Nothing is real, in the sense that it is permanent. Everything appears to be subject to irrevocable Laws of change and decay. As the things which we see are temporal, it is essential for our intellectual development, that we focus our thoughts upon the things which are Unseen and Eternal. Many minds are susceptible of deception by the fleeting phenomena of life; but behind these phenomena there is an essential element, entirely spiritual,28 uninfluenced by arbitrary ideas or changeful conditions, which “pervades all things,” and is “pure” and “unchanging.”

According to the Mahayana School of Buddhist thought, objects and their names are similarly unreal and illusory. In essence, objects and names are just products of untrained and unenlightened minds. Nothing is real in the sense of being permanent. Everything seems to be subject to unstoppable laws of change and decay. Since the things we see are temporary, it’s crucial for our intellectual growth to focus on the unseen and eternal. Many minds can be easily misled by the passing phenomena of life; however, behind these phenomena is an essential element that is purely spiritual, uninfluenced by arbitrary ideas or changing conditions, which “pervades all things,” and is “pure” and “unchanging.”

Perhaps it might prove of interest to quote the following outline of Mahayana doctrine29 prepared by Mr S. Kuroda, which was approved by several influential Buddhist communions in Japan, “and published with authority at Tokyo in 1893”:—

Perhaps it could be interesting to quote the following outline of Mahayana doctrine29 prepared by Mr. S. Kuroda, which was endorsed by several influential Buddhist communities in Japan, “and published with authority in Tokyo in 1893”:—

“All things that are produced by causes and conditions are inevitably destined to extinction. There is nothing that has any reality; when conditions come things begin to appear, when conditions cease these things likewise cease to exist. Like the foam of the water, like the lightning flash,30 and like the floating, swiftly vanishing clouds, they are only of momentary duration. As all things have no constant nature of their own, so there is no actuality in pure and impure, rough and fine, large and small, far and near, knowable and unknowable, etc. On this account it is sometimes said that all things are nothing. The apparent phenomena around us are, however, produced by mental operations within us, and thus distinctions are established....”

“All things that come into being due to causes and conditions are inevitably bound to fade away. There’s nothing that has true existence; when conditions are met, things start to manifest, and when those conditions disappear, those things also cease to be. Like the foam on the water, like a flash of lightning, and like clouds that quickly drift away, they exist only for a brief moment. Since all things lack a permanent nature, there’s no real difference between pure and impure, coarse and fine, big and small, far and near, knowable and unknowable, etc. For this reason, it’s sometimes said that all things are nothing. The phenomena we see around us, however, are created by our own mental processes, and that’s how distinctions are formed....”

“All things are included under subject and object. The subject is an entity in which mental operations are awakened whenever there are objects, while the object consists of all things, visible and invisible, knowable and unknowable, etc. The subject is not something that occupies some space in the body alone, nor does the object exist outside of the subject....”31

“All things fall under the categories of subject and object. The subject is a being where mental processes are triggered whenever there are objects present, while the object encompasses everything, both seen and unseen, knowable and unknowable, and so on. The subject isn't just something that exists in a physical space within the body, nor does the object exist outside of the subject....”31

“The various phenomena which appear as subjects and objects are divided into two kinds:—the perceptible and knowable, the imperceptible and unknowable.... Now, what are the imperceptible and unknowable phenomena?”

“The different phenomena that show up as subjects and objects are divided into two types: the perceptible and knowable, and the imperceptible and unknowable.... So, what are the imperceptible and unknowable phenomena?”

“Through the influence of habitual delusions, boundless worlds, innumerable varieties of things spring up in the mind. This boundless universe and these subtle ideas are not perceptible and knowable;32 only Bodhisattvas33 believe, understand, and become perfectly convinced of these through the contemplation of Vidyamatara34 (all things are nothing but phenomena in mind); hence they are called imperceptible and unknowable. What are the perceptible and knowable phenomena?”

“Due to the influence of habitual misconceptions, endless worlds and countless varieties of things arise in the mind. This vast universe and these subtle ideas are not perceivable or understandable;32 only Bodhisattvas33 believe, comprehend, and become fully convinced of these through the reflection on Vidyamatara34 (all things are merely phenomena in the mind); therefore, they are referred to as imperceptible and unknowable. What are the perceivable and knowable phenomena?”

“Not knowing that these imperceptible and unknowable phenomena are the productions of their own minds, men from their habitual delusions invest them with an existence outside of mind, as perceptible mental phenomena, as things visible, audible, etc. These phenomena are called perceptible and knowable.”

“Without realizing that these subtle and unknowable phenomena come from their own minds, people, caught in their usual misunderstandings, attribute an existence to them outside of their minds, perceiving them as tangible mental phenomena, as things that can be seen, heard, and so on. These phenomena are referred to as perceivable and knowable.”

“Though there are thus two kinds, perceptible and imperceptible phenomena, they occur upon the same things, and are inseparably bound together even in the smallest particle. Their difference in appearance is caused only by differences, both in mental phenomena and in the depth of conviction. Those who know only the perceptible things, without knowing the imperceptible, are called the unenlightened by Buddha....”

“Even though there are two types of phenomena—those we can perceive and those we can't—they happen to the same things and are tightly linked even in the tiniest particle. The difference in how they appear is only due to differences in our thoughts and levels of belief. Buddha refers to those who only understand what they can perceive, without grasping what is imperceptible, as the unenlightened....”

“In contradistinction to the fallacious phenomena, there is the true Essence of Mind. Underlying the phenomena of mind, there is an unchanging principle which we call essence of mind.... The essence of mind is the entity without ideas and without phenomena, and is always the same. It pervades all things, and is pure and unchanging.... The essence and the phenomena of mind are inseparable; and as the former is all-pervading and ever-existing, so the phenomena occur everywhere and continually, wherever suitable conditions accompany it. Thus the perceptible and imperceptible phenomena are manifestations of the essence of mind that, according to the number and nature of conditions, develop without restraint. All things in the universe, therefore, are mind itself.”

“In contrast to misleading appearances, there is the true Essence of Mind. Beneath the occurrences of the mind lies an unchanging principle that we refer to as the essence of mind.... The essence of mind is the entity without thoughts and without occurrences, and it remains constant. It exists in everything and is pure and unchanging.... The essence and the phenomena of the mind are intertwined; just as the former is all-pervasive and always existing, so the phenomena take place everywhere and continuously, wherever appropriate conditions are present. Therefore, both observable and unobservable phenomena are expressions of the essence of mind that, depending on the number and nature of conditions, unfold freely. Consequently, everything in the universe is, in essence, mind itself.”

“By this we do not mean that all things combine into a mental unity called mind, nor that all things are emanations from it, but that, without changing their places or appearance, they are mind itself everywhere. Buddha saw this truth and said that the whole universe was his own. Hence it is clear that where the essence of mind is found, and the necessary conditions accompany it, the phenomena of mind never fail to appear.... Though there is a distinction between the essence and the phenomena of mind, yet they are nothing but one and the same substance, that is, mind. So we say that there exists nothing but mind. Though both the world of the pure and impure, and the generation of all things, are very wide and deep, yet they owe their existence to our mind.”

“By this, we don’t mean that everything combines into a mental unity called mind, or that everything comes from it, but that, without changing their locations or appearances, they are mind itself everywhere. Buddha recognized this truth and stated that the entire universe was his own. Therefore, it’s clear that where the essence of mind is present, and the necessary conditions are met, the phenomena of mind will always appear.... Although there is a distinction between the essence and the phenomena of mind, they are ultimately just one and the same substance, which is mind. So we say that nothing exists except mind. Though both the pure and impure worlds, and the creation of all things, are vast and profound, they owe their existence to our mind.”

Perhaps we might appropriately indicate that however interesting, or even fascinating, may be the nice distinction between mind and essence of mind, in relation to phenomena, so far as we are aware, the distinction may be implied, but is never precisely stated, in the text of The Diamond Sutra. Nevertheless, we may readily appreciate the subtle intellectual movement, which endeavours to distinguish clearly between the phenomena of mind, and an unchanging principle underlying it, capable of being defined as Essence of Mind. Yet we have a notion that our Japanese Buddhist friends intuitively find in their beautiful concept, infinitely more of a purely spiritual nature, than they attempt to express by the mere metaphysical term. Doubtless they have frequently applied to it the incisive logic of Sakyamuni Buddha, and found simultaneously, that what is ordinarily referred to as “essence of mind,” is not in reality “essence of mind,” it is merely termed “essence of mind.”35

Perhaps we should point out that, while the distinction between mind and essence of mind in relation to phenomena is interesting, it seems that this distinction is implied but never clearly stated in the text of The Diamond Sutra. Still, we can appreciate the subtle intellectual effort to differentiate between the phenomena of mind and a unchanging principle behind it, which can be defined as Essence of Mind. However, we feel that our Japanese Buddhist friends intuitively see much more in their beautiful concept that's purely spiritual than what they convey with the simple metaphysical term. They likely apply the sharp logic of Sakyamuni Buddha and discover that what is usually called “essence of mind” isn’t actually “essence of mind”; it’s just labeled as “essence of mind.”35

The term Buddha, as defined in The Diamond Sutra, seems to merit a brief consideration. In fulfilment of our present purpose, it seems almost unnecessary to enter into questions regarding the historical Buddha, or to the authenticity of Sutras ascribed to his genius. Therefore, without indicating any particular reservation, we meantime accept the traditional statements that the Buddha of The Diamond Sutra was the son of Suddhodana, the husband of Yasodhara, and the father of Rahula. But, incorporated with the text, there is embodied in the familiar term Buddha, a lofty spiritual concept, which seems to place it in a category where fresh interest is imparted to the question of its interpretation.

The term Buddha, as described in The Diamond Sutra, deserves a brief look. For our current purpose, it’s almost unnecessary to delve into issues surrounding the historical Buddha or the authenticity of the Sutras attributed to him. So, for now, we’ll accept the traditional statements that the Buddha of The Diamond Sutra was the son of Suddhodana, the husband of Yasodhara, and the father of Rahula. However, within the text, the term Buddha carries a profound spiritual meaning that adds a new level of interest to the question of its interpretation.

Concluding the twenty-sixth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, wherein “the spiritual36 body is entirely differentiated from external phenomena” Sakyamuni, in reply to an enquiry regarding the possibility of perceiving “Buddha” by means of his bodily distinctions, delivered the following remarkable Gatha37:—

Concluding the twenty-sixth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, where “the spiritual36 body is completely separate from external experiences,” Sakyamuni, in response to a question about whether one can perceive “Buddha” through his physical characteristics, shared the following noteworthy Gatha37:—

I am not to be perceived by means of any visible form,
Nor sought after by means of any audible sound;
Whosoever walks in the way of iniquity,
Cannot perceive the blessedness of the Lord Buddha.38

In the twenty-ninth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, wherein is expounded “the majesty of the absolute,” Sakyamuni declared that a disciple who affirms that “Buddha” comes or goes, obviously has not understood the meaning of his instruction. Because, as we learn from our text, the idea “Buddha” implies neither coming from anywhere, nor going to anywhere. This purely spiritual concept of Buddha seems to have seized the imagination, and inspired the writer of the Yuen-Chioh Sutra,39 to whom are ascribed the following significant lines:—

In the twenty-ninth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, which explains “the greatness of the ultimate reality,” Sakyamuni stated that a disciple who claims that “Buddha” comes or goes clearly hasn’t grasped the meaning of his teachings. As we learn from our text, the concept of “Buddha” does not imply coming from or going to any place. This purely spiritual idea of Buddha seems to have captivated the imagination and inspired the author of the Yuen-Chioh Sutra, 39 who is credited with the following important lines:—

Like drifting clouds, like the waning moon, like ships that sail the ocean, like shores that are washed away—these are symbolic of endless change. But the blessed Buddha, in his essential, absolute nature, is changeless and everlasting.

Like drifting clouds, like the fading moon, like ships sailing the ocean, like shores that get eroded—these symbolize endless change. But the blessed Buddha, in his fundamental, true nature, is unchanging and eternal.

Again, in the seventeenth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, it is declared that in the word “Buddha,” every Law is intelligibly comprehended.40 To Western minds, it might become necessary to resist a natural inclination to ascribe to those elements of thought, an influence which had its inception in a nation other than the Indian.41 But, lest we should appear to detract from the native glory of Sakyamuni Buddha, perhaps it might prove opportune to remark, that there is sufficient evidence in the ancient Vedic hymns, Upanishads, etc., to indicate clearly the probable starting-points in the evolution of his thought. It seems to be to the everlasting honour of some early Indian philosophers, that they endeavoured carefully to combine in an abstract spiritual unity, all the essential elements usually comprehended under the term “Divinity.”42 This may in a manner explain why the devout Buddhist, possessing a natural mental tendency—induced by persistent Hindoo influence—is enabled to regard “Buddha”43 in a purely spiritual sense, as the One44 in whom all Laws are comprehended and become perfectly intelligible.

Again, in the seventeenth chapter of The Diamond Sutra, it states that in the word “Buddha,” every Law is clearly understood.40 For Westerners, it may be necessary to resist the urge to attribute these ideas to influences that began in a country other than India.41 However, to avoid downplaying the inherent greatness of Sakyamuni Buddha, it might be worth noting that there is ample evidence in the ancient Vedic hymns, Upanishads, etc., suggesting the probable starting points in the development of his ideas. It seems to be to the lasting credit of some early Indian philosophers that they carefully tried to unify all essential elements typically described by the term “Divinity” in an abstract spiritual way.42 This could explain why a devoted Buddhist, influenced by ongoing Hindu traditions, can see “Buddha”43 in a purely spiritual light, as the One44 in whom all Laws are understood and become fully clear.

In The Diamond Sutra it may be observed that incidental reference is made by Sakyamuni Buddha to the doctrines of Karma and Reincarnation. It seems to be an old truth to which expression is given in the Epistle to the Galatians: “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”45

In The Diamond Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha casually mentions the concepts of Karma and Reincarnation. This seems to align with an ancient truth expressed in the Epistle to the Galatians: “Whatever a person sows, that will they also reap. For the one who sows to their flesh will reap corruption from the flesh; but the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.”45

To the Buddhist mind, Karma is indissolubly associated with “the Law which moves to Righteousness.” Thus it is accustomed to view the traditional Christian idea of “justification by Faith,” rather as a devoutly-conceived theory, than as a reasonably-constructed truth.

To the Buddhist perspective, Karma is closely tied to “the Law that leads to Righteousness.” Therefore, it tends to see the traditional Christian concept of “justification by Faith” more as a thoughtfully imagined theory than as a logically established truth.

Occasionally we have heard a gentle affirmation, that the Western mind seems unwittingly inclined to confound the doctrine of Karma with a concept which is almost suggestive of Fatalism. If Karma contains even a germ of thought which corresponds to “blind fatalism,” the idea is perhaps quite felicitously expressed in the following sentences, culled from a valued letter written by an aged Chinese monk: “Karma is a universal Law which gently binds us to the rhythmic cycle of evolving life. It operates so quietly and imperceptibly that we scarcely are conscious of its presence. The absolute truth of Karma greatly attracts our minds, which approve naturally of its consummate justice and perfect righteousness.”

Sometimes we’ve heard a gentle acknowledgment that the Western mindset unintentionally mixes up the concept of Karma with something that closely resembles Fatalism. If Karma includes even a hint of “blind fatalism,” that idea is perhaps nicely captured in the following lines from a cherished letter by an elderly Chinese monk: “Karma is a universal Law that gently ties us to the rhythmic cycle of evolving life. It works so quietly and subtly that we barely notice it. The profound truth of Karma deeply engages our minds, which naturally appreciate its complete justice and perfect righteousness.”

Those ideas of “consummate justice” and “perfect righteousness,” seem to be faithfully portrayed in the following quotation, gleaned from The Light of Asia:—

Those concepts of “ultimate justice” and “perfect fairness” seem to be accurately reflected in the following quote taken from The Light of Asia:—

What hath been bringeth what shall be, and is,
 Worse—better—last for first and first for last:
 The Angels in the Heavens of Gladness reap
 Fruits of a holy past.

It would therefore appear that Karma may be regarded generally, as comprising the constituent moral elements derived consecutively from the thoughts, words, and actions of an interminable life’s cycle. Perhaps it is in this connection that Chinese Buddhists frequently assume Karma to resemble “a moral fibre, indissolubly entwined in sentient life.” It may be believed to recede far into the past, and to extend indefinitely into the future.

It seems that Karma can generally be understood as the moral components that come from the continuous cycle of thoughts, words, and actions throughout countless lives. This is likely why Chinese Buddhists often think of Karma as “a moral fiber, tightly woven into the fabric of sentient life.” It is believed to stretch back deep into the past and to continue into the future without end.

Although realising the significance of Karma,46 the devout Buddhist mind is not usually disturbed by fearful forebodings. Ostensibly, it has evolved to a condition of holiness, wherein “the dross of sin” is entirely consumed in the “white flames” of Sakyamuni’s “transcendent wisdom” and “boundless love.”

Although realizing the importance of Karma, 46 the devoted Buddhist mind is typically not troubled by anxious thoughts. It appears to have reached a state of purity, where “the impurities of sin” are completely burned away in the “white flames” of Sakyamuni’s “transcendent wisdom” and “boundless love.”

Within the realm of Buddhist philosophy, the doctrine of reincarnation is conspicuous by reason of its peculiarly attractive charms. On first acquaintance, the European mind may be somewhat “startled” to discover, that a satisfactory explanation of the interminable evolution of life, is sought for by the earnest Buddhist in the theory of reincarnation.

Within the realm of Buddhist philosophy, the idea of reincarnation stands out because of its uniquely appealing qualities. At first, the European mind might be a bit “taken aback” to learn that the dedicated Buddhist looks for a satisfactory explanation of the endless evolution of life in the theory of reincarnation.

In the text of The Diamond Sutra, it may be observed that Sakyamuni Buddha, in discoursing to Subhuti, referred incidentally to personal reminiscences, one of which belonged to a distant period of five hundred incarnations.

In The Diamond Sutra, it can be seen that Sakyamuni Buddha, while speaking to Subhuti, casually mentioned personal memories, one of which was from a distant time of five hundred lifetimes ago.

According to the text of The Light of Asia, the spiritual consciousness of Sakyamuni Buddha extended to a period even more remote, as may be judged by these remarkable lines:—

According to the text of The Light of Asia, Sakyamuni Buddha's spiritual awareness reached back to an even earlier time, as can be seen in these notable lines:—

I now remember, myriad rains ago,
 What time I roamed Himâla’s hanging woods.

In considering briefly the doctrine of reincarnation, perhaps it might readily be conceded to our Buddhist friends, that there were exemplified in the Founder of their faith, a wonderful potency of intellect, and a marvellous degree of spiritual intuition. Quite agreeable, also, may be the suggestion, that this potency of intellect might become intensified, and probably “rendered subjective,” by “ascetic exercises,” abstract contemplation, and “determined effort.”

In briefly looking at the idea of reincarnation, it’s probably fair to acknowledge to our Buddhist friends that their founder demonstrated incredible intellectual power and an impressive level of spiritual insight. It’s also agreeable to suggest that this intellectual power could be intensified and likely made subjective through ascetic practices, deep contemplation, and focused effort.

Spence Hardy indicated in Eastern Monachism that the Buddhist mind conceives of “spiritual powers” arising from the aforementioned “potency of intellect” and “spiritual intuition,” which in other systems of religion are usually regarded as partaking of the nature of “Divinity.” If it be admitted that those potential “powers” are probably susceptible of affiliation with the Divine Spirit, then the way of approach to an understanding of the Buddhist theory of intuition becomes, perhaps, tolerably clear. Concrete knowledge acquired by intuition, appears to assure our Buddhist friends of the fact of reincarnation. But they invariably refrain from a vain attempt to prove the “fact,” by an authorised—and consequently stereotyped—process of reasoning.

Spence Hardy mentioned in Eastern Monachism that the Buddhist mind sees “spiritual powers” coming from the earlier mentioned “potency of intellect” and “spiritual intuition,” which other religions typically view as having a connection to “Divinity.” If we accept that these potential “powers” can likely connect with the Divine Spirit, then understanding the Buddhist theory of intuition becomes somewhat clearer. Concrete knowledge gained through intuition seems to assure our Buddhist friends of the fact of reincarnation. However, they always avoid trying to prove the “fact” through an authorized—and therefore predictable—process of reasoning.

The unknown Hindoo author of The Bhagavad-Gita revealed in simple phraseology the native idea of reincarnation; and suggested, happily, an instructive theory concerning the advent of great Teachers and Saviours in every age. To Krishna are ascribed the following sayings;—

The unknown Hindu author of The Bhagavad-Gita expressed the local concept of reincarnation in straightforward language and, thankfully, proposed an insightful theory about the arrival of great Teachers and Saviors in every era. The following sayings are attributed to Krishna;—

Manifold the renewals of my birth
 Have been.... When Righteousness
 Declines, O Bharata, when Wickedness
 Is strong, I rise, from age to age, and take
 Visible shape, and move a man with men,
 Succouring the good, thrusting the evil back,
 And setting Virtue on her seat again.

Rhys Davids justly observed that “to the pious Buddhist it is a constant source of joy and gratitude that ‘the Buddha,’ not only then, but in many former births, when emancipation from all the cares and troubles of life was already within his reach, should again and again, in mere love for man, have condescended to enter the world, and live amidst the sorrows inseparable from finite existence.”47 Perhaps in a more general sense the idea of reincarnation appealed strongly to the imagination of Wordsworth, when he was inspired to write these familiar, yet exquisite, lines:—

Rhys Davids rightly noted that “for the devoted Buddhist, it's a continual source of joy and gratitude that ‘the Buddha,’ not only in that time, but in many past lives, when he could have freed himself from all the worries and troubles of life, chose repeatedly, out of pure love for humanity, to come back into the world and experience the sorrows that come with being finite.”47 Maybe more broadly, the concept of reincarnation resonated deeply with Wordsworth, inspiring him to pen these well-known yet beautiful lines:—

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting;
 The soul that rises with us, our life’s star,
 Hath had elsewhere its setting
 And cometh from afar.

Regarding the doctrines of Individuality and non-Individuality, which characterise the text of The Diamond Sutra, wherein are found to occur frequently Chinese equivalents for the ordinary concepts of an entity, a being, a living being and a personality, the following passage from The Bhagavad-Gita, suggestive almost of complete harmony with the Buddhist doctrine, may serve to make even a cursory consideration of the subject perhaps more illuminating. The passage, rendered by Sir Edwin Arnold, is as follows:—

Regarding the ideas of Individuality and non-Individuality that define the text of The Diamond Sutra, where you often find Chinese terms for common concepts like an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality, the following excerpt from The Bhagavad-Gita, which almost aligns perfectly with the Buddhist teachings, could provide a clearer understanding of the subject even with just a brief look. The passage, translated by Sir Edwin Arnold, is as follows:—

There is ‘true’ Knowledge, Learn it thou in this:
 To see one changeless Life in all the Lives,
 And in the Separate, One Inseparable.
 There is imperfect Knowledge: that which sees
 The separate existences apart,
 And, being separated, holds them real.

As Nirvana is only referred to casually in The Diamond Sutra, that familiar Buddhist term hardly calls for any present detailed explanation. Within a brief compass probably no better explanation may be forthcoming than what is already given in this concise exposition gathered from The Light of Asia:—

As Nirvana is only briefly mentioned in The Diamond Sutra, that well-known Buddhist term doesn't really need an in-depth explanation today. In a short format, there’s probably no better explanation than what's already provided in this clear summary taken from The Light of Asia:—

If any teach Nirvana is to cease,
 Say unto such they lie.
 If any teach Nirvana is to live,
 Say unto such they err; not knowing this,
 Nor what light shines beyond their broken lamps,
 Nor lifeless, timeless bliss.

In concluding, it might be opportune to observe, that the Werthurtheile,48 known amongst modern theologians as characterising the teaching of Albrecht Ritschl—sounds, upon intimate acquaintance, merely as a faint echo of the logic of Sakyamuni Buddha. Ritschl might apply his Werthurtheile to the presumed interpretation of a “miracle,” etc. Buddha suggested by his “method,” that what is ordinarily referred to as a “miracle,” is not in reality a “miracle,” therefore it is merely defined as a “miracle.” So, also, with the various dogmas which distinguish every religious creed. By many Chinese it is regarded as an evidence of Divinity, that in the mind of Sakyamuni Buddha there was conceived this incisive logical method; and amongst the learned monks, profound homage is rendered, and much wonder expressed, because the Lord Buddha49 did not hesitate to apply its principles to every doctrine synonymous with his own accredited “Law.”

In conclusion, it’s worth noting that the Werthurtheile, 48 which modern theologians recognize as characteristic of Albrecht Ritschl’s teachings, ultimately feels like a faint echo of Sakyamuni Buddha's logic upon closer examination. Ritschl might use his Werthurtheile to interpret what is considered a “miracle,” for example. Buddha suggested through his “method” that what people typically call a “miracle” is not actually a “miracle”; it is simply labeled as such. The same applies to the various dogmas that define every religious belief. Many Chinese view the incisive logical method in Sakyamuni Buddha’s mind as a sign of Divinity, and the learned monks express deep respect and wonder because the Lord Buddha 49 was not afraid to apply these principles to every teaching that aligned with his own recognized “Law.”

1 “The Sutra of firm establishment in all doctrine, describing clearly the secret merit and attainments in the religious life of Tathagata.” (Compare Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.)

1 “The Sutra on solid foundations in all teachings, clearly outlining the hidden virtues and achievements in the spiritual life of Tathagata.” (See Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.)

2 See the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See the introduction to The Vagrakkhedika.

3 “A native of Western India who lived as a hermit under an Arguna tree, whence he derived his name. Converted by Kapimala, he laboured in Southern India as the fourteenth patriarch.... He is the chief representative, if not originator, of the Mahayana school, the greatest philosopher of the Buddhists, and as such styled ‘one of the four suns which illuminate the world.’ His own peculiar tenets have been perpetuated by a distinct metaphysical school called Madhyamika (Lit. Juste Milieu), the characteristics of which are a sophistic nihilism which dissolves every proposition into a thesis and its antithesis, and denies both. ‘The soul,’ said Nagarjuna, ‘has neither existence nor non-existence, it is neither eternal nor non-eternal, neither annihilated by death nor non-annihilated.’ The tenets of this school are condensed in Nagardjuna’s commentary on the Mahaprajna Paramita S’astra. He spent the later part of his life in a monastery at Kosala ... (correct date probably a.d. 194). After his death he received the title Bodhisattva. He is the author of many S’atras.” (Compare Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

3 “A native of Western India who lived as a hermit under an Arguna tree, which is how he got his name. Converted by Kapimala, he worked in Southern India as the fourteenth patriarch.... He is the main representative, if not the originator, of the Mahayana school, the greatest philosopher of the Buddhists, and is referred to as ‘one of the four suns that illuminate the world.’ His unique beliefs have been carried on by a distinct metaphysical school called Madhyamika (Lit. Juste Milieu), characterized by a sophistic nihilism that breaks down every proposition into a thesis and its antithesis, denying both. ‘The soul,’ said Nagarjuna, ‘has neither existence nor non-existence, it is neither eternal nor non-eternal, neither annihilated by death nor non-annihilated.’ The principles of this school are summarized in Nagarjuna’s commentary on the Mahaprajna Paramita S’astra. He spent the later part of his life in a monastery at Kosala ... (correct date probably AD 194). After his death, he was honored with the title Bodhisattva. He wrote many S’atras.” (Compare Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

4 See the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

5 Kumarajiva was referred to as “one of the four suns of Buddhism” (Tchatvara Suryas). He laboured in China as a most active and judicious translator, and is credited with having introduced a new alphabet. One of Kumarajiva’s Chinese designations—Tung-Sheo—meant that, although young in years, he was ripe in the wisdom and virtues of old age. (Compare Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

5 Kumarajiva was called “one of the four suns of Buddhism” (Tchatvara Suryas). He worked in China as a very active and wise translator and is known for introducing a new alphabet. One of Kumarajiva’s Chinese titles—Tung-Sheo—implied that, despite being young, he possessed the wisdom and virtues of an elder. (See Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

6 Beal stated in his preface to the Kin-Kong-King, that “it was translated first into the Chinese by Kumara-Jiva (a.d. 405), who was brought into China from Thibet.”

6 Beal mentioned in his introduction to the Kin-Kong-King that “it was first translated into Chinese by Kumara-Jiva (CE 405), who was brought into China from Tibet.”

7 Other translations, worthy of recognition, are those attributed respectively to Bodhiruki (a.d. 509), Paramartha (a.d. 562), Dharmagupa, of the Sui dynasty (a.d. 589–618), and I-Tsing (a.d. 703). (Compare the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.)

7 Other translations that deserve recognition are those attributed to Bodhiruki (A.D. 509), Paramartha (A.D. 562), Dharmagupa of the Sui dynasty (A.D. 589–618), and I-Tsing (A.D. 703). (See the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.)

8 This information may be found in Max Müller’s Vagrakkhedika, and represented, doubtless, at the period when it was written, a considerable part of the knowledge available on the subject.

8 This information can be found in Max Müller’s Vagrakkhedika, and undoubtedly represented a significant portion of the knowledge available on the subject at the time it was written.

9 By Max Müller.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ By Max Müller.

10 The Chinese Ma-Ming.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The Chinese Ma-Ming.

11 Compare the Chinese text of the Chi-Sin-Pien—The Awakening of Faith.

11 Compare the Chinese text of the Chi-Sin-Pien—The Awakening of Faith.

12 In the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the intro to The Vagrakkhedika.

13 “Supreme spiritual wisdom.” In Beal’s Kin-Kong-King, “The unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart.” (Sanscrit, “Annuttara Samyak Sambodhi Hridaya.”)

13 “Ultimate spiritual wisdom.” In Beal’s Kin-Kong-King, “The unmatched, just, and enlightened heart.” (Sanskrit, “Annuttara Samyak Sambodhi Hridaya.”)

14 According to the text of The Diamond Sutra, the intellect of Sakyamuni Buddha sank so profoundly into the past, that he was enabled to speak confidently of his experiences in previous incarnations. (Compare pp. 56, 57.)

14 According to the text of The Diamond Sutra, the mind of Sakyamuni Buddha delved so deeply into the past that he was able to speak confidently about his experiences in previous lives. (Compare pp. 56, 57.)

15 From the text adopted by Mr H. Oelsner, M.A., Ph.D., for The Temple Classics.

15 From the text adopted by Mr. H. Oelsner, M.A., Ph.D., for The Temple Classics.

16 Dr Edkins, in his scholarly work Chinese Buddhism, seems to have regarded “the Law or body of doctrine” as an accurate definition of Dharma.

16 Dr. Edkins, in his scholarly work Chinese Buddhism, appears to view "the Law or body of doctrine" as a precise definition of Dharma.

Dr Eitel, in his Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, explained Dharma by “Fah”—“Law”; and observed that it is “a general term for religious objects, especially for the Buddhistic Canon.”

Dr. Eitel, in his Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, defined Dharma as “Fah”—“Law”; and noted that it is “a general term for religious objects, particularly for the Buddhist Canon.”

Mr Vincent A. Smith, in Asoka, Buddhist Emperor of India, suggested that the Chinese Hsiao (piety), and the Latin Pietas, coincide with the Sanscrit term Dharma.

Mr. Vincent A. Smith, in Asoka, Buddhist Emperor of India, suggested that the Chinese Hsiao (piety), and the Latin Piety, align with the Sanskrit term Dharma.

17 The Chinese phrase is “Fah-sing-chen-ru-hai.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The Chinese phrase is "Fah-sing-chen-ru-hai."

18 See the Tao-Teh-Ching. Compare, also, the statement attributed to Confucius—“Nature and Truth cannot be adequately expressed.”

18 See the Tao-Teh-Ching. Also compare the quote attributed to Confucius—“Nature and Truth can't be fully expressed.”

19 Or Dharma.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Or Dharma.

20 Compare The Light of Asia. Perhaps this aspect of the “Law” of Buddha may be conceived of as harmonising with Shakespeare’s idea of a “Divinity.”

20 Compare The Light of Asia. Maybe this aspect of the “Law” of Buddha can be seen as aligning with Shakespeare’s notion of a “Divinity.”

21 It may be interesting to observe that, according to our Chinese text, Sakyamuni Buddha evidently disclaimed any desire to formulate, or to perpetuate, a stereotyped system of “Law” or “doctrine.” Sakyamuni Buddha also made it plain, that the “Law” which he enunciated, was presented before the minds of his disciples in the simile of a “raft”—a thing to be abandoned when the mind “touched the further shore” of everlasting truth. It seems to be in this tentative sense that intellectual Buddhists regard all ecclesiastical institutions, priesthoods, dogmas, ordinances, etc.; and we have met monks who would classify belief in the “efficacy” of religious rites or ceremonies, with obnoxious forms of “heresy” and “immorality.” (Compare Rhys Davids’ Buddhism.) With regard to the Buddhist objection concerning the “efficacy” of religious “rites,” compare the noble sentiments expressed in the following lines, delightfully rendered by Sir Edwin Arnold from the Bhagavad-Gita (The Song Celestial):—

21 It might be interesting to note that, according to our Chinese text, Sakyamuni Buddha clearly rejected any desire to create or maintain a rigid system of “Law” or “doctrine.” He also made it clear that the “Law” he taught was likened to a “raft”—something to be discarded once the mind reached the “farther shore” of eternal truth. It seems that in this provisional sense, intellectual Buddhists view all religious institutions, priesthoods, dogmas, ordinances, etc.; and we have encountered monks who would categorize belief in the “power” of religious rites or ceremonies as undesirable forms of “heresy” and “immorality.” (Compare Rhys Davids’ Buddhism.) Regarding the Buddhist criticism of the “power” of religious “rites,” compare the noble sentiments expressed in the following lines, beautifully translated by Sir Edwin Arnold from the Bhagavad-Gita (The Song Celestial):—

“Serenity of soul, benignity,
 Sway of the silent spirit, constant stress
 To sanctify the nature,—these things make
 Good rite, and true religiousness of mind.”

22 Max Müller suggests that Samgna and Dharma “correspond in many respects to the Vedantic Namarupe”—in Chinese Ming-Seh—name, form, or characteristic.

22 Max Müller suggests that Samgna and Dharma “correspond in many respects to the Vedantic Namarupe”—in Chinese Ming-Seh—name, form, or characteristic.

23 Compare p. 86.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Compare p. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

24 Compare p. 55.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See p. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

25 Compare p. 80.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Compare page __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

26 Compare p. 76.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See p. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

27 Compare p. 95.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See p. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

28 Some modern Japanese Buddhists appear to regard this purely spiritual element as “essence of mind.”

28 Some modern Japanese Buddhists seem to view this purely spiritual aspect as the "essence of mind."

29 From the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ From the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.

30 Compare p. 110.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Compare page __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

31 Compare the interesting dialogue entitled The Enlightenment of Ananda, in which Sakyamuni instructs his distinguished disciple in ideas concerning the subjective and objective phenomena of mind.

31 Compare the fascinating dialogue called The Enlightenment of Ananda, where Sakyamuni teaches his esteemed disciple about the concepts of subjective and objective experiences of the mind.

32 Compare pp. 102, 103.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Compare pages __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

33 Bodhisattvas—greatly enlightened disciples.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Bodhisattvas—highly enlightened followers.

34 Vidya Matra Siddhi, a philosophical work by Vasubandhu, a native of Radjagriha, and disciple of Nagarjuna, founder of the Mahayana school. (Compare Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

34 Vidya Matra Siddhi, a philosophical work by Vasubandhu, who was from Radjagriha and a student of Nagarjuna, the founder of the Mahayana school. (See Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.)

35 Compare the process of reasoning which permeates the entire Diamond Sutra. We hope no injustice is done to our Japanese friends, by applying to their beautiful concept “essence of mind,” this familiar logical method of Sakyamuni Buddha.

35 Look at the reasoning process that runs through the entire Diamond Sutra. We hope we don’t offend our Japanese friends by applying this well-known logical method of Sakyamuni Buddha to their beautiful concept of “essence of mind.”

36 Fah-Shen—the Law, or spiritual body. Compare Shen-Shen, the term usually employed in the Chinese rendering of the New Testament Scriptures to denote the spiritual body.

36 Fah-Shen—the Law, or spiritual body. Compare Shen-Shen, the term commonly used in the Chinese translation of the New Testament Scriptures to refer to the spiritual body.

37 Gatha—usually a Scripture verse comprising four lines.

37 Gatha—typically a verse from scripture that consists of four lines.

38 Compare the following lines from The Song Celestial.—

38 Check out the following lines from The Song Celestial.—

“I am not known
 To evil-doers, ... nor to those
 Whose mind is cheated by the show of things.”

39 In Buddhist phraseology, Yuen-Chioh means the study, by means of contemplation, of primary spiritual causes.

39 In Buddhist terminology, Yuen-Chioh refers to the study of primary spiritual causes through contemplation.

40 Compare Beal’s rendering in the Kin-Kong-King, “Tathagata is the explanation as it were of all systems of Law.” See also The Book of the Manifesting of the One and Manifold in The Song Celestial, the verse commencing:—

40 Compare Beal’s version in the Kin-Kong-King, “Tathagata is basically the explanation for all systems of Law.” Also, see The Book of the Manifesting of the One and Manifold in The Song Celestial, the verse starting:—

“Thou, of all souls the Soul!
 The comprehending whole!”

In conversation with Chinese monks regarding the meaning of this impressive passage, we found that they invariably approved of a suggested rendering, that “Buddha is the One in whom all Laws become intelligible.”

In discussions with Chinese monks about the meaning of this impressive passage, we found that they consistently agreed with a proposed interpretation: “Buddha is the One in whom all Laws become clear.”

41 Compare the observations made by Sir Edwin Arnold in his preface to The Song Celestial, regarding the date when that famous Brahmanic poem was composed; and the gentle indication that in its teaching may be found “echoes of the lessons of Galilee, and of the Syrian incarnation.”

41 Compare the observations made by Sir Edwin Arnold in his preface to The Song Celestial, regarding when that famous Brahmanic poem was composed; and the subtle suggestion that its teachings contain “echoes of the lessons of Galilee, and of the Syrian incarnation.”

42 An instructive exposition of this subject by J. Muir, Esq., entitled The Progress of the Vedic Religion towards Abstract Conceptions of the Deity, may be consulted in the Jour. R.A.S., 1864–65.

42 An informative discussion on this topic by J. Muir, Esq., titled The Progress of the Vedic Religion towards Abstract Conceptions of the Deity, can be found in the Jour. R.A.S., 1864–65.

43 In colloquial Chinese there is a noteworthy saying, that “Buddha is simply a condition of mind.” This “condition of mind” is beautifully expressed by a “classic” couplet, which, rendered into English, means “as pure as the image of the moon in a river,” and “as lovely as the bloom of a flower in a mirror” (Shui-Li-Chï-Yüeh, Ching-Li-Chï-Wha).

43 In everyday Chinese, there's a notable saying that "Buddha is just a state of mind." This "state of mind" is beautifully captured by a classic couplet, which translates into English as "as pure as the reflection of the moon in a river" and "as lovely as the bloom of a flower in a mirror" (Shui-Li-Chï-Yüeh, Ching-Li-Chï-Wha).

44 Compare the beautifully expressed sentiment of Akhnaton, Pharaoh of Egypt, concerning “the One in whom all Laws are intelligibly comprehended.” “There is no poverty for him who hath Thee in his heart.” (See Life and Times of Akhnaton.)

44 Check out the beautifully expressed sentiment of Akhnaton, Pharaoh of Egypt, about “the One in whom all Laws are clearly understood.” “There is no poverty for someone who has You in their heart.” (See Life and Times of Akhnaton.)

45 Rhys Davids, when he expounded the doctrine of Karma in Buddhism, clearly indicated the Buddhist position, “that whatever a man reaps, that he must also have sown.” Chinese Buddhists appear to be assured, “that if a man reaps sorrow, disappointment, pain, he himself, and no other, must at some time have sown folly, error, sin; and if not in this life, then in some former birth. Where then, in the latter case, is the identity between him who sows and him who reaps? In that which alone remains when a man dies, and the constituent parts of the sentient being are dissolved; in the result, namely, of his action, speech, and thought, in his good or evil Karma (literally his ‘doing’) which does not die.”

45 Rhys Davids, when he explained the concept of Karma in Buddhism, clearly stated the Buddhist view that “whatever a person reaps, that they must also have sown.” Chinese Buddhists seem to believe that “if a person experiences sorrow, disappointment, or pain, they alone must have previously sown folly, error, or sin; and if not in this life, then in some past life. So, in that case, where is the connection between the one who sows and the one who reaps? In what remains when a person dies and the components of their conscious being are dissolved; in the result, which is the outcome of their actions, speech, and thoughts, in their good or evil Karma (literally their ‘doing’) which does not die.”

46 In the concept Karma, Sakyamuni Buddha suggested the revealing of a moral cause which explained the otherwise insoluble riddle of the evident inequalities, and consequent sufferings of life.

46 In the idea of Karma, Sakyamuni Buddha proposed the uncovering of a moral cause that clarified the otherwise impossible-to-solve puzzle of the obvious inequalities and the resulting sufferings of life.

47 Compare Buddhism.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Compare Buddhism.

48 “The much-canvassed Ritschlian doctrine of the Worth—or ‘value-judgments,’ in which the peculiarity of religious knowledge is supposed to lie.” For the introduction of the term into theology we are indebted to Herrmann, Die Religion, etc., and Kaftan, Das Wesen. See Orr’s, The Ritschlian Theology and The Evangelical Faith.

48 “The frequently discussed Ritschlian concept of Worth—or 'value-judgments,' which is believed to capture the uniqueness of religious knowledge.” We owe the introduction of this term into theology to Herrmann, Die Religion, etc., and Kaftan, Das Wesen. See Orr’s, The Ritschlian Theology and The Evangelical Faith.

49 It may be observed in this English version of The Diamond Sutra, that the Chinese term Fuh, in deference to our Oriental friends, is invariably rendered “Lord Buddha”—a designation consonant with their concepts of devotion and piety.

49 In this English version of The Diamond Sutra, you’ll notice that the Chinese term Fuh is always translated as “Lord Buddha”—a title that aligns with their ideas of devotion and piety.

THE DIAMOND SUTRA


[Chapter 1]

[Chapter 1]

Thus have I heard1 concerning our Lord Buddha:—

Thus have I heard1 concerning our Lord Buddha:—

Upon a memorable occasion, the Lord Buddha2 sojourned in the kingdom of Shravasti,3 lodging in the grove of Jeta,4 a park within the imperial domain, which Jeta, the heir-apparent, bestowed upon Sutana,5 a benevolent Minister of State, renowned for his charities and benefactions.

Upon a memorable occasion, the Lord Buddha2 stayed in the kingdom of Shravasti,3 residing in the grove of Jeta,4 a park within the royal territory, which Jeta, the crown prince, gave to Sutana,5 a generous Minister of State, known for his charitable deeds and contributions.

With the Lord Buddha, there were assembled together twelve hundred and fifty mendicant disciples,6 all of whom had attained to eminent degrees of spiritual wisdom.

With the Lord Buddha, there were gathered together one thousand two hundred and fifty wandering disciples, 6 all of whom had reached high levels of spiritual insight.

As it approached the hour for the morning meal, Lord Buddha, Honoured of the Worlds,7 attired himself in a mendicant’s robe,8 and bearing an alms-bowl in his hands, walked towards the great city of Shravasti, which he entered to beg for food.9 Within the city he proceeded from door to door,10 and received such donations as the good people severally bestowed.11 Concluding this religious exercise, the Lord Buddha returned to the grove of Jeta, and partook of the frugal meal12 received as alms. Thereafter he divested himself of his mendicant’s robe, laid aside the venerated alms-bowl,13 bathed his sacred feet, and accepted the honoured seat reserved for him by his disciples.

As it got closer to the time for breakfast, Lord Buddha, Honoured of the Worlds, put on a monk's robe and, holding an alms bowl in his hands, walked toward the great city of Shravasti, where he went to beg for food. Inside the city, he went from door to door and received the donations that the kind people generously offered. After finishing this act of devotion, Lord Buddha returned to the grove of Jeta and had the simple meal he received as alms. Afterwards, he took off his monk's robe, set aside the respected alms bowl, washed his blessed feet, and took the special seat that his disciples had prepared for him.

1 It is generally supposed that the familiar introductory phrase, “Thus have I heard,” was adopted by the writers or editors of Buddhist Sutras in order that their scriptures might assume the same high degree of authority as the Brahmanas and the Mantras, “as forming the ‘S’ruti’ or sacred revelation of the followers of the Vedas.” (Compare Max Müller’s History of Sanscrit Literature and the valuable note in Beal’s Kin-Kong-King)

1 It's generally believed that the well-known opening phrase, “Thus have I heard,” was used by the writers or editors of Buddhist Sutras so that their texts could have the same level of authority as the Brahmanas and Mantras, regarded as the ‘S’ruti’ or sacred revelation of the Veda followers. (See Max Müller’s History of Sanskrit Literature and the important note in Beal’s Kin-Kong-King)

2 “The term (Buddha) means ‘every intelligent being who has thrown off the bondage of sense perception and self, knows the utter unreality of all phenomena, and is ready to enter Nirvana.’”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2 “The term (Buddha) refers to ‘any conscious being who has freed themselves from the limitations of sensory perception and ego, recognizes the complete illusion of all phenomena, and is prepared to attain Nirvana.’”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

3 Shravasti is variously described as the city (or kingdom) of philosophy, of good doctrine, of abundant virtue, and as the abode of immortals. It was situated on the north bank of the Ganges, about 200 miles above Benares. Much interesting information regarding the sacred city Shravasti, is fortunately preserved in the instructive records of the distinguished Chinese pilgrims, Fa-Hien and Hiuen-Tsang.

3 Shravasti is often referred to as the city (or kingdom) of philosophy, good teachings, abundant virtue, and the home of immortals. It was located on the north bank of the Ganges, about 200 miles upstream from Benares. Fortunately, a lot of fascinating information about the sacred city of Shravasti is preserved in the insightful writings of the renowned Chinese travelers, Fa-Hien and Hiuen-Tsang.

4 “Prasenajit, the king of Shravasti, was very favourable to the Buddhist religion. It was his minister who bought the garden of Jeta from the prince of that name, and erected in it a residence for Buddha (see Julien’s Memoirs sur les Contrées Occidentales). Many of the Sutras attributed to Buddha are said to have been delivered here. Hiuen-Tsang observed the remains of the monastery formerly standing on the site of the garden of Jeta, 2 miles below the city.” — Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

4 “Prasenajit, the king of Shravasti, was very supportive of the Buddhist religion. It was his minister who purchased the garden of Jeta from the prince of that name and built a residence for Buddha there (see Julien’s Memoirs sur les Contrées Occidentales). Many of the Sutras attributed to Buddha are said to have been delivered here. Hiuen-Tsang noted the remnants of the monastery that used to be on the site of the garden of Jeta, 2 miles south of the city.” — Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

5 “A person of extraordinary piety and goodness. One of the former Djatakas of Sakyamuni when he was a prince, and forfeited the throne by liberality in almsgiving.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

5 “A person of exceptional faith and kindness. One of the earlier Jatakas of Sakyamuni when he was a prince, who gave up the throne because of his generosity in giving alms.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

6 The Chinese text is ta-pi-k’u—greater disciples. Our Chinese editor of The Diamond Sutra suggests that there are different grades of discipleship. The “lesser disciples” are those who have abandoned every form of vice, and are striving after virtue. The “greater disciples” are those to whom virtue has become spontaneous, and who have ceased to strive after its attainment.

6 The Chinese text is ta-pi-k’u—greater disciples. Our Chinese editor of The Diamond Sutra suggests that there are different levels of discipleship. The “lesser disciples” are those who have given up all forms of wrongdoing and are working towards being virtuous. The “greater disciples” are those for whom virtue has become second nature, and who no longer need to actively pursue it.

7 A title conferred by Chinese Buddhists upon the founder of their faith, believing him to be a Teacher and Saviour whose merit is acclaimed in worlds beyond our own.

7 A title given by Chinese Buddhists to the founder of their faith, viewing him as a Teacher and Savior whose achievements are recognized in realms beyond our own.

8 Having taken vows of poverty, a robe is one of the following eight articles which Buddhist monks are permitted to possess: three garments of different descriptions, a girdle for the loins, an alms-bowl, a razor, a needle, and a water-strainer.

8 Having taken vows of poverty, a robe is one of the following eight items that Buddhist monks are allowed to own: three different types of clothing, a belt, a bowl for collecting alms, a razor, a needle, and a water filter.

9 Buddha has said, “the wise priest never asks for anything; he disdains to beg; it is a proper thing for which he carries the alms-bowl; and this is his only mode of solicitation. But when he is sick, he is permitted to ask for any medicine that he may require, without being guilty of any transgression.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

9 Buddha said, “the wise monk never asks for anything; he looks down on begging; the only reason he carries the alms bowl is for what he genuinely needs. This is his only way of asking. However, when he is unwell, he is allowed to request any medicine he needs without committing any wrongdoing.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

10 Concerning the manner of begging an alms: “As a bee, injuring not the flower, or its colour, or its scent, flies away, taking the nectar, so let a sage go through the village.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

10 Concerning how to ask for charity: “Just like a bee, which doesn’t harm the flower, its color, or its fragrance, takes the nectar and flies away, so should a wise person move through the village.”—Questions of King Milinda. T.W. Rhys Davids.

11 “By many of the Buddhists it is considered to be an act of great merit to make a vow never to partake of food without giving a portion to the priests.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

11 "Many Buddhists believe that it’s a significant act of merit to promise never to eat without sharing a portion with the priests."—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

12 “The fifth of the twelve sacred observances of the Chinese is called in Sanscrit Khaloupas’ Waddhaktinka, and is said to enjoin that the food obtained by the mendicant is to be divided into three portions: one to be given to any person whom he sees to be suffering from hunger, and a second to be carried to some quiet place in the forest, and placed upon a stone for the birds and beasts. If he does not meet with any one who is in want, he is not to eat the whole of the food that he has received, but two-thirds only. By this means his body will be lighter and more active.... He will be able readily to enter upon the practice of all good works. When any one eats too greedily ... nothing is more harmful to the development of reason.” (Quotation from Remusat’s Relation des Royaumes Buddhiques, in Spence Hardy’s Eastern Monachism.)

12 “The fifth of the twelve sacred practices of the Chinese is called in Sanskrit Khaloupas’ Waddhaktinka, and it instructs that the food received by the beggar should be divided into three parts: one part is to be given to anyone he sees who is suffering from hunger, and a second part should be taken to a quiet spot in the forest and left on a stone for the birds and animals. If he doesn’t encounter anyone in need, he shouldn’t eat all the food he has received, but only two-thirds of it. This way, his body will be lighter and more active... He will be better able to engage in all good deeds. When someone eats too greedily... nothing is more harmful to the development of reason.” (Quotation from Remusat’s Relation des Royaumes Buddhiques, in Spence Hardy’s Eastern Monachism.)

13 “The alms-bowl which Sakyamuni used is considered a sacred relic, and to be used by each of the hundred Buddhas of the present kalpa. It was first preserved in Vais’ali, whence its emigrations began to Gandhara, to Persia, to China, to Ceylon, to Madhyades’a, up into the heaven Tuchita, and down to the bottom of the ocean, where it is to await (in the palace of Sagara) the advent of Meitreya Buddha.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

13 “The alms-bowl that Sakyamuni used is regarded as a sacred relic, meant to be used by each of the hundred Buddhas of the current era. It was first kept in Vais’ali, from where it traveled to Gandhara, then to Persia, then to China, to Ceylon, to Madhyades’a, up to the heaven Tuchita, and down to the depths of the ocean, where it will wait (in the palace of Sagara) for the arrival of Meitreya Buddha.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.


[Chapter 2]

[Chapter 2]

Upon that occasion, the venerable Subhuti1 occupied a place in the midst of the assembly. Rising from his seat, with cloak arranged in such manner that his right shoulder was disclosed, Subhuti knelt upon his right knee, then pressing together the palms of his hands, he respectfully raised them towards Lord Buddha, saying: “Thou art of transcendent wisdom, Honoured of the Worlds! With wonderful solicitude, Thou dost preserve in the faith, and instruct in the Law, this illustrious assembly of enlightened disciples.2 Honoured of the Worlds! if a good disciple, whether man or woman,3 seeks to obtain supreme spiritual wisdom,4 what immutable Law shall sustain the mind of that disciple, and bring into subjection every inordinate desire?”5

Upon that occasion, the respected Subhuti1 was in the middle of the assembly. Rising from his seat, with his cloak arranged to reveal his right shoulder, Subhuti knelt on his right knee, pressed his palms together, and respectfully raised them towards Lord Buddha, saying: “You are of transcendent wisdom, Honored of the Worlds! With great care, You preserve the faith and teach the Law to this esteemed assembly of enlightened disciples.2 Honored of the Worlds! if a good disciple, whether man or woman,3 seeks to gain supreme spiritual wisdom,4 what unchanging Law will support the mind of that disciple and bring every uncontrolled desire under control?”5

The Lord Buddha replied to Subhuti, saying: “Truly a most excellent theme! As you affirmed, I preserve in the faith, and instruct in the Law, this illustrious assembly of enlightened disciples. Attend diligently unto me, and I shall enunciate a Law whereby the mind of a good disciple, whether man or woman, seeking to obtain supreme spiritual wisdom,6 shall be adequately sustained, and enabled to bring into subjection7 every inordinate desire.” Subhuti was gratified, and signified glad consent. Thereupon, the Lord Buddha, with majesty of person,8 and perfect articulation, proceeded to deliver the text of this Scripture,9 saying:—

The Lord Buddha responded to Subhuti, saying: “This is truly an excellent topic! As you mentioned, I uphold the faith and teach the Law to this remarkable group of enlightened followers. Listen carefully to me, and I will explain a Law that will support the mind of a good disciple, whether male or female, seeking to achieve the highest spiritual wisdom,6 and will help them control7 every excessive desire.” Subhuti was pleased and expressed his agreement. Then, the Lord Buddha, with an impressive presence,8 and clear speech, began to share the text of this Scripture,9 saying:—

1 “A famous dialectician noted for the subtilty of his intellect. He was a native of Shravasti, a contemporary of Sakyamuni, and figures as the principal interlocutor in the Prajna-Paramita.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

1 “A well-known debater recognized for his sharp mind. He originated from Shravasti, was a contemporary of Sakyamuni, and serves as the main speaker in the Prajna-Paramita.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2Pu-Sa or Bodhisattva, literally he whose essence (Sattva) has become intelligence (Bodhi). A being that has only once more to pass through human existence before it attains to Buddhaship. The third class of Buddhistic saints comprehending all who are candidates for Buddhaship as well as those Buddhas who are not yet perfected by entrance into Nirvana. They are also styled Mahasattvas (Mo-Ho-Sa). The state of a Bodhisattva is considered as one of the three means of conveyance to Nirvana.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2Pu-Sa or Bodhisattva, literally means one whose essence (Sattva) has become wisdom (Bodhi). It's a being that only has to go through human life one more time before achieving Buddhahood. This is the third group of Buddhist saints, which includes all those who are candidates for Buddhahood, along with those Buddhas who have not yet reached perfection by entering Nirvana. They are also referred to as Mahasattvas (Mo-Ho-Sa). The state of a Bodhisattva is seen as one of the three paths to Nirvana.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

3 “Women began to ask and received permission to take the vows. They were called in India Bikshuni.... Ni is the Sanscrit feminine termination of Bikshu. These female mendicants were subject to the same code of regulations as the males.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

3 “Women started to request and were given permission to take the vows. They were referred to as Bikshuni in India... Ni is the Sanskrit feminine ending of Bikshu. These female beggars were held to the same set of rules as the males.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

4ho-ru-to-lo-san-mao-san-pu-ti (Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi), literally unexcelled perfect intelligence. Another more painstaking but arbitrary explanation is untarnished and unparalleled (Nuttara) correct view (Sam) and complete wisdom (Myak) with complete possession of the highest sentiments (Sambodhi). This term, one of the sacred phrases of most frequent occurrence, signifies the characteristics which every Buddha possesses.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

4ho-ru-to-lo-san-mao-san-pu-ti (Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi), literally means unexcelled perfect insight. Another more detailed but somewhat arbitrary explanation is spotless and unmatched (Nuttara) correct perspective (Sam) and complete wisdom (Myak), along with fully embodying the highest qualities (Sambodhi). This term, one of the most common sacred phrases, represents the traits that every Buddha has.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“The unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“The unmatched, fair, and enlightened heart.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

5 “When a man’s heart is disposed in accordance with his roaming senses, it snatches away his spiritual knowledge as the wind does a ship on the waves.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

5 “When a man's heart is aligned with his wandering desires, it takes away his spiritual understanding just like the wind takes a ship on the waves.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

6 Chinese commentators are careful to explain that the title of this Sutra, Po-ro-po-lo-mi (Prajna-Paramita), means Wisdom, by which we are enabled to reach the other shore (Nirvana).

6 Chinese commentators are careful to explain that the title of this Sutra, Po-ro-po-lo-mi (Prajna-Paramita), means Wisdom, which helps us reach the other shore (Nirvana).

7 “Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.”—The Apostle Paul.

7 “Taking control of every thought to follow Christ.”—The Apostle Paul.

8 Compare the Chinese text of the famous Buddhist tract entitled Awakening of Faith, written by Ma-Ming (Asvaghocha), “who flourished a.d. 50, under the Indo-Scythic king, Gondophares.”

8 Compare the Chinese version of the well-known Buddhist text called Awakening of Faith, written by Ma-Ming (Asvaghocha), “who lived around AD 50, during the reign of the Indo-Scythic king, Gondophares.”

9 “This work contains the germ of the larger compilation Prajna-Paramita in one hundred and twenty volumes. The abstractions of Buddhist philosophy, which were afterwards ramified to such a formidable extent as these numbers indicate, are here found in their primary form, probably as they were taught by Sakyamuni himself.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

9 “This work contains the foundation of the larger compilation Prajna-Paramita in one hundred and twenty volumes. The concepts of Buddhist philosophy, which later expanded to such an extensive degree as these numbers show, are found here in their original form, likely as they were taught by Sakyamuni himself.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.


[Chapters 3 and 4]

[Chapters 3 and 4]

“By this wisdom shall enlightened disciples be enabled to bring into subjection every inordinate desire! Every species of life, whether hatched in the egg, formed in the womb, evolved from spawn, produced by metamorphosis, with or without form or intelligence, possessing or devoid of natural instinct—from these changeful1 conditions of being, I command you to seek deliverance,2 in the transcendental concept of Nirvana.3 Thus, you shall be delivered from an immeasurable, innumerable, and illimitable world of sentient life; but, in reality, there is no world of sentient life from which to seek deliverance. And why? Because, in the minds4 of enlightened disciples there have ceased to exist such arbitrary concepts of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality.”5

“Through this wisdom, enlightened followers can control every excessive desire! Every type of life, whether hatched from an egg, developed in the womb, evolved from spawn, or formed through metamorphosis, regardless of having a shape or intelligence, and whether they have natural instincts or not—out of these variable conditions of existence, I urge you to seek liberation in the higher concept of Nirvana. By doing this, you will be freed from a vast, countless, and limitless world of sentient beings; however, in reality, there isn’t a world of sentient beings from which to find liberation. And why is that? Because, in the minds of enlightened followers, such arbitrary ideas of phenomena like an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality have disappeared.”

“Moreover, Subhuti, an enlightened disciple ought to act spontaneously in the exercise of charity,6 uninfluenced by sensuous phenomena7 such as sound, odour, taste, touch, or Law.8 Subhuti, it is imperative that an enlightened disciple, in the exercise of charity, should act independently of phenomena. And why? Because, acting without regard to illusive forms of phenomena, he will realise in the exercise of charity, a merit inestimable and immeasurable.”

“Additionally, Subhuti, an enlightened disciple should perform acts of charity spontaneously, 6 without being influenced by sensory experiences 7 like sound, smell, taste, touch, or the Law. 8 Subhuti, it’s crucial that an enlightened disciple, when giving charity, acts independently of these phenomena. And why is that? Because by acting without attachment to deceptive forms of phenomena, they will achieve an extraordinary and limitless merit in their charitable acts.”

“Subhuti, what think you? Is it possible to estimate the distance comprising the illimitable universe of space?”9 Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! It is impossible to estimate the distance comprising the illimitable universe of space.” The Lord Buddha thereupon discoursed, saying: “It is equally impossible to estimate the merit10 of an enlightened disciple, who discharges the exercise of charity, unperturbed by the seductive influences of phenomena. Subhuti, the mind of an enlightened disciple ought thus to be indoctrinated.”11

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can we measure the distance of the limitless universe of space?”9 Subhuti answered, “Honored One! It’s impossible to measure the distance of the limitless universe of space.” The Lord Buddha then explained, “It’s just as impossible to measure the merit10 of an enlightened disciple who practices charity, unaffected by the tempting influences of the world. Subhuti, this is how the mind of an enlightened disciple should be trained.”11

1 Discoursing upon illusory ideas concerning the world of sentient life, the Lord Buddha stated that these were already eliminated from the minds of his enlightened disciples. The reference in the text is to disciples in process of instruction, and these the Lord Buddha commanded to relegate to oblivion the deceptive idea of the reality of sentient life, to dissolve within their minds its nauseous dregs, to put away its horrid stain, and cause it to vanish like snow in a glowing furnace. —Chinese Annotation.

1 Talking about misleading ideas regarding the world of living beings, the Lord Buddha said that his enlightened disciples had already let go of these thoughts. The text refers to students who were still learning, and the Lord Buddha instructed them to forget the false notion of the reality of living beings, to remove the unpleasant remnants of those ideas from their minds, to clear away the terrible marks left by those thoughts, and to make them disappear like snow in a hot furnace. —Chinese Annotation.

“The very nature of phenomena demonstrates that they must have had a beginning, and that they must have an end.” —Lay Sermons. Huxley.

“The very nature of phenomena shows that they must have had a beginning and that they must have an end.” —Lay Sermons. Huxley.

2 By adopting the term Mieh-Tu, Chinese Buddhists appear well prepared to refute a prevalent notion that their concept of deliverance is equivalent to annihilation. Mieh usually means annihilation, but Tu—to cross over in safety, is the antithesis of annihilation. After due consideration of the significance of the terminology, perhaps it will be generally conceded that English renderings of Mieh-Tu as Deliverance or Salvation, are not without some degree of justification.

2 By using the term Mieh-Tu, Chinese Buddhists seem ready to challenge the common belief that their idea of deliverance means total destruction. Mieh typically means annihilation, but Tu—to safely cross over—contrasts with annihilation. After carefully considering the meaning of the terminology, it might be widely accepted that English translations of Mieh-Tu as Deliverance or Salvation are somewhat justified.

“All these I command and exhort to enter on the state of the unsurpassed Nirvana (Pari Nirvana), and for ever to free themselves from the conditions of being to which they severally belong.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“All these I command and encourage to pursue the state of supreme Nirvana (Pari Nirvana) and to free themselves forever from the conditions of existence to which they individually belong.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

3 “The dewdrop slips into the shining sea.” —Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

3 “The dewdrop falls into the sparkling ocean.” —Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

“The dewdrop re-becomes the shining sea.” —Chioh-Hsien (a Chinese monk).

“The dewdrop turns back into the shining sea.” —Chioh-Hsien (a Chinese monk).

“The popular exoteric systems agree in defining Nirvana negatively as a state of absolute exemption from the circle of transmigration as a state of entire freedom from all forms of materiality, from all passion and exertion, mentally and emotionally, a state of indifference therefore alike to joy and pain. Positively they define Nirvana as the highest stage of spiritual liberty and bliss, as absolute immortality through absorption of the soul into itself. Individuality is preserved, and Buddhas who have entered Nirvana occasionally reappear again to intervene on behalf of the faithful.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“The popular mainstream beliefs agree in defining Nirvana negatively as a state of complete freedom from the cycle of rebirth, free from all material desires, passions, and mental or emotional struggles, thus being indifferent to both joy and suffering. Positively, they describe Nirvana as the highest level of spiritual freedom and happiness, as everlasting life achieved through the soul merging with itself. Individuality is maintained, and Buddhas who have reached Nirvana sometimes return to help the faithful.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

4 The able commentator Ti-Ching observes that many people, like Ananda—a favourite disciple of Buddha—are in error when they suppose their minds to be located within their material bodies. This interesting aspect of Buddhist psychology is made tolerably clear in the familiar narrative known generally as The Enlightenment of Ananda. Therein the Lord Buddha endeavours to prove that as objects within ourselves are invisible, the illuminating mind cannot be asserted to inhabit exclusively our material bodies. He also indicates that it cannot be affirmed to occupy any appointed sphere outside ourselves, it being usually understood that we observe only those objects by which we are environed. The Lord Buddha also controverts the theory, enunciated by Ananda, that the mind is secreted somewhere within the organs of sense; which assumption is based upon a notion that the seeing eye, and differentiating mind, are mysteriously correlated.

4 The skilled commentator Ti-Ching points out that many people, like Ananda—a favorite disciple of Buddha—are mistaken when they think their minds are located within their physical bodies. This intriguing aspect of Buddhist psychology is made fairly clear in the well-known story generally referred to as The Enlightenment of Ananda. In this narrative, the Lord Buddha tries to demonstrate that since the objects within ourselves are invisible, the illuminating mind cannot be said to exist solely in our physical bodies. He also suggests that we cannot affirm it occupies any specific space outside ourselves, as it is usually understood that we only perceive those objects around us. The Lord Buddha also disputes the theory proposed by Ananda that the mind is hidden somewhere within the sense organs; this assumption is based on the idea that the seeing eye and the distinguishing mind are mysteriously linked.

5 “This belief in self is regarded so distinctly as a heresy that two well-known words in Buddhist terminology have been coined on purpose to stigmatise it. The first of these is Sakkayaditthi, ‘the heresy of individuality,’ the name given to this belief as one of the three primary delusions (the others being doubt, and belief in the efficacy of rites or ceremonies) which must be abandoned at the very first stage of the Buddhist path of holiness. The other is Attavada, ‘the doctrine of soul or self,’ which is the name given to it as a part of the chain of causes which lead to the origin of evil. It is there classed—with sensuality, heresy (as to eternity and annihilation), and belief in the efficacy of rites and ceremonies—as one of the four Upadanas, which are the immediate cause of birth, decay, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair.”—Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.

5 “This belief in the self is so strongly viewed as a heresy that two well-known terms in Buddhist terminology have been created specifically to condemn it. The first is Sakkayaditthi, meaning 'the heresy of individuality,' which refers to this belief as one of the three main delusions (the others being doubt, and the belief in the effectiveness of rituals) that must be let go of at the very beginning of the Buddhist path to holiness. The second is Attavada, meaning 'the doctrine of soul or self,' which labels it as part of the chain of causes that leads to the origin of evil. It's categorized there—alongside sensuality, heresy regarding eternity and annihilation, and belief in the effectiveness of rituals—as one of the four Upadanas, which are the direct causes of birth, decay, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair.”—Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.

6 “The first of six Paramita—charity, morality, endurance, energy, contemplation, wisdom—cardinal virtues, or means of progressing towards Nirvana. The virtue of religious charity, implying all kinds of self-denying acts, almsgiving, sacrifice, etc.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

6 “The first of the six Paramita—charity, morality, endurance, energy, contemplation, wisdom—key virtues that help in the journey towards Nirvana. The virtue of religious charity involves all forms of selfless acts, charity, sacrifice, and more.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

7 “The kind of craving excitement, which follows on sensation, and causes the delusion of self and the lust of life—creating either delight in the objects that present themselves, or an eager desire to supply a felt want—this eager yearning thirst growing into sensuality, desire of future life, or love of the present world, is the origin of all suffering. Sorrow and suffering will be overcome, extinguished, if this ‘thirst’ be quenched, this lust of life destroyed. ‘He who overcomes this contemptible thirst, sufferings fall off from him like water drops from a lotus leaf.’”—Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.

7 “The kind of craving excitement that comes from sensation, which leads to the illusion of self and the desire for life—creating either joy in the things we encounter or a strong wish to fulfill a need—this intense yearning that grows into sensuality, the desire for future experiences, or the love of the present world, is the root of all suffering. Pain and suffering can be overcome and eliminated if this ‘thirst’ is satisfied, if this craving for life is destroyed. ‘He who conquers this despicable thirst, will shed his sufferings like drops of water from a lotus leaf.’”—Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.

8 Fah, the Chinese equivalent of Dharma—Law, appears to be a generic term for all religious doctrines incidental to Buddhism. The Buddhas are invariably referred to as Fah-Wang—Princes of the Law. The Sutras are frequently alluded to as Fah-Pao—Jewels of the Law. The monks are usually designated Fah-Men—Disciples of the Law. The interminable process of transmigration is depicted by Fah-Luen—Wheel of the Law. The dissemination of Buddhistic tenets is typified by Chuan-Fah-Luen—Revolving Wheel of the Law. Religious designations consonant with the idea of Law, are held in high esteem amongst the Buddhist ecclesiastical orders. Of such are Fah-Ai—Lover of the Law; Fah-Lien—Approved in the Law; Fah-Ming—Brightness of the Law (compare Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism.

8 Fah, the Chinese equivalent of Dharma—Law, seems to be a broad term for all religious teachings related to Buddhism. The Buddhas are always referred to as Fah-Wang—Princes of the Law. The Sutras are often called Fah-Pao—Jewels of the Law. The monks are typically called Fah-Men—Disciples of the Law. The endless cycle of rebirth is represented by Fah-Luen—Wheel of the Law. The spread of Buddhist beliefs is illustrated by Chuan-Fah-Luen—Revolving Wheel of the Law. Religious titles associated with the concept of Law are highly regarded among Buddhist clergy. These include Fah-Ai—Lover of the Law; Fah-Lien—Approved in the Law; Fah-Ming—Brightness of the Law (see Eitel’s Handbook of Chinese Buddhism).

9 “Subhuti, can the western, or southern, or northern regions of space be measured? or the four midway regions of space (i.e., N.E., S.E., S.W., N.W.), or the upper and lower regions: can either of these be accurately measured or defined?”— Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

9 “Subhuti, can we measure the western, southern, or northern parts of space? Or the four intermediate regions of space (i.e., Northeast, Southeast, Southwest, Northwest), or the upper and lower regions: can any of these be precisely measured or defined?”— Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

10 “Of all the modes of acquiring merit, that of almsgiving is the principal; it is the chief of the virtues that are requisite for the attainment of the Buddhaship; it is the first of the four great virtues, viz.: almsgiving, affability, promoting the prosperity of others, and loving others as ourselves; it is superior to the observance of the precepts—the path that all the Buddhas have trod—a lineage to which they have all belonged.... The giving of alms softens the mind, and brings it into subjection, by which the ascetic is prepared for the exercise of the rites he is afterwards to practise.... The faithful are required to give in alms of that which they have honestly earned by their own personal exertions.... There must be a willing mind respecting that which they offer, from the time that the intention of making the offering is formed to the time when it is presented, as well as after it has been made.... When the gift, the giver, and the receiver are all pure, the reward is proportionately great.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

10 “Of all the ways to earn merit, giving to others is the most important; it’s the core of the virtues needed to achieve Buddhahood; it’s the first of the four great virtues: giving, kindness, helping others thrive, and loving others as we love ourselves; it’s more important than following the rules—the path all the Buddhas have walked, a legacy they all share.... Giving alms opens the heart and helps to discipline the mind, preparing the ascetic for the rituals they will practice later.... The faithful should give from what they’ve honestly earned through their own efforts.... There must be a willing spirit in regard to what they offer, from the moment the intention to give is formed until it’s actually given, and even afterwards.... When the gift, the giver, and the receiver are all pure, the reward is correspondingly great.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

“Let his livelihood be kindliness,
 His conduct righteousness,
 Then in the fulness of gladness
 He will make an end of grief.”
Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.

[Chapter 5]

[Chapter 5]

The Lord Buddha interrogated Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Is it possible that by means of his physical body,1 the Lord Buddha may be clearly perceived?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! It is impossible that by means of his physical body, the Lord Buddha may be clearly perceived. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as a physical body, is in reality not merely a physical body.” Thereupon the Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “Every form or quality of phenomena is transient and illusive. When the mind realises that the phenomena of life are not real phenomena, the Lord Buddha may then be clearly perceived.”2

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Is it possible to clearly perceive the Lord Buddha through his physical body?” Subhuti responded, “No! Honored of the Worlds! It’s impossible to clearly perceive the Lord Buddha by means of his physical body. And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha calls a physical body is really not just a physical body.” Then the Lord Buddha said to Subhuti, “Every form or quality of phenomena is temporary and deceptive. When the mind understands that the phenomena of life are not real phenomena, the Lord Buddha can then be clearly perceived.”

1 “Primitive Buddhism distinguished a material, visible, and perishable body (Seh-Shenlit., the Body of Form) and an immaterial, invisible, immortal body (Fah-Shenlit., the Body of Law) as the constituents of every personality. This dichotomism, taught, as it seems by Sakyamuni himself, was ever afterwards retained as regards the nature of ordinary mortals. But in later ages, when the combined influence of Sivaism, which ascribed to Siva a threefold body (called Dharmakaya—essence, Sambhogakaya—reflex intelligence, and Nirmanakaya—practical issue of his intelligence), and that of Brahmanism with its Trimurti, gave rise to the Buddhist dogma of a Triratna (San-Pao—the precious Buddha, the precious Law, and the precious Priesthood), trichotomism was taught with regard to the nature of all Buddhas. Again they ascribed to every Buddha a triple form of existence, viewing him: (1) as having entered Nirvana; (2) as existing in reflex in the world of form; (3) as existing or having existed on earth.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

1 “Primitive Buddhism recognized a physical, visible, and temporary body (Seh-Shenlit., the Body of Form) and a non-physical, invisible, eternal body (Fah-Shenlit., the Body of Law) as the components of every individual. This distinction, believed to be taught by Sakyamuni himself, has always been maintained in relation to ordinary people. However, in later times, the combined influence of Sivaism, which attributed a threefold body to Siva (known as Dharmakaya—essence, Sambhogakaya—reflex intelligence, and Nirmanakaya—practical expression of his intelligence), alongside the impact of Brahmanism with its Trimurti, led to the Buddhist doctrine of Triratna (San-Pao—the precious Buddha, the precious Law, and the precious Priesthood). Consequently, a trichotomous view was adopted regarding the nature of all Buddhas. They attributed to each Buddha a triple form of existence, seeing him: (1) as having entered Nirvana; (2) as existing in a reflexive manner in the world of form; (3) as existing or having existed on earth.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2 The spiritual Buddha must be realised within the mind, otherwise there can be no true perception of the Lord Buddha.—Chinese Annotation.

2 The spiritual Buddha needs to be recognized within the mind, or else there won't be any genuine understanding of the Lord Buddha.—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 6]

[Chapter 6]

Subhuti enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! In future ages, when this scripture is proclaimed, amongst those beings destined to hear, shall any conceive within their minds a sincere, unmingled faith?”1

Subhuti asked the Lord Buddha, “Esteemed of the Worlds! In future times, when this scripture is shared, among those who are meant to hear it, will anyone develop a genuine, pure faith in their minds?”1

The Lord Buddha replied to Subhuti, saying: “Have no such apprehensive thought! Even at the remote period of five centuries subsequent to the Nirvana of the Lord Buddha,2 there will be many disciples observing the monastic vows,3 and assiduously devoted to good works.4 These, hearing this scripture proclaimed, will believe in its immutability, and similarly conceive within their minds a pure, unmingled faith. Besides, it is important to realise that faith5 thus conceived, is not exclusively in virtue of the insular thought of any particular Buddha, but because of its affiliation with the concrete6 thoughts of myriad Buddhas, throughout infinite ages. Therefore, amongst the beings destined to hear this Scripture proclaimed, many, by momentary reflection, will intuitively7 conceive a pure and holy faith.”

The Lord Buddha responded to Subhuti, saying: “Don’t worry about that! Even five centuries after the Lord Buddha’s Nirvana, there will be many followers keeping the monastic vows and dedicated to good deeds. They, hearing this scripture announced, will believe in its permanence and will hold a pure, undiluted faith in their hearts. It's also essential to understand that this faith isn’t just based on the individual thoughts of any single Buddha, but connects with the profound thoughts of countless Buddhas throughout endless time. So, among those who will hear this scripture, many, through brief contemplation, will instinctively develop a pure and sacred faith.”

“Subhuti, the Lord Buddha by his prescience,8 is perfectly cognisant of all such potential disciples, and for these also there is reserved an immeasurable merit. And why? Because, the minds of these disciples will not revert to such arbitrary concepts of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, a personality, qualities or ideas coincident with Law, or existing apart from the idea of Law. And why? Because, assuming the permanency and reality of phenomena, the minds of these disciples would be involved in such distinctive ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Affirming the permanency and reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, their minds would inevitably be involved in resolving these same definitions. Postulating the inviolate nature of qualities or ideas which have an existence apart from the Law, there yet remain to be explained these abstruse distinctions—an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Therefore, enlightened disciples ought not to affirm the permanency or reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, nor postulate as being of an inviolate nature, qualities or ideas having an existence apart from the concept of Law.”

"Subhuti, the Lord Buddha, with his foresight, is fully aware of all potential disciples, and there is an immense merit reserved for them. And why is that? Because these disciples' minds will not fall back into arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, a personality, qualities, or concepts that are unrelated to the idea of Law. And why? Because if they assumed that phenomena were permanent and real, their minds would get caught up in these distinct ideas of an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. By asserting the permanence and reality of qualities or ideas related to the Law, their minds would inevitably be involved in trying to clarify these definitions. If they assert that qualities or ideas exist apart from the Law, there still remain complex distinctions to explain—such as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Therefore, enlightened disciples should not affirm the permanence or reality of qualities or ideas that are related to the Law, nor should they propose that qualities or ideas exist independently of the concept of Law."

“Thus, we are enabled to appreciate the significance of those words which the Lord Buddha invariably repeated to his followers: ‘You disciples must realise that the Law which I enunciated, was presented before your minds in the simile of a raft.9 If the Law—having fulfilled its function in bearing you to the other shore (Nirvana)10—with its coincident qualities and ideas must inevitably be abandoned,11 how much more inevitable must be the abandonment of qualities or ideas which have an existence apart from the Law?’”

“Therefore, we can understand the importance of the words that the Lord Buddha often said to his followers: ‘You disciples need to realize that the Law I taught was presented to you using the metaphor of a raft.9 Once the Law has done its job of taking you to the other shore (Nirvana)10—with its related qualities and ideas—it must surely be let go,11 so how much more necessary is it to let go of qualities or ideas that exist separately from the Law?’”

1 Compare the question addressed by Jesus to His disciples, “When the Son of Man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?”

1 Compare the question Jesus asked His disciples, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?”

“In fulness of the times—it fell
 The Buddha died, the great Tathagata,
 Even as a man ’mongst men, fulfilling all:
 And how a thousand thousand lakhs since then
 Have trod the Path which leads whither he went
 Unto Nirvana, where the Silence lives.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

3 When a novice seeks admission to a monastic order, an ordination service is conducted by a chapter of monks, at which the following vows are administered. “I take the vow not to destroy life. I take the vow not to steal. I take the vow to abstain from impurity. I take the vow not to lie. I take the vow to abstain from intoxicating drinks, which hinder progress and virtue. I take the vow not to eat at forbidden times. I take the vow to abstain from dancing, singing, music, and stage plays. I take the vow not to use garlands, scents, unguents, or ornaments. I take the vow not to use a high or broad bed. I take the vow not to receive gold or silver.” (Compare Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.)

3 When someone new wants to join a monastic order, a group of monks holds an ordination service where the following vows are taken. “I vow not to kill. I vow not to steal. I vow to avoid impurity. I vow not to lie. I vow to refrain from intoxicating drinks that hinder progress and virtue. I vow not to eat at inappropriate times. I vow to avoid dancing, singing, music, and theater. I vow not to use garlands, fragrances, lotions, or ornaments. I vow not to sleep on a high or wide bed. I vow not to accept gold or silver.” (Compare Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.)

4 “The primary motive for doing good, and worshipping Buddha, according to these scriptures (the Buddha scriptures of Nipal), is the hope of obtaining absorption into the nature of the god, and being freed from transmigrations.”—China. Sir John Francis Davis.

4 “The main reason for doing good and worshipping Buddha, according to these texts (the Buddha scriptures from Nepal), is the desire to merge with the nature of the divine and to be free from the cycle of rebirth.”—China. Sir John Francis Davis.

“And is thy faith so much to give,
 Is it so hard a thing to see,
 That the Spirit of God, whate’er it be,
 The Law that abides and changes not, ages long,
 The Eternal and Nature-Born—these things be strong?”
The Bacche. Euripides (translated by Gilbert Murray).

6 “The elements of faith, like the flowers, appear to have their roots in eternity.”—Chang-Ming (a Chinese monk).

6 “The elements of faith, like flowers, seem to have their roots in eternity.”—Chang-Ming (a Chinese monk).

7 “Were it possible for a Yogi and a Rahat from India, a Greek philosopher from one of the schools holding the power of intuition, an ascetic from the wilds of Syria or the mountains of Egypt, a heretic from the school at Alexandria, a monk from one of the monasteries of Europe, a schoolman of the Middle Ages, and a modern German metaphysician of the school of Schelling to meet together, and were it possible for them to forget their sectarian subtleties and nice distinctions, they would find that there was a vast mass of speculation about the main principles of which they were agreed. They would be of one mind relative to the four following propositions: (1) That there is an objective potency of intellect; (2) That this potency can be rendered subjective by concentrated thought, ascetic exercises, or determined effort; (3) That this potency can only be acquired by the initiated; (4) That the initiated may enlarge this potency to a limitless extent. As to the efficient cause of the potency, there would be a difference of opinion; some would ascribe it to intuition alone, while others would attribute it to an alliance with higher spirits or with God; but of its existence there would be no doubt.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

7 “If it were possible for a Yogi and a Rahat from India, a Greek philosopher from one of the intuition-based schools, an ascetic from the wilderness of Syria or the mountains of Egypt, a heretic from the school in Alexandria, a monk from one of Europe's monasteries, a scholar of the Middle Ages, and a modern German metaphysician from the Schelling school to gather together, and if they could put aside their sectarian differences and intricate distinctions, they would discover that they all agree on a significant amount of speculation regarding the main principles. They would find common ground on four key propositions: (1) There is an objective potential of intellect; (2) This potential can become subjective through focused thought, ascetic practices, or determined effort; (3) This potential can only be attained by the initiated; (4) The initiated can expand this potential indefinitely. As for the source of this potential, there would be differing opinions; some would attribute it to intuition alone, while others would say it comes from a connection with higher beings or with God; but its existence would be undeniable.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

“For now I know, by what within me stirs,
 That I shall teach compassion unto men
 And be a speechless world’s interpreter.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

9 “(By me) is made a well-constructed raft,—so said Bhagavat—I have passed over (to Nibbana), I have reached the further bank, having overcome the torrent (of passions); there is no (further) use for a raft: therefore if thou like, rain, O sky!”—Sutta-Nipata. Fausböll.

9 “(By me) a well-built raft is made,—so said the Buddha—I have crossed over (to Nirvana), I have reached the other shore, having conquered the flood (of desires); a raft is no longer necessary: so if you want to, rain, O sky!”—Sutta-Nipata. Fausböll.

10 Compare an idea expressed by the apostle Paul, “wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.” Note, also, the similarity of a metaphor employed in Christian anthology, “We shall meet on that beautiful ‘shore.’”

10 Think about the idea shared by the apostle Paul, “the law was our guide to lead us to Christ.” Also, notice the similarity in the metaphor used in Christian writings, “We will meet on that beautiful ‘shore.’”

“Our little systems have their day,
  They have their day and cease to be;
  They are but broken lights of Thee,
 But thou, O Lord, art more than they.”
Tennyson.

“Reposing on eternal truth ... when thy mind shall have worked through the snares of delusion, then wilt thou attain to indifference to the doctrines, which are either (already) received, or have yet to be received.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

“Lying in eternal truth ... when your mind has navigated through the traps of illusion, then you will reach a point of indifference to the beliefs that are either already accepted or are still to be accepted.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.


[Chapter 7]

[Chapter 7]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Has the Lord Buddha really attained to supreme spiritual wisdom? Or has he a system of doctrine which can be specifically formulated?”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Has the Lord Buddha truly reached the highest level of spiritual wisdom? Or does he have a set of teachings that can be clearly defined?”

Subhuti replied, saying: “As I understand the meaning of the Lord Buddha’s discourse, he has no system of doctrine which can be specifically formulated; nor can the Lord Buddha express, in explicit terms, a form of knowledge which can be described as supreme spiritual wisdom. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha adumbrated in terms of the Law, is transcendental and inexpressible. Being a purely spiritual concept, it is neither consonant with Law, nor synonymous with anything apart from the Law. Thus1 is exemplified the manner by which wise disciples and holy Buddhas, regarding intuition2 as the Law of their minds, severally attained to different planes of spiritual wisdom.”3

Subhuti replied, saying: “From what I gather from the Lord Buddha’s teachings, he doesn’t have a specific doctrine that can be neatly defined; nor can the Lord Buddha articulate a kind of knowledge that can be called the highest spiritual wisdom. And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha described in terms of the Law is beyond expression and transcendent. Being a purely spiritual concept, it doesn’t align with the Law, nor does it mean anything outside of the Law. Thus1 illustrates how wise disciples and holy Buddhas, viewing intuition2 as the Law of their minds, each reached different levels of spiritual wisdom.”3

1 “So it appears that all the sages and wise men who have lived have all adopted this mode of diffusive doctrine [doctrine which admits of no particular distinction (wou-wei)], and hence the differences which have occurred.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

1 “So it seems that all the sages and wise individuals throughout history have embraced this broad way of teaching [a teaching that doesn't make specific distinctions (wou-wei)], and that's why the differences have arisen.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

2 The Chinese text “i-wu-wei-fah,” is explained by a learned expositor as tsz-ran-choih-sing—the intuitive faculty.

2 The Chinese phrase “i-wu-wei-fah” is described by an informed commentator as tsz-ran-choih-sing—the intuitive ability.

3 “Because that thing which was known or taught by the Tathagata is incomprehensible and inexpressible. It is neither a thing nor no-thing. And why? Because the holy persons are of imperfect power.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Because what was known or taught by the Tathagata is beyond understanding and can't be put into words. It's neither something nor nothing. And why? Because the enlightened beings have limited power.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.


[Chapter 8]

[Chapter 8]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? If a benevolent person bestowed as alms, an abundance of the seven treasures1 sufficient to fill the universe, would there accrue to that person a considerable merit?”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “What do you think? If a kind person gave as charity a vast amount of the seven treasures1 enough to fill the universe, would that person receive significant merit?”

Subhuti replied, saying:2 “A very considerable merit, Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, what is referred to does not partake of the nature of ordinary merit, and in this sense the Lord Buddha made mention of a ‘considerable’ merit.”

Subhuti replied, saying:2 “A significant merit, Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because what is being referred to isn’t the same as ordinary merit, and in this context, the Lord Buddha spoke of a ‘considerable’ merit.”

The Lord Buddha rejoined, saying: “If a disciple adhered with implicit faith to a stanza3 of this Scripture, and diligently explained it to others, the intrinsic merit of that disciple would be relatively greater. And why? Because, Subhuti, the holy Buddhas, and the Law4 by which they attained to supreme spiritual wisdom, severally owe their inception to the truth5 of this sacred Scripture. Subhuti, what is ordinarily termed the Buddhic Law, is not really a Law attributive to Buddha.”6

The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “If a disciple truly believed in a verse3 from this Scripture and actively shared it with others, that disciple's inherent merit would be much greater. And why is that? Because, Subhuti, the holy Buddhas and the teachings4 that led them to ultimate spiritual enlightenment all arise from the truth5 found in this sacred Scripture. Subhuti, what is commonly referred to as the Buddhic Law is not actually a Law that belongs to Buddha.”6

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal.

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal.

2 “Very considerable indeed, world-honoured one! But why so? This merit being in its very character of the nature of that which is no merit at all, so Tathagata speaks of it as being ‘much.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

2 “That's really significant, esteemed one! But why is that? This merit, by its very nature, is the opposite of what we consider merit, so the Tathagata refers to it as ‘much.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti said: Yes, O Sugata, that son or daughter of a good family would produce a large stock of merit. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, what was preached by the Tathagata as the stock of merit, is no stock of merit. Therefore, the Tathagata preaches: ‘a stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed!’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti said: Yes, O Sugata, that son or daughter of a good family would generate a lot of merit. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, what the Tathagata taught as the source of merit is not actually a source of merit. That's why the Tathagata says: ‘a source of merit, a source of merit indeed!’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Gatha—hymns and chants, narratives containing moral expositions in metrical language. A Chinese text says, ‘32 characters form one Gatha,’ which refers to a certain variety of Gatha called Aryagiti, a metre consisting of 32 instants.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

3 “Gatha—hymns and chants, stories that include moral lessons in rhythmical language. A Chinese text states, ‘32 characters make up one Gatha,’ which pertains to a specific type of Gatha known as Aryagiti, a meter composed of 32 instants.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

4 “The Dharmma (Law) is perfect, having nothing redundant, and nothing wanting. But it requires attention, that the benefits it offers may be received. Though the teacher may attain great happiness, and enter Nirvana, it does not follow that the disciple will necessarily possess the same privileges; he may be like one who binds the crown upon the head of another. Therefore each one for himself must exercise meditation, and observe the ordinances, that he may attain wisdom.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

4 “The Dharmma (Law) is perfect, without any excess or deficiency. However, it requires attention so that its benefits can be received. Just because the teacher may achieve great happiness and reach Nirvana, it doesn’t mean the disciple will automatically enjoy the same benefits; he might be like someone who places a crown on someone else's head. Therefore, each individual must practice meditation and follow the rules to gain wisdom.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

5 “Faith is in the world the best property for a man; Dhamma (the Law), well observed, conveys happiness; truth, indeed, is the sweetest of things; and the life they call the best which is lived with understanding.”—Sutta-Nipata. Fausböll.

5 “Faith is the best asset a person can have; Dhamma (the Law), when followed correctly, leads to happiness; truth, truly, is the most wonderful thing; and the life considered the best is one lived with understanding.”—Sutta-Nipata. Fausböll.

6 “What then, Subhuti? All the Buddhas, and all the perfect laws of the Buddhas, have sprung from (the principles of) this one Sutra; but, Subhuti, that which is spoken of as the Law of Buddha, is after all not such a Law (or, is a Law of no Buddha).”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

6 “What then, Subhuti? All the Buddhas, and all the true teachings of the Buddhas, have come from this one Sutra; but, Subhuti, what is referred to as the Law of Buddha isn’t really a Law (or, isn’t a Law of any Buddha).”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Because, O Subhuti, the highest perfect knowledge of the holy and enlightened Tathagatas is produced from it; the blessed Buddhas are produced from it. And why? Because, O Subhuti, when the Tathagata preached: ‘The qualities of Buddha, the qualities of Buddha indeed!’ They were preached by him as no-qualities of Buddha. Therefore they are called the qualities of Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Because, O Subhuti, the highest perfect knowledge of the holy and enlightened Tathagatas comes from it; the blessed Buddhas arise from it. And why? Because, O Subhuti, when the Tathagata taught: ‘The qualities of Buddha, the qualities of Buddha indeed!’ He taught them as the no-qualities of Buddha. Therefore, they are called the qualities of Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

An erudite Chinese commentator suggests that the words fei-fuh-fah are synonymous with wu-wei-fah—intuition, already observed in the preceding section. A familiar passage from Lao-Tsz, “Infinite truth is inexpressible,” is quoted by our commentator as serving to illustrate the difficulty of giving expression to an idea equivalent to the Law of Buddha.

An insightful Chinese commentator suggests that the words fei-fuh-fah are similar to wu-wei-fah—intuition, as discussed in the previous section. Our commentator quotes a well-known passage from Lao-Tsz: “Infinite truth is inexpressible,” to highlight the challenge of articulating an idea that is equivalent to the Law of Buddha.


[Chapter 9]

[Chapter 9]

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May a Scrotapatti1 (having entered the stream which bears on to Nirvana) thus moralise within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits2 commensurate with the merit of a Scrotapatti’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Scrotapatti is simply a descriptive term signifying ‘having entered the stream.’ A disciple who avoids the seductive phenomena of form, sound, odour, taste, touch, and Law,3 is named a Scrotapatti.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Can a Scrotapatti1 (one who has entered the stream that leads to Nirvana) think to themselves, ‘I have gained the benefits2 that come with being a Scrotapatti’?” Subhuti replied, “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because ‘Scrotapatti’ is just a term that means ‘having entered the stream.’ A disciple who steers clear of the tempting experiences of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and Law3 is called a Scrotapatti.”

The Lord Buddha again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May a Sakridagami4 (who is subject only to one more reincarnation) thus muse within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits consonant with the merit of a Sakridagami’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Sakridagami is merely a descriptive title denoting ‘only one more reincarnation’;5 but in reality there is no such condition as ‘only one more reincarnation,’ hence Sakridagami is merely a descriptive title.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti again, saying: “What do you think? Can a Sakridagami4 (someone who has only one more reincarnation left) think to himself, ‘I have achieved the benefits that come with being a Sakridagami’?” Subhuti answered, saying: “No! Honored One of the Worlds! And why is that? Because Sakridagami is just a label meaning ‘only one more reincarnation’;5 but truly, there is no such state as ‘only one more reincarnation,’ so Sakridagami is just a label.”

The Lord Buddha once again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Anagami6 (having entire immunity from reincarnation) thus reflect within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits which accord with the merit of an Anagami?’” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Anagami is merely a designation meaning ‘immunity from reincarnation’; but in reality there is no such condition as ‘immunity from reincarnation,’ hence Anagami is merely a convenient designation.”

The Lord Buddha once again asked Subhuti, "What do you think? Can an Anagami6 (who is completely free from reincarnation) think to himself, ‘I have achieved the benefits that come with being an Anagami?’” Subhuti responded, “No! Honored One! Why? Because Anagami is just a term that means ‘free from reincarnation’; but in reality, there is no such condition as being ‘free from reincarnation,’ so Anagami is just a useful label.”

The Lord Buddha yet again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Arhat7 (having attained to absolute quiescence of mind) thus meditate within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, there is not in reality a condition synonymous with the term Arhat. Honoured of the Worlds! if an Arhat thus meditates within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’ there would be obvious recurrence of such arbitrary concepts as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Honoured of the Worlds! When the Lord Buddha declared that in absolute quiescence8 of mind, perfect observance of the Law,9 and true spiritual perception, I was pre-eminent amongst the disciples, I did not cogitate thus within myself, ‘I am an Arhat, freed10 from desire!’ Had I thus cogitated, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’11 the ‘Honoured of the Worlds’ would not have declared concerning me, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka’;12 but, in reality, Subhuti was perfectly quiescent and oblivious to phenomena;13 hence the allusion, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka.’”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti again, saying: “What do you think? Can an Arhat7 (who has achieved complete peace of mind) meditate on his own, thinking, ‘I have become an Arhat’?” Subhuti answered, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, in reality, there is no state equivalent to the term Arhat. Honoured of the Worlds! If an Arhat meditates on his own, thinking, ‘I have become an Arhat,’ it would lead to repetitive thoughts about concepts like entity, being, living being, and personality. Honoured of the Worlds! When the Lord Buddha stated that in absolute peace8 of mind, perfect adherence to the Law,9 and true spiritual insight, I was distinguished among the disciples, I did not think to myself, ‘I am an Arhat, free10 from desire!’ If I had thought, ‘I have become an Arhat,’11 the ‘Honoured of the Worlds’ would not have said about me, ‘Subhuti enjoys the practices of the Aranyaka’;12 yet, in truth, Subhuti was completely peaceful and unaware of phenomena;13 hence the reference, ‘Subhuti enjoys the practices of the Aranyaka.’”

1 “One who has entered (Apatti) the stream (Srota), the latter being defined as the stream of holy conduct (which bears on to Nirvana).”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

1 "Someone who has entered the stream (Srota), which is defined as the stream of righteous conduct that leads to Nirvana."—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2 “Men walking in the path, and standing in the fruits thereof, those who have attained some fruits thereof but are yet learners ... whose hope is directed to the utmost goal.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

2 “People walking along the path and enjoying its rewards, those who have experienced some benefits but are still learners ... whose hopes are aimed at the ultimate goal.” —Questions of King Milinda. T.W. Rhys Davids.

“Enter the path! There spring the healing streams
 Quenching all thirst! there bloom th’ immortal flowers
 Carpeting all the way with joy! there throng
 Swiftest and sweetest hours.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

3 Perhaps in the sense that a Scrotapatti clearly perceives and understands the tentative nature of the Law, his mind being trained to regard it as “a well-constructed raft,” designed to bear him safely across the stream of spiritual consciousness upon which he has entered. It also appears that the Scrotapatti discerns in the idea of the Law, something as unreal and ephemeral as the phenomena of form, sound, odour, taste, or touch. In seeking “Nirvana’s blest abode,” the Scrotapatti endeavours to “rise by daily sojourn with these phantasies—to lovelier verities.”

3 Maybe in the way that a Scrotapatti clearly sees and understands the tentative nature of the Law, his mind is trained to think of it as “a well-built raft,” meant to carry him safely across the stream of spiritual awareness he has entered. It also seems that the Scrotapatti recognizes in the idea of the Law something as unreal and fleeting as the phenomena of form, sound, smell, taste, or touch. In pursuing “Nirvana’s blessed place,” the Scrotapatti tries to “rise by daily engagement with these illusions—to more beautiful truths.”

4 “The path Sakradagami is so called because he who enters it will receive one more birth. He may enter this path in the world of men, and afterwards be born in a Dewa-Loka (a heavenly mansion—in Chinese Tien-Kong); or he may enter it in a Dewa-Loka, and afterwards be born in the world of men.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

4 “The path of Sakradagami gets its name because anyone who takes it will have one more rebirth. They might start on this path in the human world and then be reborn in a Dewa-Loka (a heavenly realm—in Chinese Tien-Kong); or they could begin in a Dewa-Loka and later be born in the human world.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

5 “Because he is not an individual being (Dharma), who has obtained the state of a Sakridagami.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

5 “Because he is not a separate person (Dharma), who has achieved the state of a Sakridagami.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

6 “Not returning, or not being reborn in the world of desire. The third degree of Buddhistic saintship, the third class of Aryas, embracing all those who are no more liable to be reborn as men, though they are to be born once more as Devas, when they will forthwith become Arhats and enter Nirvana.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

6 “Not returning, or not being reborn in the world of desire. The third level of Buddhist sainthood, the third class of Aryas, includes everyone who is no longer subject to being reborn as humans, although they will be reborn as Devas, where they will immediately become Arhats and enter Nirvana.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“Men devoid of passion, and of malice, and of dulness, men in whom the great evils (lust, becoming, delusion, and ignorance) are not, men who have neither craving thirst, nor grasping desires.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

"Men without passion, malice, or dullness; men who are free from the great evils (lust, attachment, delusion, and ignorance); men who have no craving or selfish desires."—Questions of King Milinda. T.W. Rhys Davids.

7 “Explained by Fuh-Ko—the Fruit of Buddha (Buddhaphalam). The original meaning of Arhat (deserving, worthy) is overlooked by most Chinese commentators, who explained the term as if it were written Ari-Hat—Destroyer of the Enemy. The following two explanations are given, Shah-Tseh—Destroying the Enemy, and Puh-Seng—not to be reborn, i.e., except from transmigration. There is, however, a third explanation which is based on the original meaning of Arhat, namely Ying-Kong—deserving worship. The Arhat is the perfected Arya (one who has mastered the four spiritual truths—Sz-Ti—and thereby entered the path to Nirvana called Arya-Marga), and the state of Arhat can accordingly be attained only by passing through the different degrees of saintship. Arhatship implies possession of supernatural powers, and is to be succeeded either by Buddhaship or by immediate entrance into Nirvana.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

7 “Explained by Fuh-Ko—the Fruit of Buddha (Buddhaphalam). The original meaning of Arhat (deserving, worthy) is often missed by most Chinese commentators, who interpret the term as though it were Ari-Hat—Destroyer of the Enemy. The following two interpretations are provided: Shah-Tseh—Destroying the Enemy, and Puh-Seng—not to be reborn, i.e., except through transmigration. However, there is a third interpretation based on the original meaning of Arhat, namely Ying-Kong—deserving worship. The Arhat is the perfected Arya (one who has mastered the four spiritual truths—Sz-Ti—and thus embarked on the path to Nirvana called Arya-Marga), and the state of Arhat can only be achieved by progressing through the various levels of saintship. Arhatship includes the possession of supernatural powers, and is followed either by Buddhaship or by immediate entry into Nirvana.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“Those who have entered the stream, and those who, free from stains, will only be reborn once more on earth, those who will never again return, and Arhats—these are they who dwell in the ‘city of Righteousness.’”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

“Those who are on the path, and those who, free from impurities, will only be born once more on earth, those who will never return again, and Arhats—these are the ones who live in the ‘city of Righteousness.’”—Questions of King Milinda. T.W. Rhys Davids.

In the moral philosophy of Mencius there is inculcated a principle of having few desires (Kwa-Yuh), and Chinese Buddhists frequently institute comparisons between those “few desires” and “no desires” of the Arhats.

In Mencius's moral philosophy, the idea of having fewer desires (Kwa-Yuh) is emphasized, and Chinese Buddhists often compare these "few desires" to the "no desires" of the Arhats.

8 A Chinese annotator suggests it is almost self-evident that “absolute quiescence” is the condition of mind in which knowledge is acquired by intuition.

8 A Chinese annotator suggests it's almost obvious that “absolute stillness” is the state of mind in which knowledge is gained through intuition.

“More is the treasure of the Law than gems;
 Sweeter than comb its sweetness; its delights
 Delightful past compare.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

10 “The man for whom there is nothing upon which he depends, who is independent, having understood the Dhamma (Law), for whom there is no desire for coming into existence or having existence—him I call calm.... He has overcome desire.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

10 “The person who relies on nothing and is independent, having understood the Dhamma (Law), for whom there’s no desire to be born or to exist—him I call calm.... He has overcome desire.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

“This devotion should be practised with that determination by which thought becomes indifferent (to every worldly object). He who has abandoned all desires which spring from imagination, and has, by means of his heart, kept back the whole collection of the senses from every direction (in which they would go), should gradually become passive by his mind’s acquiring firmness, and, by having caused his heart to remain within himself, should not place his thoughts on anything at all.”—Bhagavad-Gita.—J. Cockburn Thomson.

“This devotion should be practiced with the determination that allows thoughts to become indifferent to all worldly things. Someone who has let go of all desires that come from imagination and has used their heart to rein in all the senses from all directions should gradually become more passive as their mind grows firm. By keeping their heart focused within, they shouldn’t place their thoughts on anything at all.”—Bhagavad-Gita.—J. Cockburn Thomson.

11 “There are some persons who obtain the Rahatship instantaneously, while others can only obtain it by a slow process; they must give aims, make offerings, study the Bana (Law), and exercise the necessary discipline.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

11 “There are some people who achieve the Rahatship right away, while others can only reach it through a gradual process; they have to set goals, make offerings, study the Bana (Law), and practice the required discipline.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

12 “Explained by ‘living in retirement,’ ‘a hermit,’ ‘a recluse.’ The term signifies ascetics who live in strict seclusion. There are three classes to be distinguished. The first is called Dharma Aranyaka—‘Hermits of the Law,’ their favourite tenet being the doctrine that the principles (Dharma) constituting human nature are originally calm, still, and passive. Their favourite tree is the Bodhi tree (tree of intelligence). The second class is called Matanga Aranyaka. Its members reside constantly in cemeteries, and are prohibited to approach a village within hearing distance of the lowing of a cow. They are probably called after the Hindoo caste Matanga. The third class, or the Danataka Aranyaka, is formed by hermits living on the sea beach or on half-tide rocks.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

12 “Referred to as ‘living in retirement,’ ‘a hermit,’ or ‘a recluse.’ The term describes ascetics who live in strict seclusion. There are three categories to distinguish. The first is called Dharma Aranyaka—‘Hermits of the Law,’ whose main belief is that the principles (Dharma) that make up human nature are originally calm, still, and passive. Their preferred tree is the Bodhi tree (the tree of knowledge). The second category is known as Matanga Aranyaka. Its members live primarily in cemeteries and are not allowed to come within earshot of a cow's mooing in a village. They are likely named after the Hindu caste Matanga. The third category, or Danataka Aranyaka, consists of hermits living on the beach or on half-tide rocks.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“Men whose home is the forest, men who have taken on themselves the extra vows, men full of joy, men who are wearing rough garments, men rejoicing in solitude.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

“Men who live in the forest, men who have embraced additional vows, men full of joy, men dressed in coarse clothing, men celebrating their solitude.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

13 “The Sramana (Buddhist monk) who sets himself to overcome the evils of existence, retires from all intercourse with the world, and either practises meditation, simply, or joins with it the practice of Kasina (an ascetic exercise to free the mind from all agitation), by which he is enabled to attain to Nimitta (inward illumination), which is represented as being a mental illumination that brings with it, in various degrees of perfection, the state of mind called Samadhi (absolute self-abstraction). This result of profound meditation includes undisturbed tranquillity, and equanimity the most entire, and in its superior degree it produces unconsciousness.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

13 “The Sramana (Buddhist monk) who seeks to overcome the hardships of life withdraws from all social interaction and either practices meditation alone or combines it with the practice of Kasina (an ascetic exercise to free the mind from all distractions). Through this, he can attain Nimitta (inner illumination), which is described as a mental clarity that brings, in various levels of perfection, the mental state known as Samadhi (complete self-absorption). This outcome of deep meditation includes undisturbed calmness, total equanimity, and in its higher form, it leads to a state of unconsciousness.”—Eastern Monachism. Spencer Hardy.

“The world-honoured one would not then have said: ‘Subhuti, what is this but the name of the one who delights in the mortification of an Aranyaka (forest devotee),’ regarding ‘Subhuti’ as in truth not acting at all, but as a mere name, then (in such forgetfulness of self) ‘he is one who delights in self-mortification.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“The world-honored one wouldn’t have said: ‘Subhuti, what is this but the name of the person who enjoys the suffering of a forest devotee,’ seeing ‘Subhuti’ as not really doing anything at all, but just a name. In that kind of self-forgetfulness, ‘he is someone who takes pleasure in self-denial.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.


[Chapter 10]

[Chapter 10]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? When the Lord Buddha, in a previous life, was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha,1 was there communicated to him any prescribed Law, or system of doctrine, whereby he eventually became a Buddha?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! When the Lord Buddha was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, neither prescribed Law nor system of doctrine was communicated to him, whereby he eventually became a Buddha.”2

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking: “What do you think? When I was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha in a past life, was there any prescribed Law or system of doctrine given to me that led to my becoming a Buddha?” Subhuti responded, saying: “No! Honored of the Worlds! When you were a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, no prescribed Law or system of doctrine was communicated to you that would have led to your becoming a Buddha.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? may an enlightened disciple thus ponder within himself, ‘I shall create numerous Buddhist Kingdoms’?”3 Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, kingdoms thus created would not in reality be Buddhist kingdoms,4 therefore ‘the creation of numerous Buddhist kingdoms’ is merely a figure of speech.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking, “What do you think? Can an enlightened disciple think to himself, ‘I will create many Buddhist Kingdoms’?”3 Subhuti answered, “No! Honored One! And why is that? Because the kingdoms created this way wouldn’t actually be Buddhist kingdoms,4 so ‘the creation of many Buddhist kingdoms’ is just a figure of speech.”

The Lord Buddha, continuing, addressed Subhuti, saying: “Enlightened disciples ought therefore to engender within themselves a pure and holy mind; they ought not to depend on the phenomena of form, sound, odour, taste, touch, or Law; they ought to sedulously cultivate a mind independent of every material aid.”

The Lord Buddha went on to speak to Subhuti, saying: “Enlightened followers should develop a pure and sacred mindset; they shouldn’t rely on the appearances of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or teachings; they should diligently cultivate a mindset that is independent of any material support.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “Supposing a man with a body as pretentious as Sumeru,5 prince among mountains, would you esteem such a body as being great?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Exceedingly great, Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, the Lord Buddha referred not to a physical body,6 but to mental and spiritual concepts of bodies, in which sense a body may be regarded as really Great.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “Imagine a person with a body as impressive as Sumeru, the king of mountains. Would you consider such a body to be great?” Subhuti answered, saying: “Incredibly great, Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because the Lord Buddha wasn’t talking about a physical body, but rather about mental and spiritual ideas of bodies, in which case a body can be seen as truly great.”

1Ran-Teng-Fuh—the Buddha who illuminates brightly, Ting-Kwang-Fuh—the Buddha of fixed light. The twenty-fourth predecessor of Sakyamuni, from whom the latter received the assurance of his being destined for Buddhaship.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

1Ran-Teng-Fuh—the Buddha who shines brightly, Ting-Kwang-Fuh—the Buddha of steady light. The twenty-fourth predecessor of Sakyamuni, from whom Sakyamuni got the confirmation of his future as a Buddha.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

It is recorded in The Diamond Sutra that the Lord Buddha, in previous incarnations, assiduously performed religious vows, and deferentially honoured all contemporary Buddhas. An image of a former master, Dipankara Buddha, may frequently be observed in Chinese Buddhist temples, immediately behind the more conspicuous figure of Sakyamuni Buddha. Amongst Chinese Buddhist anniversaries may be found the birthday of “the ancient Buddha, Ran-Teng” (Dipankara), and the period allocated for its observance is the 22nd day of the 8th month. (Compare Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.)

It is recorded in The Diamond Sutra that the Lord Buddha, in past lives, diligently fulfilled religious vows and respectfully honored all the Buddhas of his time. An image of a former master, Dipankara Buddha, can often be seen in Chinese Buddhist temples, right behind the more prominent figure of Sakyamuni Buddha. Among the anniversaries celebrated in Chinese Buddhism is the birthday of “the ancient Buddha, Ran-Teng” (Dipankara), which is observed on the 22nd day of the 8th month. (Compare Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.)

2 “It is maintained by the Buddhists that the founder of their faith was entirely αὐτοδιδακτος. The wisdom that he manifested was the outbeaming of a self-enkindled flame, not an inspiration from any exterior source, nor was it the result of any process of thought or reason. To whatever object he directed his intellectual vision, whether it was near or remote, whether past, present, or future, he saw it in a moment, intuitively, and yet in a manner the most absolutely perfect.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

2 "Buddhists believe that the founder of their faith was completely self-taught. The wisdom he showed was the result of a self-generated spark, not inspired by anything external, nor the outcome of any reasoning or thought process. No matter what he focused his mind on—whether it was something close or far away, past, present, or future—he understood it instantly, in a way that was entirely perfect."—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

3 “Bhagavat said: If Subhuti, a Bodhisattva, should say, ‘I shall create numbers of worlds,’ he would say what is untrue. And why? Because, O Subhuti, when Tathagata preached numbers of worlds, numbers of worlds indeed! they were preached by him as no numbers. Therefore they are called numbers of worlds.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Bhagavat said: If Subhuti, a Bodhisattva, were to say, ‘I will create many worlds,’ that would be false. And why? Because, O Subhuti, when Tathagata talked about many worlds, they were presented by him as having no specific numbers. That’s why they're referred to as many worlds.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti, what think you? are the various lands and territories of the Buddhas completely perfected by the Bodhisatwas who occupy them? No! World-honoured one! for this complete perfection of which we speak is after all no perfection at all, it is only an empty name.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Are the different lands and territories of the Buddhas fully perfected by the Bodhisattvas who inhabit them? No! World-honored one! Because this so-called complete perfection is really not perfection at all; it’s just an empty label.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“The wise man is always thinking: How can I and these beings become Buddhas? I will preach this true Law, upon which the happiness of all beings depends, for the benefit of the world.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

“The wise person is always considering: How can I and these beings become Buddhas? I will share this true Law, on which the happiness of all beings relies, for the benefit of the world.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

The words Chuang-Yen, in a Buddhist sense, usually refer to the erection or adornment of temples and pagodas, almsgiving, or other work of merit. Used in conjunction with Fuh-Tu—Buddhist kingdoms, as exemplified by our text, Chuang-Yen appears to convey a much wider meaning. Perhaps it refers to a spiritual creation and adornment by charity and virtue, of kingdoms owning allegiance to the Lord Buddha.

The term Chuang-Yen in Buddhism typically refers to building or decorating temples and pagodas, giving to charity, or performing other good deeds. When paired with Fuh-Tu—Buddhist kingdoms, as shown in our text, Chuang-Yen seems to have a much broader meaning. It may imply a spiritual creation and beautification through charity and virtue of kingdoms that are devoted to the Lord Buddha.

“In twelve years from the commencement of his public teaching, Buddha’s doctrines had spread over sixteen Indian kingdoms.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

“In twelve years from the start of his public teaching, Buddha’s teachings had spread across sixteen Indian kingdoms.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

4 A Buddhist kingdom has no outward manifestation; it is a pure and holy condition of mind.—Chinese Annotation.

4 A Buddhist kingdom doesn’t have any visible signs; it’s a pure and sacred state of mind.—Chinese Annotation.

Compare the statement attributed to Christ, “The kingdom of heaven is within you.”

Compare the statement attributed to Christ, “The kingdom of heaven is within you.”

5 “Sumeru is probably Elburz, an isolated mountain of the Caucasus range, 18,000 feet in height, and surrounded by low ground.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

5 "Sumeru is likely Elburz, a remote mountain in the Caucasus range, standing 18,000 feet tall, and surrounded by flat land."—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

“But when they brought the painted palanquin
 To fetch him home, the bearers of the poles
 Were the four Regents of the Earth, come down
 From Mount Sumeru.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

6 “The modification which Buddhism introduced into the idea of transmigration was necessitated by the early Buddhist theories of the nature of sentient beings; according to which, man consists of an assemblage of different properties or qualities ... these are Material qualities, Sensations, abstract Ideas, Tendencies of mind, and mental Powers.... The first group, Material Qualities, are like a mass of foam, that gradually forms, and then vanishes. The second group, the Sensations, are like a bubble dancing on the face of the water. The third group, the Ideas, are like the uncertain mirage that appears in the sunshine. The fourth group, the mental and moral Predispositions, are like the plantain stalk, without firmness or solidity. And the last group, the Thoughts, are like a spectre or magical illusion. The body itself is constantly changing, ... man is never the same for two consecutive moments.” (Compare Rhys Davids’ Buddhism, and Spence Hardy’s Manual.

6 “The change that Buddhism made to the idea of reincarnation was driven by early Buddhist views on the nature of sentient beings; according to these views, a person is made up of a mix of different properties or qualities... these include Material Qualities, Sensations, abstract Ideas, Tendencies of mind, and mental Powers.... The first group, Material Qualities, is like a mass of foam that gradually forms and then disappears. The second group, Sensations, is like a bubble dancing on the surface of the water. The third group, Ideas, is like the uncertain mirage that appears in the sunlight. The fourth group, mental and moral Predispositions, is like the plantain stalk, lacking firmness or solidity. And the last group, Thoughts, is like a ghost or magical illusion. The body itself is constantly changing... a person is never the same for two consecutive moments.” (Compare Rhys Davids’ Buddhism, and Spence Hardy’s Manual.

“For instance, Subhuti, a man might have a body and a large body, so that his size should be as large as the king, of mountains, Sumeru. Do you think then, O Subhuti, that his selfhood would be large? Subhuti said, Yes! his selfhood would be large. And why? Because, when the Tathagata preached ‘selfhood,’ selfhood indeed! it was preached by him as no selfhood. Therefore it is called selfhood.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“For example, Subhuti, a person might have a body that’s enormous, as large as the king of mountains, Sumeru. Do you think, Subhuti, that this person's sense of self would be big? Subhuti replied, Yes! their sense of self would be big. And why? Because when the Tathagata talked about ‘self,’ it was really about no self at all. That’s why it’s referred to as self.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.


[Chapter 11]

[Chapter 11]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If there were rivers Ganges as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, would the aggregate grains of sand1 be of considerable number?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Of very considerable number, Honoured of the Worlds! The rivers Ganges alone would be innumerable, and much more innumerable would be the grains of sand.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If there were as many rivers as the grains of sand on the banks of the Ganges, would the total number of grains of sand be significant?” Subhuti responded, saying: “Absolutely significant, Honoured of the Worlds! The rivers alone would be countless, and the grains of sand would be even more countless.”

The Lord Buddha thereupon addressed Subhuti, saying: “I have a truth to declare unto you! If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were to bestow in the exercise of charity, an abundance of the seven treasures,2 sufficient to fill as many boundless universes as there would be grains of sand in these innumerable rivers, would the cumulative merit of such a disciple be considerable?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Very considerable, Honoured of the Worlds!”

The Lord Buddha then spoke to Subhuti, saying: “I have something important to share with you! If a good disciple, whether male or female, were to donate a huge amount of the seven treasures, enough to fill countless universes like the number of grains of sand in all these countless rivers, would the total merit of such a disciple be significant?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Very significant, Honoured of the Worlds!”

The Lord Buddha then declared unto Subhuti, “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were with implicit faith to adhere to a stanza of this Scripture, and diligently explain it to others, the consequent merit would be relatively greater than the other.”

The Lord Buddha then said to Subhuti, “If a devoted disciple, whether male or female, were to wholeheartedly follow a verse from this Scripture and carefully explain it to others, the resulting merit would be significantly greater than the rest.”

“Sarvanikchepa, by which you deal
 With all the sands of Gunga, till we come
 To Antah-Kalpas, where the unit is
 The sands of ten crore Gungas.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

2 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal.

2 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal.

“As much of the seven precious substances as would fill as many great chiliocosms as there are sands in all the rivers above described.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“As much of the seven precious substances as would fill as many great worlds as there are grains of sand in all the rivers mentioned above.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.


[Chapter 12]

[Chapter 12]

The Lord Buddha, continuing, said unto Subhuti: “Wherever this Scripture is proclaimed, even though it were but a stanza comprising four lines, you should realise that that place would be sanctified by the presence of the whole realm of gods, men, and terrestrial spirits,1 who ought unitedly to worship, as if before a sacred shrine of Buddha.2 But what encomium shall express the merit of a disciple who rigorously observes, and diligently studies,3 the text of this Scripture? Subhuti, you should realise that such a disciple will be endowed4 with spiritual powers commensurate with initiation in the supreme, incomparable, and most wonderful Law.5 Whatever place constitutes a repository for this sacred Scripture, there also the Lord Buddha may be found, together with disciples worthy of reverence and honour.”

The Lord Buddha continued, saying to Subhuti: "Wherever this Scripture is announced, even if it’s just a stanza with four lines, you should understand that place is blessed by the presence of all the gods, humans, and earthly spirits,1 who should collectively worship as if they were at a sacred shrine of Buddha.2 But what praise can capture the worth of a disciple who strictly follows and thoroughly studies,3 the text of this Scripture? Subhuti, you should know that such a disciple will receive4 spiritual powers equal to those who are initiated into the supreme, unparalleled, and most amazing Law.5 Wherever this sacred Scripture is kept, there too the Lord Buddha can be found, along with disciples deserving of respect and honor.”

1 Adopting Max Müller’s rendering. In the Chinese text are Tien, Ren, and O-Siu-Lo—heaven, or gods—men, and Asurus; the latter defined as fei-tien—not celestial spirits.

1 Following Max Müller’s interpretation. In the Chinese text are Tien, Ren, and O-Siu-Lo—heaven, or gods—humans, and Asurus; the last one specified as fei-tien—not celestial spirits.

2 “Whatever spirits have come together here, either belonging to the earth or living in the air, let us worship the perfect Buddha, revered by gods and men.”

2 “Whatever spirits are gathered here, whether from the earth or the skies, let us honor the perfect Buddha, respected by both gods and humans.”

“Whatever spirits have come together here, either belonging to the earth or living in the air, let us worship the perfect Dhamma (Law), revered by gods and men.”

“Whatever spirits have gathered here, whether from the earth or the sky, let us honor the perfect Dhamma (Law), respected by both gods and humans.”

“Whatever spirits have come together here, either belonging to the earth or living in the air, let us worship the perfect Sangha (community of monks), revered by gods and men.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

“Whatever spirits have gathered here, whether they are of the earth or dwell in the air, let us honor the perfect Sangha (community of monks), respected by both gods and humans.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

3 “Earnestness is the path of immortality (Nirvana), thoughtlessness the path of death. Those who are in earnest do not die, those who are thoughtless are as if dead already.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

3 “Being serious is the way to immortality (Nirvana), while being careless leads to death. Those who take things seriously do not die, while those who are careless are already as good as dead.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

4 “They, O Subhuti, will be endowed with the highest wonder (with what excites the highest wonder). And in that place, O Subhuti, there dwells the teacher (Sasa, often the name of Buddha), or one after another holding the place of the wise preceptor. (This may refer to a succession of teachers banding down the tradition one to another.)”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

4 “They, Subhuti, will be filled with the greatest awe (with what sparks the greatest awe). And there, Subhuti, resides the teacher (Sasa, often the name for Buddha), or one after another taking the role of the wise guide. (This might refer to a line of teachers passing down the tradition from one to the next.)”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti, know that this man has acquired knowledge of the most excellent and desirable of all Laws; and if the place where this Sutra is recited be worthy of all honour as the place of Buddha himself, so also is this disciple honourable and worthy of the highest respect.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

"Subhuti, understand that this person has gained knowledge of the most superior and desirable of all teachings; and if the location where this Sutra is recited is deserving of the utmost respect as the place of Buddha himself, then this disciple is also honorable and worthy of the highest regard."—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

5 “The praises of the Bana (Law) are a favourite subject with the native authors.... The discourses of Buddha are as a divine charm to cure the poison of evil desire; a divine medicine to heal the disease of anger; a lamp in the midst of the darkness of ignorance; a fire, like that which burns at the end of a Kalpa, to destroy the evils of repeated existence; a meridian sun to dry up the mud of covetousness; a great rain to quench the flame of sensuality; a thicket to block up the road that leads to the Narakas (place of the wicked); a ship in which to sail to the opposite shore of the ocean of existence; a collyrium for taking away the eye-film of heresy; a moon to bring out the night-blowing lotus of merit; a succession of trees bearing immortal fruit, placed here and there, by which the traveller may be enabled to cross the desert of existence; ... a straight highway by which to pass to the incomparable wisdom; a door of entrance to the eternal city of Nirvana; ... a treasury of the best things it is possible to obtain; and a power by which may be appeased the sorrow of every sentient being.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

5 “The teachings of the Bana (Law) are a popular topic among native writers.... The teachings of Buddha act like a divine remedy to heal the poison of desire; a holy treatment for the ailment of anger; a light in the darkness of ignorance; a fire, similar to the one that burns at the end of a Kalpa, to eliminate the troubles of endless rebirth; a bright sun to evaporate the muck of greed; a heavy rain to douse the fire of lust; a barrier to block the path leading to the Narakas (place of the wicked); a boat to take you across to the other side of the ocean of existence; an eye salve to remove the blindness of false beliefs; a moon to reveal the night-blooming lotus of good deeds; a series of trees bearing eternal fruit, scattered along the way so that travelers can navigate the desert of life; ... a straight path to reach unparalleled wisdom; a gateway to the everlasting city of Nirvana; ... a treasure trove of the best things you can acquire; and a force that can alleviate the suffering of every living being.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.


[Chapter 13]

[Chapter 13]

Upon that occasion, Subhuti enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! by what name shall this Scripture be known, that we may regard it with reverence?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “Subhuti, this Scripture shall be known as The Diamond Sutra,1 ‘The Transcendent Wisdom,’ by means of which we reach ‘The Other Shore.’ By this name you shall reverently regard it! And why? Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha declared as ‘transcendent wisdom’ by means of which we reach ‘the other shore,’ is not essentially ‘transcendent wisdom’—in its essence it transcends all wisdom.”

On that occasion, Subhuti asked the Lord Buddha, “Honored One! What will this Scripture be called so that we can hold it in reverence?” The Lord Buddha answered, “Subhuti, this Scripture will be called The Diamond Sutra,1 ‘The Transcendent Wisdom,’ through which we attain ‘The Other Shore.’ By this name, you should hold it with reverence! And why? Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha refers to as ‘transcendent wisdom’ that allows us to reach ‘the other shore’ is not really ‘transcendent wisdom’—its true nature goes beyond all wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying:2 “What think you? Did the Lord Buddha formulate a precise system of Law or doctrine?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha did not formulate a precise system of Law or doctrine.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying:2 “What do you think? Did the Lord Buddha establish a clear system of law or teachings?” Subhuti responded, saying: “Respected One! The Lord Buddha did not establish a clear system of law or teachings.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? within the myriad worlds which comprise this universe, are the atoms of dust numerous?”3 Subhuti replied, saying: “Very numerous, Honoured of the Worlds!”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking: “What do you think? In the countless worlds that make up this universe, are the atoms of dust numerous?”3 Subhuti answered: “Very numerous, Honored One!”

The Lord Buddha continuing his discourse, said: “Subhuti, the Lord Buddha declares that all these ‘atoms of dust’ are not essentially ‘atoms of dust,’ they are merely termed ‘atoms of dust.’ The Lord Buddha also declares that those ‘myriad worlds’ are not really ‘myriad worlds,’ they are merely designated ‘myriad worlds.’”

The Lord Buddha, continuing his teaching, said: “Subhuti, the Lord Buddha states that all these ‘atoms of dust’ aren’t truly ‘atoms of dust’; they are just called ‘atoms of dust.’ The Lord Buddha also says that those ‘myriad worlds’ aren’t actually ‘myriad worlds’; they are just referred to as ‘myriad worlds.’”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions?”4 Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha cannot be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as his ‘thirty-two bodily distinctions,’ are not in reality ‘bodily distinctions,’ they are merely defined as ‘bodily distinctions.’”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking, “What do you think? Can the Lord Buddha be seen through his thirty-two physical characteristics?”4 Subhuti responded, “No! Honored One! The Lord Buddha cannot be seen through his thirty-two physical characteristics. And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha calls his ‘thirty-two physical characteristics’ are not actually ‘physical characteristics’; they are just labeled as ‘physical characteristics.’”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, day by day sacrificed lives innumerable as the sands of the Ganges;5 and if another disciple adhered with implicit faith to a stanza of this Scripture, and diligently explained it to others, the intrinsic merit of such a disciple would be relatively greater than the other.”6

The Lord Buddha told Subhuti, “If a good disciple, whether male or female, sacrificed countless lives every day like the sands of the Ganges;5 and if another disciple had complete faith in a verse of this Scripture and explained it diligently to others, the true merit of that disciple would be greater than the other.”6

1 A Chinese annotator observes, that as the “diamond” excels all other precious gems in brilliance and indestructibility, so also the “wisdom” of this Sutra transcends and shall outlive all other knowledge known to philosophy.

1 A Chinese commentator notes that just as the “diamond” shines brighter than any other precious stone and is unbreakable, the “wisdom” of this Sutra surpasses and will outlast all other knowledge recognized by philosophy.

2 “Then what do you think, O Subhuti, is there anything that was preached by the Tathagata? Subhuti said: Not indeed, O Bhagavat, there is nothing that was preached by the Tathagata.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “Then what do you think, Subhuti, is there anything that the Tathagata taught? Subhuti replied: No, indeed, Bhagavat, there’s nothing that the Tathagata taught.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

It appears to be one of the distinctive features of primitive Buddhism, that its founder made provision for the utmost development of the human intellect, within the spheres of religion and philosophy. According to the text of The Diamond Sutra, the Lord Buddha evidently disclaims any suggestion on his part to formulate a “precise system of Law or doctrine” corresponding to the idea of a creed.

It seems to be one of the unique aspects of early Buddhism that its founder allowed for the fullest development of human intellect in the fields of religion and philosophy. According to the text of The Diamond Sutra, the Lord Buddha clearly denies any intention to create a “precise system of Law or doctrine” that aligns with the idea of a creed.

3 “Matter is infinitely divisible.”—The World as Idea and Will. Schopenhauer.

3 “Matter can be split infinitely.”—The World as Idea and Will. Schopenhauer.

  “After me repeat
Your numeration....
By Pundarikas unto Padumas,
Which last is how you count the utmost grains
Of Hastagiri ground to finest dust.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

“If the Buddha was not a materialist, in the sense of believing in the eternal existence of material atoms, neither could he in any sense be called a ‘spiritualist,’ or believer in the external existence of abstract spirit. With him creation did not proceed from an omnipotent spirit or mind evolving phenomena out of itself by the exercise of will, nor from an eternal self-existing, self-evolving germ of any kind. As to the existence in the universe of any spiritual substance which was not matter and was imperceptible to the senses, it could not be proved.”—Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

“If the Buddha wasn't a materialist, meaning he didn't believe in the eternal existence of material atoms, he also couldn't be called a ‘spiritualist’ or someone who believes in the external existence of an abstract spirit. For him, creation didn't come from an all-powerful spirit or mind that produced phenomena through will, nor from any eternal, self-existing, self-evolving essence. Regarding the existence of any spiritual substance in the universe that wasn't matter and couldn't be perceived by the senses, there was no proof of it.” —Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

“Subhuti, all these countless particles of dust Tathagata declares are no real particles; it is but an empty name by which they are known. Tathagata declares that all these systems of worlds composing the great chiliocosm are no real worlds; they are but empty names.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, all these countless particles of dust that the Tathagata talks about are not actual particles; they’re just an empty label we use to refer to them. The Tathagata says that all these systems of worlds making up the vast chiliocosm are not real worlds; they’re just empty names.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

4 “Characteristic physiological marks by which every Buddha may be recognised.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

4 “Distinct physical features that can identify every Buddha.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“Can Tathagata be known by the thirty-two signs (of a hero)?”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Can Tathagata be recognized by the thirty-two signs (of a hero)?”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“The King saluted, and Queen Maya made
 To lay her babe before such holy feet;
 But when he saw the prince the old man cried
 ‘Ah, Queen not so!’ and thereupon he touched
 Eight times the dust, laid his waste visage there,
 Saying, ‘O Babe! I worship! Thou art He!
 I see the rosy light, the foot-sole marks,
 The soft curled tendrils of the Swastika,
 The sacred primal signs thirty-and-two,
 The eighty lesser tokens. Thou art Buddh,
 And thou wilt preach the Law and save all flesh
 Who learn the Law.’”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

“Bright were the divine lineaments of his face, and as the Master (of the Law) gazed in awe and holy reverence, he knew not how to compare the spectacle; the body of Buddha and his Kashaya robe were of a yellowish red colour, and from his knees upward the distinguishing marks of his person were exceedingly glorious.”—The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.

“Bright were the divine features of his face, and as the Master (of the Law) looked on in awe and deep respect, he couldn't find a way to compare what he was seeing; Buddha's body and his Kashaya robe were a yellowish-red, and from his knees up, the distinguishing marks of his body were incredibly glorious.”—The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.

5 The Chinese expression Shen-Ming—life, invariably refers to life in an ordinary material sense, and which may be offered in sacrifice. But in Buddhist philosophy there is a spiritual Atman, which can be disposed of only by knowledge.

5 The Chinese term Shen-Ming—life, usually means life in a regular material way, which can be given up in sacrifice. However, in Buddhist philosophy, there is a spiritual Atman, which can only be understood through knowledge.

6 “Were any one to fill the bowl of Buddha with the choicest food, or to present oil, sugar, honey, medicaments in the greatest abundance, or to build thousands of Wiharas (monasteries or temples) splendid as those of Anuradhapura (an ancient city in Ceylon, the Anurogrammum of Ptolemy), or to present an offering to Buddha like that of Anepidu (a rich merchant of Sewet), the hearing or reading of one stanza of the Bana (Law) would be more meritorious than all.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

6 “Even if someone filled the Buddha's bowl with the finest food, or offered up oil, sugar, honey, and medicine in great plenty, or built thousands of Wiharas (monasteries or temples) as magnificent as those in Anuradhapura (an ancient city in Ceylon, the Anurogrammum of Ptolemy), or made a donation to the Buddha like that of Anepidu (a wealthy merchant from Sewet), simply hearing or reading one stanza of the Bana (Law) would be more rewarding than all of that.” —Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.


[Chapter 14]

[Chapter 14]

Upon that occasion, the venerable Subhuti, hearing the text of this scripture proclaimed, and profoundly realising its meaning, was moved to tears. Addressing the Lord Buddha, he said: “Thou art of transcendent wisdom, Honoured of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha in expounding this supreme canon of Scripture, surpassed in perspicuity every exposition previously heard by me, since my eyes1 were privileged to perceive this most excellent wisdom. Honoured of the Worlds! In years to come, if disciples hearing this scripture proclaimed, and having within their minds a pure and holy faith, engender true concepts of the ephemeral nature of phenomena—we ought to realise that the cumulative merit of such disciples will be intrinsic and wonderful. Honoured of the Worlds! The true concept of phenomena is, that these are not essentially phenomena, and hence the Lord Buddha declared that they are merely termed phenomena.”

Upon that occasion, the respected Subhuti, hearing the text of this scripture read aloud, and deeply understanding its meaning, was brought to tears. He said to the Lord Buddha: “You are of transcendent wisdom, Honoured of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha, in explaining this supreme scripture, has exceeded in clarity every explanation I have heard before, as my eyes1 have been fortunate enough to see this remarkable wisdom. Honoured of the Worlds! In the future, if disciples hear this scripture proclaimed, and with a pure and holy faith in their hearts, develop true insights into the impermanent nature of phenomena—we should understand that the collective merit of such disciples will be profound and remarkable. Honoured of the Worlds! The true understanding of phenomena is that they are not truly phenomena, and thus the Lord Buddha stated that they are only called phenomena.”

“Honoured of the Worlds! having heard this unprecedented Scripture, faith, clear understanding, and firm resolve to observe its precepts, follow as a natural sequence. If, in future ages, disciples destined to hear this Scripture, likewise believe, understand, and observe its precepts, their merit will incite the highest wonder and praise.2 And why? Because, the minds of those disciples3 will have outgrown such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because, the entity is in reality non-entity; and a being, a living being, or a personality, are ideas equally nebulous and hypothetical.4 Wherefore, discarding every arbitrary idea of phenomena, the wise and wholly enlightened were severally designated Buddha.”5

“Honored by the Worlds! Having heard this unique Scripture, faith, clear understanding, and a strong commitment to follow its teachings come naturally. If, in future times, followers who are meant to hear this Scripture also believe, understand, and follow its teachings, their merit will inspire the greatest admiration and praise.2 And why? Because the minds of those followers3 will have moved beyond simplistic ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because, in truth, an entity is a non-entity; and the concepts of being, living being, or personality are equally vague and theoretical.4 Therefore, by letting go of every simplistic idea of phenomena, the wise and fully enlightened were each called Buddha.”5

The Lord Buddha, assenting, said unto Subhuti: “If, in future ages, disciples destined to hear this Scripture, neither become perturbed by its extreme modes of thought,6 nor alarmed by its lofty sentiments,7 nor apprehensive about realising its high ideals8—these disciples also, by their intrinsic merit, will incite superlative wonder and praise.”

The Lord Buddha agreed and said to Subhuti: “If, in the future, followers who are meant to hear this Scripture don't get disturbed by its extreme ideas,6 don’t feel overwhelmed by its grand sentiments,7 and aren’t anxious about achieving its lofty goals8—these followers, because of their own merit, will inspire great wonder and admiration.”

“Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha referred to as the first Paramita9 (charity), is not in reality the first Paramita, it is merely termed the first Paramita

“Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha called the first Paramita9 (charity) isn't actually the first Paramita; it's just labeled as the first Paramita.”

“Subhuti, regarding the third Paramita (endurance), it is not in reality a Paramita, it is merely termed a Paramita. And why? Because, in a previous life, when the Prince of Kalinga10 (‘Kaliradja’) severed the flesh from my limbs and body, at that time I was oblivious to such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because, upon that occasion, when my limbs and body were rent asunder, had I not been oblivious to such arbitrary ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, there would have originated within my mind, feelings of anger and resentment.”

“Subhuti, about the third Paramita (endurance), it’s not actually a Paramita; it’s just called a Paramita. And why is that? Because in a past life, when the Prince of Kalinga10 (‘Kaliradja’) cut the flesh from my arms and body, I was completely unaware of the silly concepts of things like an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because at that moment, when my limbs and body were torn apart, if I hadn’t been unaware of those silly ideas like an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, I would have felt anger and resentment in my mind.”

“Subhuti, five hundred incarnations ago,11 I recollect that as a recluse practising the ordinances of the Kshanti-Paramita,12 even then I had no such arbitrary ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. Therefore, Subhuti, an enlightened disciple ought to discard as being unreal and illusive, every conceivable form of phenomena.13 In aspiring to supreme spiritual wisdom, the mind ought to be insensible to every sensuous influence, and independent of everything pertaining to sound, odour, taste, touch, or Law. There ought to be cultivated a condition of complete independence of mind; because, if the mind is depending upon any external aid, it is obviously deluded—there is in reality nothing external to depend upon.14 Therefore, the Lord Buddha declared that in the exercise of charity, the mind of an enlightened disciple ought not to depend upon any form of phenomena. Subhuti, an enlightened disciple desirous to confer benefits upon the whole realm of being, ought thus to be animated in the exercise of charity.”15

“Subhuti, five hundred lives ago, I remember that as a recluse following the principles of the Kshanti-Paramita, I didn’t hold any fixed ideas about entities, beings, living beings, or personalities. So, Subhuti, an enlightened disciple should let go of any notions of phenomena as being real and illusory. In seeking ultimate spiritual wisdom, the mind should be unaffected by any sensory experiences and independent of anything related to sound, smell, taste, touch, or the Law. There should be a complete independence of mind; because, if the mind relies on external support, it is clearly deceived—there is really nothing external to lean on. Therefore, the Lord Buddha stated that in practicing generosity, the mind of an enlightened disciple should not depend on any form of phenomena. Subhuti, an enlightened disciple who wishes to benefit all beings should be motivated to practice generosity.”

The Lord Buddha, in declaring the “unreality of phenomena,” also affirmed “that the whole realm of sentient life is ephemeral and illusory.”16

The Lord Buddha, by stating the “unreality of phenomena,” also confirmed “that the entire realm of sentient life is temporary and deceptive.”16

“Subhuti, the sayings of the Lord Buddha are true, credible, and immutable. His utterances are neither extravagant nor chimerical. Subhuti, the plane17 of thought to which the Lord Buddha attained, cannot be explained in terms synonymous with reality or non-reality.”

“Subhuti, the teachings of the Lord Buddha are genuine, trustworthy, and unchanging. His words are neither exaggerated nor illusory. Subhuti, the level of thought that the Lord Buddha reached cannot be described using terms that mean the same as reality or non-reality.”

“Subhuti, in the exercise of charity, if the mind of an enlightened disciple is not independent of every Law, he is like unto a person having entered impenetrable darkness, and to whom every object is invisible. But an enlightened disciple, discharging the exercise of charity with a mind independent of every Law, is like unto a person having the power of vision, in the meridian glory of the sunlight, and to whom every object is visible.”

“Subhuti, when it comes to giving, if the mind of an enlightened disciple isn’t free from any rules, it’s like someone who has stepped into complete darkness, where nothing can be seen. However, an enlightened disciple who practices giving with a mind free from all rules is like someone with perfect vision, basking in the bright sunlight, where everything is visible.”

“Subhuti, in future ages, if a good disciple, whether man or woman, rigorously studies and observes the text of this Scripture; the Lord Buddha, by means of his Buddhic wisdom,18 entirely knows and perceives that for such a disciple there is reserved a cumulative merit, immeasurable and illimitable.”

“Subhuti, in the future, if a good student, whether male or female, diligently studies and follows the teachings of this Scripture; the Lord Buddha, through his profound wisdom, fully understands and sees that for such a student there is a vast and unlimited accumulation of merit.”

1 “As one raises what has been overthrown, or reveals what has been hidden, or tells the way to him who has gone astray, or holds out an oil lamp in the dark that those who have eyes may see the objects, even so by the venerable Gotama in manifold ways the Dhamma (Law) has been illustrated.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

1 “As one lifts up what has fallen, uncovers what has been concealed, guides the lost, or holds out a lamp in the dark so that those who can see may recognize what’s around them, in many ways the esteemed Gotama has illustrated the Dhamma (Law).”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

2 “The chief of the priests of that establishment (the Jayendra convent) was a man of high moral character. He observed with the greatest strictness the religious rules and ordinances. He was possessed of the highest intelligence, and acquainted with all the points of a true disciple. His talents were eminent; his spiritual powers exalted; and his disposition affectionate.”—The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.

2 “The head priest of that establishment (the Jayendra convent) was a man of high moral integrity. He followed the religious rules and regulations with utmost care. He had exceptional intelligence and knew all the qualities of a true disciple. His talents were outstanding; his spiritual abilities were remarkable; and he had a caring nature.” —The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.

3 “They had within themselves the possession of a power by which all objective truth could be presented to their intellectual vision. They, therefore, partook of what in other systems would be regarded as divinity.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

3 “They held a power that allowed them to see all objective truth clearly. Because of this, they experienced what would be considered divine in other systems.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

4 “They have been divided into existing and non-existing, real and unreal, by those who had wrong notions; other laws also, of permanency, of being produced, of birth from something already produced, are wrongly assumed.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

4 “They have been categorized as existing and non-existing, real and unreal, by those who have mistaken beliefs; other principles, like permanence, creation, and birth from something that already exists, are also incorrectly assumed.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

5 “But, O Bhagavat, there will not arise in them any idea of a self, of a being, of a living being, of a person, nor does there exist for them any idea of no-idea. And why? Because, the idea of a self is no-idea, the idea of a being is no-idea, the idea of a living being is no-idea, the idea of a person is no-idea. And why? Because, the blessed Buddhas are freed from all ideas.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

5 “But, O Bhagavat, they won’t have any concept of a self, a being, a living being, or a person, nor will they entertain the notion of not having any concepts. And why? Because the concept of a self is a non-concept, the concept of a being is a non-concept, the concept of a living being is a non-concept, and the concept of a person is a non-concept. And why? Because the blessed Buddhas are free from all concepts.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

... “For birth and death End hence for me and those who learn
End hence for me and those who learn my Law.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

7 “As the Buddhist strove to reach a state of quietism or holy meditation in this world, namely the state of the perfect disciple or Arhat; so he looked forward to an eternal calm in the world to come, Nirvana. Buddha taught that this end could only be attained by the practice of virtue.”—The Indian Empire. Sir William Hunter.

7 “As the Buddhist aims to achieve a state of calm or holy meditation in this life, known as the state of the perfect disciple or Arhat; so he anticipates an eternal peace in the afterlife, Nirvana. Buddha taught that this goal can only be reached through living a virtuous life.”—The Indian Empire. Sir William Hunter.

8 “The heart of it is love, the end of it Is peace and consummation sweet.”—The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

8 “The essence of it is love, and the outcome Is peace and sweet fulfillment.”—The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

9 The first of six Paramita—charity, morality, endurance, energy, contemplation, wisdom—or means of attaining to Nirvana.

9 The first of six Paramita—generosity, ethics, perseverance, effort, meditation, wisdom—or ways to reach Nirvana.

“What the Tathagata preaches as the Prajna-Paramita, that was preached also by innumerable Blessed Buddhas. Therefore it is called the Prajna-Paramita,”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“What the Tathagata teaches as the Prajna-Paramita, that was also taught by countless Blessed Buddhas. That’s why it’s called the Prajna-Paramita,”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

10 “An ancient kingdom S.E. of Kos’ala, a nursery of heretical sects, the present Calingapatah, a town in the northern Circars (Lat. 18° 15 N., Long. 85° 11 E.).”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

10 “An ancient kingdom southeast of Kos’ala, a breeding ground for heretical sects, now known as Calingapatah, a town in the northern Circars (Lat. 18° 15 N., Long. 85° 11 E.).”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

It is recorded that the Lord Buddha, in a previous incarnation, was living in a mountainous region, strictly observing the monastic vows. The Prince of Kalinga, a cruel and dissolute ruler, having organised a hunting expedition, visited the secluded region, accompanied by numerous ladies of his harem. Fatigued by the excitement of the chase, the prince fell into a deep siesta. Meantime, the ladies resolved upon a short excursion along a mountain path. Unexpectedly meeting the Lord Buddha, they were greatly astonished at his dignified bearing and edifying conversation. When the prince awoke from his siesta, he was irritated to find that his ladies had disappeared. Instituting an immediate search, he became filled with implacable rage upon discovering them in the society of a hermit. The incident, as narrated in the Chinese text, proved to be a distressing sequel to the modest ladies’ innocent adventure. (Compare Chinese Annotations, etc.)

It’s recorded that the Lord Buddha, in a past life, was living in a mountainous area, strictly following the monastic vows. The Prince of Kalinga, a ruthless and indulgent ruler, organized a hunting trip and visited the secluded area with many women from his harem. Tired from the excitement of the chase, the prince fell into a deep sleep. Meanwhile, the women decided to take a short walk along a mountain path. When they unexpectedly encountered the Lord Buddha, they were greatly impressed by his dignified presence and enlightening conversation. When the prince woke up from his nap, he was annoyed to find that his women were missing. Starting an immediate search, he became filled with intense anger upon discovering them with a hermit. The incident, as described in the Chinese text, turned out to be a troubling outcome of the innocent adventure of the modest ladies. (Compare Chinese Annotations, etc.)

11 “Various forms of pre-existence to the number of 500 or 550 are recorded, in the course of which he (Buddha) marked his way up through as many different stages of transmigration from the lowest spheres of life to the highest, practising all kinds of asceticism, and exhibiting in every form the utmost unselfishness and charity.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

11 “Various forms of pre-existence, numbering 500 or 550, have been documented, during which he (Buddha) navigated numerous stages of reincarnation, moving from the lowest levels of existence to the highest, practicing all sorts of asceticism, and demonstrating the highest degree of selflessness and generosity.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“I and thou, O Arjuna! have passed through many transmigrations. I know all these.... Even though I am unborn, of changeless essence, and the lord also of all which exist, yet, in presiding over nature (Prakrita), which is mine, I am born by my own mystic power (Maya). For whenever there is a relaxation of duty, ... and an increase of impiety, I then reproduce myself for the protection of the good.... I am produced in every age.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

“I and you, O Arjuna! have gone through many lifetimes. I know all this.... Even though I am never born, of unchanging nature, and the ruler of everything that exists, I still manifest through my own mystical power (Maya) while overseeing nature (Prakrita), which is mine. Whenever there is a decline in duty, ... and an increase in wrongdoing, I then come back to protect the righteous.... I manifest in every era.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

12 “Explained by patient endurance of insult. The virtue of patience, implying constant equanimity under persecution, and excluding hatred and revenge.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

12 “This is described as enduring insults with patience. The quality of patience means maintaining calmness in the face of persecution, while also rejecting feelings of hatred and the desire for revenge.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

“Because, O Subhuti, I remember the past five hundred births, when I was the Rishi-Kshantivadin (preacher of endurance).”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Because, O Subhuti, I remember the past five hundred lives, when I was the Rishi-Kshantivadin (teacher of patience).”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

13 “Let (the Bodhisattva) be concentrated in mind, attentive, ever firm as the peak of Mount Sumeru, and in such a state (of mind) look upon all laws (and things) as having the nature of space (as being void), permanently equal to space, without essence, immovable, without substantiality. These, indeed, are the Laws, all and for ever.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

13 “Let the Bodhisattva stay focused and aware, always steady like the peak of Mount Sumeru, and in that state of mind, view all laws and things as having the nature of space (as being empty), consistently equal to space, without any essence, unchanging, and lacking substance. These are, indeed, the Laws, for all time.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

14 “Because what is believed is not believed (not to be depended on).”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

14 “Because what one believes can’t always be trusted.” —The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

15 “Hence Buddha declares that the mind of a Bodhisatwa ought not to rely on any formal act of charity. Subhuti, the Bodhisatwa ought to distribute his almsgiving for the purpose of benefiting the whole mass of sentient creatures, and yet Tathagata declares that as all dependencies are after all no real subjects of dependence, so also he says that all sentient creatures are not in reality what they are called.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

15 “Therefore, Buddha says that a Bodhisattva shouldn't depend on any formal acts of charity. Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should give to others with the aim of helping all sentient beings, but the Tathagata also states that since all dependencies aren't truly what they seem, all sentient beings aren't really what they're referred to as.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

16 Literally, “Every form of phenomena is really not phenomena; every form of sentient life is in reality not sentient life.”

16 Basically, “Every type of phenomenon is really not a phenomenon; every type of sentient life is actually not sentient life.”

17 The Buddhist term, Fah (Law).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The Buddhist term, Fah (Law).

18 “The omniscience of Buddha is not the knowledge of all things, but the power of knowing whatever he wishes to know. In opposition to other teachers, who deduce their doctrines from certain previously assumed principles, and who may err either in the data, or in the deductions from them. Buddha affirms of himself that the complete field of truth is before him, that the eye of wisdom to perceive it was obtained by him when he became a Buddha; and whatever he desires to know he perceives perfectly, and at one glance, without any reasoning process.”—(Rev. D. J. Gogerly, in the Ceylon Friend. Quoted by R. Spence Hardy, in Eastern Monachism).

18 “The all-knowingness of Buddha isn't about knowing everything, but about having the ability to understand anything he wants to know. Unlike other teachers who base their teachings on certain assumed principles and can make mistakes either in their facts or in their conclusions, Buddha claims that he sees the entire landscape of truth clearly. He gained the wisdom to see it fully when he became a Buddha; whatever he wants to understand, he sees perfectly and instantly, without needing to reason it out.” —(Rev. D. J. Gogerly, in the Ceylon Friend. Quoted by R. Spence Hardy, in Eastern Monachism).


[Chapter 15]

[Chapter 15]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, in the morning, at noonday, and at eventide, sacrificed lives innumerable as the sands of the Ganges, and thus without intermission throughout infinite ages; and if another disciple, hearing this Scripture proclaimed, steadfastly believed it, his felicity would be appreciably greater than the other. But how much greater must be the felicity of a disciple who transcribes the sacred text, observes its precepts, studies its Laws, and repeats the Scripture that others may be edified thereby?”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, sacrificed countless lives as many as the sands of the Ganges every morning, noon, and evening, continuously for infinite ages; and if another disciple heard this Scripture and truly believed it, their happiness would be significantly greater than the first. But just imagine how much greater the happiness of a disciple who copies the sacred text, follows its guidelines, studies its teachings, and shares the Scripture so that others can benefit from it?”

“Subhuti, the relative importance of this Scripture may thus be summarily stated: its truth is infinite; its worth incomparable; and its merit interminable.”

“Subhuti, the significance of this Scripture can be summed up like this: its truth is limitless; its value unmatched; and its merit endless.”

“The Lord Buddha delivered this Scripture specifically for those who are entered upon the path which leads to Nirvana, and for those who are attaining to the ultimate plane of Buddhic thought.1 If a disciple rigorously observes, studies, and widely disseminates the knowledge of this Scripture, the Lord Buddha entirely knows and perceives that for such an one there will be a cumulative merit, immeasurable, incomparable, illimitable, and inconceivable. All such disciples will be endowed with transcendent Buddhic wisdom and enlightenment.2 And why? Because, Subhuti, if a disciple takes pleasure in a narrow or exclusive form of the Law,3 he cannot receive with gratification4 the instruction of this Scripture, or delight in its study, or fervently explain it to others. Subhuti, in whatever place there is a repository for this Scripture, the whole realm of spiritual beings ought to adore it; and reverencing it as a sacred shrine,5 ceremoniously surround it, scattering profusely sweet-scented flowers, and pure odours of fragrant incense.”6

“The Lord Buddha delivered this Scripture specifically for those who are on the path to Nirvana and for those reaching the highest level of Buddhist thought.1 If a disciple diligently observes, studies, and widely shares the knowledge of this Scripture, the Lord Buddha fully knows and sees that this person will gain immense, incomparable, limitless, and unimaginable merit. All such disciples will be blessed with profound Buddhist wisdom and enlightenment.2 And why? Because, Subhuti, if a disciple takes pleasure in a narrow or exclusive interpretation of the Law,3 they cannot truly receive with joy4 the teachings of this Scripture, or enjoy its study, or passionately explain it to others. Subhuti, in any place where this Scripture is kept, all the spiritual beings should honor it; and, treating it as a sacred shrine,5 they should ceremoniously surround it, generously scattering sweet-scented flowers and fragrant incense.”6

1 Literally, for the ta-cheng-che—those of the great vehicle, i.e., the Mahayana faith. “They taught (the Mahayana school) that there were two methods of salvation, or, so to speak, two ways or two vehicles—the great and the little (Maha-Yana and Hina-Yana)—and indeed two Bodhis or forms of true knowledge which these vehicles had to convey (there was also a middle way). The former was for ordinary persons, the latter for beings of larger talents and higher spiritual powers.”—Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

1 Basically, for the ta-cheng-che—those following the great vehicle, i.e., the Mahayana faith. “They taught (the Mahayana school) that there were two methods of salvation, or, in other words, two ways or two vehicles—the great and the small (Maha-Yana and Hina-Yana)—and indeed two Bodhis or forms of true knowledge that these vehicles had to offer (there was also a middle way). The former was for regular people, while the latter was for those with greater abilities and higher spiritual powers.”—Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

“Therefore let one always be thoughtful, and avoid (gross) pleasures; having abandoned them, let him cross the stream, after baling out the ship, and go to the other shore (Nirvana).”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

“Therefore, always be mindful and steer clear of excessive pleasures; once you've left them behind, make your way across the stream, after removing the water from the boat, and reach the other shore (Nirvana).”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

2 “All these beings will equally remember the Bodhi (the highest Buddhic knowledge), will receive it and understand it.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “All these beings will all remember the Bodhi (the highest Buddhist knowledge), will receive it and understand it.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“All men being one with ho-tan (Gautama?) Tathagata, arrive at the state of the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened (heart).”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“All people are connected with ho-tan (Gautama?) Tathagata, reaching the state of the highest, most just, and enlightened (heart).”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

The Chinese phrase “ho-tan-Ju-Lai,” may mean to bear upon the person evidences of the Lord Buddha. Compare the statement of the apostle Paul, “I bear in my body evidences of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

The Chinese phrase “ho-tan-Ju-Lai” may mean to carry within oneself signs of the Lord Buddha. This is similar to the statement by the apostle Paul, “I carry in my body signs of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

3 Those disciples associated with the Siao-Fah (little Law, the Hinayana school of Buddhist thought), are rather ungraciously referred to by a Chinese commentator as “rootless stems”; by which we are reminded of the Hindoo aphorism, “from the absence of a root within the root, all things are rootless.”

3 The followers of the Siao-Fah (little Law, the Hinayana school of Buddhist thought) are somewhat ungraciously called “rootless stems” by a Chinese commentator. This brings to mind the Hindu saying, “from the absence of a root within the root, all things are rootless.”

4 When the Lord Buddha delivered the Sutra known as the Lotus of the Good Law, it is recorded that five thousand followers forsook him, owing to what they regarded as a grave difficulty in complying with its intensely abstruse doctrines.

4 When the Lord Buddha taught the Sutra called the Lotus of the Good Law, it's noted that five thousand followers abandoned him, because they saw the complex teachings as too difficult to understand.

5 “In these two places also Topes (where relics of Buddha are deposited and safeguarded) have been built, both adorned with layers of all the previous substances (gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal). The kings, ministers, and peoples of the kingdoms vie with one another in making offerings at them. The trains of those who come to scatter flowers and light lamps at them never cease.”—The Travels of Fa-Hien. Legge.

5 “In these two locations, there are also stupa (structures where Buddha’s relics are kept and protected) that have been built, both embellished with layers of various materials (gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal). The kings, ministers, and people of the kingdoms compete with each other in making offerings at these sites. The streams of those who come to scatter flowers and light lamps never stop.” —The Travels of Fa-Hien. Legislation.

This descriptive scene concerning the endless trains of pilgrims who lit their lamps at the sacred shrine, may recall to our minds the beautifully expressed line in Sophocles’ Œdipus Coloneus, thus rendered by Professor Jebb, The torch-lit strand of Eleusis.

This vivid scene about the endless streams of pilgrims who lit their lamps at the sacred shrine might remind us of the beautifully phrased line in Sophocles’ Œdipus Coloneus, translated by Professor Jebb, The torch-lit strand of Eleusis.

6 “Then the king, with his assembled ministers and all the priests belonging to the capital (of Kashmir), advanced to the preaching hall (Dharmasala) and escorted him (the Master of the Law) onwards, being altogether something like a thousand men, with standards and parasols, with incense and flowers filling the roads. When they met (the Master of the Law) they all performed a humble salutation, and spread before him countless flowers as religious offerings.”—The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.

6 “Then the king, along with his gathered ministers and all the priests from the capital of Kashmir, made their way to the preaching hall (Dharmasala) and escorted him (the Master of the Law) forward, altogether about a thousand people, with flags and umbrellas, and the roads filled with incense and flowers. When they met the Master of the Law, they all bowed respectfully and laid countless flowers before him as religious offerings.”—The Life of Hiuen-Tsang. Beal.


[Chapter 16]

[Chapter 16]

The Lord Buddha, continuing, addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, devoted to the observance and study of this Scripture, is thereby despised, or lightly esteemed,1 it is because that in a previous life there had been committed some grievous transgression, followed now by inexorable retribution.2 But, although in this life despised or lightly esteemed, the compensating merit thus acquired will cause the transgression of a former life to be fully expiated, and the disciple adequately recompensed by the attainment of supreme spiritual wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha continued to speak to Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether male or female, is dedicated to studying and following this Scripture and is disrespected or undervalued, it’s because they committed a serious wrongdoing in a past life, which is now being addressed with unavoidable consequences. However, even if they are looked down upon in this life, the merit they gain will fully atone for their past transgressions, and they will be rewarded with the realization of ultimate spiritual wisdom.”

“Furthermore, Subhuti, numberless ages ago, I recollect that before the advent of Dipankara Buddha, there were myriad Buddhas before whom I served and received religious instruction, my conduct being entirely blameless and without reproach. But, in the ages to come, if a disciple be enabled to rigorously observe and to study the text of this Scripture, the merit thus acquired will so far exceed the measure of my merit in the service of those myriad Buddhas, that it cannot be stated in terms of proportion, nor comprehended by means of any ‘analogy.’”

“Also, Subhuti, I remember from countless ages ago, before Dipankara Buddha appeared, I served many Buddhas and learned from them, always acting without blame or reproach. Yet, in the future, if a disciple diligently studies and follows this Scripture, the merit they gain will far surpass mine from serving all those Buddhas, to the point where it can't be measured or understood through any comparison.”

“Again, Subhuti, in future ages, if a good disciple, whether man or woman, be enabled to rigorously observe and to study consecutively the texts of this Scripture, were I to elaborate either the nature or extent of this merit, those who heard it might become delirious, or entirely doubt its credibility.3 Subhuti, it is necessary to realise, that as the meaning of this Scripture is beyond ordinary comprehension, the scope of its fruitful rewards is equally incomprehensible.”4

“Again, Subhuti, in the future, if a good disciple, whether male or female, is able to diligently study and follow the teachings of this Scripture, if I were to explain the nature or extent of this merit, those who hear it might become confused or completely doubt its validity.3 Subhuti, it’s important to understand that since the meaning of this Scripture goes beyond normal understanding, the range of its valuable rewards is equally beyond comprehension.”4

1 “Whoever reviles Buddha or his disciple, be he a wandering mendicant, or a householder, let one know him as an outcast.”—Sutta-Nipata. V. Fausböll.

1 “Anyone who insults Buddha or his follower, whether they are a wandering monk or someone living at home, should be considered an outcast.”—Sutta-Nipata. V. Fausböll.

2 “Whatever evil deeds these beings have done in a former birth, deeds that must lead to suffering, those deeds these beings, owing to their being overcome, after they have seen the Law, will destroy, and they will obtain the knowledge of Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “Any harmful actions these beings committed in a past life, actions that will cause suffering, they will overcome after understanding the Law, and they will eliminate those actions, gaining the knowledge of Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“According to the Buddha ... all men must suffer in their own persons either in the present life, or in future lives, the consequences of their own acts.... The penalty of sin could not be transferred to another—it could only be borne by the sinner himself, just as the reward of virtue could only be enjoyed by the virtuous man himself.”—Hinduism. Sir Monier Williams.

“According to the Buddha ... everyone must face the consequences of their own actions, either in this life or in future lives. The punishment for wrongdoing cannot be passed on to someone else—it can only be endured by the wrongdoer, just as the reward for good deeds can only be enjoyed by the person who has done good.” —Hinduism. Sir Monier Williams.

3 Literally, “become as doubtful as a fox.”

3 Basically, “be as uncertain as a fox.”

4 “For as the method and entire meaning of this Sutra is not to be described or entirely conceived, so the merit and happy consequences of accepting it cannot be conceived or described.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

4 “For the way and full significance of this Sutra cannot be fully explained or entirely understood, the benefits and joyful outcomes of embracing it also cannot be fully grasped or described.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beale.


[Chapter 17]

[Chapter 17]

Upon that occasion, the venerable Subhuti addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! if a good disciple, whether man or woman, having desired to attain to supreme spiritual wisdom, what immutable Law shall support the mind of that disciple, and bring into subjection every inordinate desire?”1

Upon that occasion, the respected Subhuti spoke to the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honored One! If a dedicated disciple, whether male or female, wishes to achieve the highest spiritual wisdom, what unchanging Law will guide that disciple's mind and control every excessive desire?”1

The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “A good disciple, whether man or woman, ought thus to habituate his mind:2 ‘I must become oblivious to every idea of sentient life; and having become oblivious to every idea of sentient life, there is no one to whom the idea of sentient life has become oblivious.’3 And why? Because, Subhuti, if an enlightened disciple retains within his mind such arbitrary ideas of sentient life as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, he has not attained to supreme spiritual wisdom. And why? Because, Subhuti, there is no Law by means of which a disciple may be defined as one having obtained supreme spiritual wisdom.”4

The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “A good disciple, whether man or woman, should train their mind like this: ‘I need to forget any ideas about sentient life; and once I forget all ideas about sentient life, there is no one left whose idea of sentient life I have forgotten.’ And why? Because, Subhuti, if an enlightened disciple holds onto any fixed ideas about sentient life as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, they haven’t achieved supreme spiritual wisdom. And why? Because, Subhuti, there’s no Law that defines a disciple as having obtained supreme spiritual wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? When the Lord Buddha was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, was there bequeathed to him any Law whereby he attained to supreme spiritual wisdom?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! inasmuch as I am able to comprehend the meaning of the Lord Buddha’s discourse, when the Lord Buddha was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, there was no Law bequeathed to him whereby he attained to supreme spiritual wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking, “What do you think? When I was a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, was there any teaching passed on to me that led to my ultimate spiritual wisdom?” Subhuti responded, “No, Honored One! As far as I can understand your message, when you were a disciple of Dipankara Buddha, there was no teaching passed on to you that led to your ultimate spiritual wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha endorsed these words, saying:5 “Truly there is no Law by means of which the Lord Buddha obtained supreme spiritual wisdom. Subhuti, if there existed a Law by means of which the Lord Buddha obtained supreme spiritual wisdom, Dipankara Buddha would not have foretold at my initiation, ‘In future ages6 thou shalt become Sakyamuni Buddha.’ But, in reality, there is no Law by means of which supreme spiritual wisdom can be obtained. Therefore, at my initiation, Dipankara Buddha foretold concerning me, ‘In future ages, thou shalt become Sakyamuni Buddha.’ And why? Because, in the word Buddha.7 every Law is summarily and intelligibly comprehended.” “If a disciple affirmed that the Lord Buddha attained to supreme spiritual wisdom, it is necessary to state that there is no Law whereby this condition of mind can be realised. The supreme spiritual wisdom to which the Lord Buddha attained, cannot, in its essence, be defined as real or unreal. Thus, the Lord Buddha declared that the ordinarily accepted term, ‘the Buddhic Law,’ is synonymous with every moral and spiritual Law. Subhuti, what are ordinarily declared to be ‘systems of Law,’ are not in reality ‘systems of Law,’ they are merely termed ‘systems of Law.’”

The Lord Buddha acknowledged these words, saying:5 “Truly, there is no Law by which the Lord Buddha achieved supreme spiritual wisdom. Subhuti, if there were a Law through which the Lord Buddha attained supreme spiritual wisdom, Dipankara Buddha would not have predicted at my initiation, ‘In future ages6 you will become Sakyamuni Buddha.’ But in truth, there is no Law by which supreme spiritual wisdom can be obtained. Therefore, at my initiation, Dipankara Buddha predicted about me, ‘In future ages, you will become Sakyamuni Buddha.’ And why? Because, in the word Buddha.7 all Laws are fully and clearly understood.” “If a disciple claims that the Lord Buddha achieved supreme spiritual wisdom, it must be stated that there is no Law through which this state of mind can be realized. The supreme spiritual wisdom that the Lord Buddha attained cannot, in its essence, be described as real or unreal. Thus, the Lord Buddha stated that the commonly accepted term ‘the Buddhic Law’ is synonymous with every moral and spiritual Law. Subhuti, what are often referred to as ‘systems of Law’ are not truly ‘systems of Law’; they are simply called ‘systems of Law.’”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “Can you imagine a man having a great physical body?” Subhuti replied, saying: “The Lord Buddha, discoursing upon the proportions of a physical body, did not maintain for these any real greatness, therefore it is merely termed ‘a great body.”’

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “Can you picture a person with a huge body?” Subhuti responded, “Lord Buddha, when discussing the measurements of a body, you didn’t assign any real significance to them, so it’s just called ‘a big body.’”

The Lord Buddha, thereupon, addressed Subhuti, saying: “Thus it is with an enlightened disciple: if he were to expatiate after this manner, ‘I must become oblivious to every idea of sentient life,’8 he could not be described as fully enlightened. And why? Because, there is no Law whereby a disciple can be approved as ‘fully enlightened.’9 Therefore, the Lord Buddha declared that within the realm of spiritual Law, there is neither an entity, a being, a living being, nor a personality.”

The Lord Buddha then spoke to Subhuti, saying: “This is how it is with an enlightened disciple: if he were to say something like, ‘I have to forget all ideas of living beings,’8 he would not be considered fully enlightened. And why? Because, there is no standard by which a disciple can be recognized as ‘fully enlightened.’9 Therefore, the Lord Buddha stated that in the realm of spiritual Law, there is neither an entity, a being, a living being, nor a personality.”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If an enlightened disciple were to speak in this wise, ‘I shall create numerous Buddhist kingdoms,’ he could not be designated ‘fully enlightened.’ And why? Because, the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon ‘creating numerous Buddhist kingdoms,’ did not affirm the idea of creating numerous ‘material’ Buddhist kingdoms, hence the ‘creation of numerous Buddhist kingdoms’ is merely a figure of speech. Subhuti, the Lord Buddha declared that a disciple may be regarded as ‘truly enlightened,’ whose mind is thoroughly imbued with the Law of non-individuality.”10

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If an enlightened disciple were to say, ‘I will create many Buddhist kingdoms,’ he could not be considered ‘fully enlightened.’ And why? Because when the Lord Buddha talked about ‘creating many Buddhist kingdoms,’ he did not mean creating numerous ‘material’ Buddhist kingdoms; therefore, the ‘creation of many Buddhist kingdoms’ is just a figure of speech. Subhuti, the Lord Buddha said that a disciple can be seen as ‘truly enlightened’ when their mind is completely filled with the principle of non-individuality.”10

1 “Let a man restraining all these remain in devotion.... For he, whose senses are under his control, possesses spiritual knowledge. Attachments to objects of sense arise in a man who meditates upon them; from attachment arises desire; from desire passion springs up; from passion comes bewilderment; from bewilderment, confusion of the memory; from confusion of the memory, destruction of the intellect; from destruction of the intellect, he perishes.”—Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

1 “Let a person who can control all these stay focused on devotion... For the one who has mastery over their senses has true spiritual understanding. Attachments to sensory objects develop in someone who reflects on them; attachment leads to desire; from desire, passion arises; from passion comes confusion; from confusion, a lack of clarity in memory; from a lack of clarity in memory, the mind is destroyed; and from the destruction of the mind, they ultimately perish.” —Bhagavad-Gita. J. Cockburn Thomson.

2 “He should thus frame his thought: all things must be delivered by me in the perfect world of Nirvana.... And why? Because, O Subhuti, there is no such thing as one who has entered on the path of the Bodhisattva.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 "He should think like this: everything should be expressed by me in the flawless realm of Nirvana.... And why? Because, O Subhuti, there is no such thing as someone who has begun the path of the Bodhisattva."—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Such scenes as the following, illustrating the beliefs of the time and the locality, would not seldom occur. A wayfarer in the country of the Getæ (Jats) (Afghanistan) knocks at the door of a Brahman family. A young man within answers: ‘There is No One in this house.’ The traveller was too well taught in Buddhism not to know the meaning of this philosophical nihilism, and at once answered, ‘Who is No One?’ The young man, when he heard this, felt that he was understood. A kindred spirit was outside. Hurriedly he opened the door, and invited the stranger to enter. The visitor was the patriarch of the time (seventeenth), with staff and rice bowl, travelling to teach and make new disciples.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

3 “Scenes like the following, reflecting the beliefs of the time and place, often took place. A traveler in the land of the Getæ (Jats) (Afghanistan) knocks on the door of a Brahman family. A young man inside replies, ‘No one is home.’ The traveler was knowledgeable enough in Buddhism to understand the meaning of this philosophical nihilism, and he immediately responds, ‘Who is No One?’ Upon hearing this, the young man felt understood. A kindred spirit was outside. He quickly opened the door and invited the stranger inside. The visitor was the patriarch of the time (seventeenth century), carrying a staff and a rice bowl, on a journey to teach and gather new disciples.” —Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

4 Most writers on the Buddhist faith and religion have occasion to refer to the series of events which culminated in the Lord Buddha obtaining “supreme enlightenment.” The founder of the Buddhist faith, dissatisfied with the practice of asceticism, and disappointed by his unfaithful disciples, walked meditatively towards the river Nairanjara, where Sujata, “the daughter of a neighbouring villager,” provided him with his morning meal. Seating himself under a sacred Bo-Tree, immediately he became engaged in the severest of mental conflicts. The Buddhist authors describe their Master as sitting “sublime,” “calm,” and “serene” throughout the sustained assault of a “visible” and wicked tempter, assisted by legions of evil spirits. So unrelenting was the fierce encounter, that the forces of nature shook and were convulsed under the dreadful onslaught. As the day advanced, the spiritual elements in Buddha’s nature gradually gained the ascendency; and when he became “fully enlightened,” there was revealed to him an antidote for human woe. The mind of the Lord Buddha thereafter assumed an aspect of perfect peace; “and in the power over the human heart of inward culture, and of love to others,” the great Teacher discovered a foundation of Truth, where, with assurance of faith, he could securely rest. As Milton regarded “Paradise” to be “regained” in the wilderness, and not on Calvary; in like manner the Buddhist poets indicate a belief that the experience of their Master under the Bo-Tree was the most eventful in his history. That is the reason they regard the Bo-Tree with a reverence resembling the Christian veneration of the Cross. (Compare Davids’ Buddhism.)

4 Most writers on Buddhism refer to the series of events that led to the Buddha achieving “supreme enlightenment.” The founder of Buddhism, unhappy with the practice of extreme self-discipline and let down by his unfaithful followers, walked thoughtfully toward the Nairanjara River, where Sujata, “the daughter of a neighboring villager,” offered him his morning meal. Sitting beneath a sacred Bo-Tree, he immediately engaged in intense mental struggle. Buddhist authors describe their Master as sitting “sublime,” “calm,” and “serene” while enduring the relentless assault of a “visible” and malicious tempter, aided by legions of evil spirits. The fierce battle was so intense that nature itself trembled under the devastating attack. As the day went on, the spiritual aspects of Buddha’s being gradually took over; and when he became “fully enlightened,” he discovered a remedy for human suffering. The mind of the Buddha then reflected perfect peace; “and in the power over the human heart of inward culture, and of love to others,” the great Teacher found a foundation of Truth on which he could confidently rely. Just as Milton viewed “Paradise” as “regained” in the wilderness rather than on Calvary, Buddhist poets express the belief that their Master’s experience under the Bo-Tree was the most significant moment in his life. This is why they hold the Bo-Tree in reverence similar to the Christian veneration of the Cross. (Compare Davids’ Buddhism.)

5 Buddha said: “Right! Right! Subhuti, there is in truth no fixed Law (by which) Tathagata attained this condition. Subhuti, if there had been such a Law, then Dipankara Buddha would not have said in delivering the prediction concerning me: ‘you in after ages must attain to the state of Buddha, and your name shall be Sakyamuni,’ so that because there is indeed no fixed Law for attaining the condition of ‘the perfect heart,’ on that account it was Dipankara Buddha delivered his prediction in such words.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

5 Buddha said: “Exactly! Exactly! Subhuti, there isn’t actually a fixed Law by which the Tathagata reached this state. Subhuti, if there had been such a Law, then Dipankara Buddha wouldn’t have said when making the prediction about me: ‘You in the future will achieve the state of Buddha, and your name will be Sakyamuni.’ Therefore, since there really is no fixed Law for achieving the state of ‘the perfect heart,’ that’s why Dipankara Buddha made his prediction in those words.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

6 “To the pious Buddhist it is a constant source of joy and gratitude that ‘the Buddha,’ not only then, but in many former births, when emancipation from all the cares and troubles of life was already within his reach, should again and again, in mere love for man, have condescended to enter the world, and live amidst the sorrows inseparable from finite existence.”—Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.

6 “For devout Buddhists, it is a continual source of joy and gratitude that ‘the Buddha,’ not just then, but in many past lives, when he could have easily achieved liberation from all the cares and troubles of life, has repeatedly chosen to come back into the world out of pure love for humanity, enduring the sorrows that come with finite existence.” —Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.

7 “And why, O Subhuti, the name of Tathagata? It expresses ‘true suchness.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It expresses that ‘he had no origin.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It expresses ‘the destruction of all qualities.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It expresses ‘one who has no origin whatever.’ And why this? Because, O Subhuti, ‘no origin is the highest goal.’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

7 “And why, Subhuti, is he called the Tathagata? It means ‘true suchness.’ And why Tathagata, Subhuti? It means ‘he has no origin.’ And why Tathagata, Subhuti? It means ‘the elimination of all qualities.’ And why Tathagata, Subhuti? It means ‘one who has absolutely no origin.’ And why is that? Because, Subhuti, ‘no origin is the ultimate goal.’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

The familiar word Buddha, seems to convey to devout Buddhist minds, a meaning consonant with the ethical idea of Love, as understood generally by the followers of Christ. Within it are potential spiritual elements, which, according to their judgment, perfectly fulfil the Law. The Chinese text, Ju-Lai-che, chi-chu-fah-ru-i, may bear the following interpretation, Buddha is the One in whom all Laws become intelligible. With this particular definition before us, and bearing in mind the general substance of the Mahayana faith, we may perhaps appreciate the sense in which the distinguished missionary, Dr Richard of Shanghai, ventured to render the Chinese term Ju-Lai (Buddha), in a translation of Asvaghocha’s The Awakening of Faith, by the English synonym God. Few Christians would controvert the statement that God, is the One in whom all Laws become intelligible!

The well-known term Buddha seems to represent for devoted Buddhists a meaning aligned with the ethical concept of Love, as commonly understood by followers of Christ. It holds potential spiritual elements that, in their view, fully embody the Law. The Chinese text, Ju-Lai-che, chi-chu-fah-ru-i, can be interpreted as Buddha is the One in whom all Laws become understandable. With this definition in mind and considering the general principles of the Mahayana faith, we can perhaps understand why the respected missionary, Dr. Richard of Shanghai, chose to translate the Chinese term Ju-Lai (Buddha) as the English word God in his translation of Asvaghocha’s The Awakening of Faith. Few Christians would dispute the assertion that God is the One in whom all Laws become understandable!

8 “And if a Bodhisattva were to say: ‘I shall deliver all beings,’ he ought not to be called a Bodhisattva. And why? Is there anything, O Subhuti, that is called a Bodhisattva? Subhuti said: ‘Not indeed!’ Bhagavat said: ‘Those who were spoken of as beings, beings indeed, O Subhuti, they were spoken of as no beings by the Tathagata, and, therefore, they are called beings. Therefore Tathagata says: “All beings are without self, all beings are without life, without manhood, without personality.”’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

8 “And if a Bodhisattva were to say: ‘I will save all beings,’ they should not be called a Bodhisattva. And why is that? Is there anything, O Subhuti, that we can call a Bodhisattva? Subhuti replied: ‘Absolutely not!’ The Bhagavat said: ‘Those who were referred to as beings, indeed beings, O Subhuti, were referred to as non-beings by the Tathagata, and that is why they are called beings. Therefore, the Tathagata says: “All beings are without self, all beings are without life, without humanity, without personality.”’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti, so it is with the Bodhisatwa, if he should say: ‘I ought to destroy all recollection of the countless kinds of creatures,’ this Bodhisatwa would not be really one, but only a nominal one.... Hence Buddha says that all things ought to be without any individual distinction.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, the same applies to the Bodhisattva; if he were to say, ‘I should eliminate all memory of the countless types of beings,’ this Bodhisattva wouldn’t truly be a Bodhisattva, but just in name.... Thus, Buddha says that all things should be without any individual distinction.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

9 “The fountain of knowledge is the pure, bright, self-enlightening mind.”—Twan-Tsi-Sin-Yao (Tang Dynasty). Compare Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.

9 “The fountain of knowledge is the clear, bright, self-illuminating mind.”—Twan-Tsi-Sin-Yao (Tang Dynasty). Compare Edkins’ Chinese Buddhism.

10 “A Bodhisattva, O Subhuti, who believes that all things are without self, he has faith, he is called a noble-minded Bodhisattva by the holy and fully enlightened Tathagata.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

10 “A Bodhisattva, O Subhuti, who understands that nothing possesses a self, has faith and is recognized as a noble-minded Bodhisattva by the holy and fully enlightened Tathagata.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

In the Mo-Wei-Sutra, the ordinary concepts of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, are referred to as blots or stains upon the mind.

In the Mo-Wei-Sutra, the usual ideas of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality are called blots or stains on the mind.


[Chapter 18]

[Chapter 18]

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the physical eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the physical eye.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Does the Lord Buddha have the physical eye?” Subhuti agreed, saying, “Honored One! The Lord Buddha does indeed have the physical eye.”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the divine or spiritual eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the divine or spiritual eye.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Does the Lord Buddha have the divine or spiritual eye?” Subhuti agreed, saying, “Honored of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha really has the divine or spiritual eye.”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the eye of wisdom?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the eye of wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Does the Lord Buddha have the eye of wisdom?” Subhuti replied, “Honored of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha truly has the eye of wisdom.”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the eye of truth?”1 Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the eye of truth.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Does the Lord Buddha have the eye of truth?”1 Subhuti agreed, saying, “Honored of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha definitely has the eye of truth.”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the Buddhic eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the Buddhic eye.”2

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? Does the Lord Buddha have the Buddhic eye?” Subhuti agreed, saying, “Honored of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha truly has the Buddhic eye.”2

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Concerning the sands of the Ganges, did the Lord Buddha declare that these were grains of sand?” Subhuti assenting, said: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha declared that these were grains of sand.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? About the sands of the Ganges, did the Lord Buddha say these are grains of sand?” Subhuti agreed, saying, “Honored of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha said these are grains of sand.”

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? If there were as many rivers Ganges as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, and if there were as many Buddhist worlds as the grains of sand in those innumerable rivers, would these Buddhist worlds be numerous?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! these Buddhist worlds would be very numerous.”

The Lord Buddha asked Subhuti, “What do you think? If there were as many Ganges rivers as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, and if there were as many Buddhist worlds as the grains of sand in those countless rivers, would these Buddhist worlds be many?” Subhuti replied, “Respected One! those Buddhist worlds would be incredibly numerous.”

The Lord Buddha, continuing, addressed Subhuti, saying: “Within these innumerable worlds, every form of sentient life, with their various mental dispositions, are entirely known to the Lord Buddha.3 And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as their ‘various mental dispositions,’ are not in reality their ‘various mental dispositions,’ these are merely termed their ‘various mental dispositions.’ And why? Because, Subhuti, dispositions of mind, or modes of thought, whether relating to the past, the present, or the future, are alike unreal and illusory.”

The Lord Buddha continued and spoke to Subhuti, saying: “In these countless worlds, every kind of sentient being, with their different mental states, is completely known to the Lord Buddha.3 And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha called their ‘different mental states’ aren’t actually their ‘different mental states’; they are simply labeled as such. And why is that? Because, Subhuti, mental states or ways of thinking, whether they are about the past, present, or future, are all unreal and illusionary.”

1 The Chinese Fah-Yen—literally, Eye of the Law.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The Chinese Fah-Yen—literally, Law's Eye.

“The second of the three great treasures is called Dhamma, or in Singhalese, Dharmma. This word has various meanings, but is here to be understood in the sense of Truth. It is not unfrequently translated ‘the Law,’ but this interpretation gives an idea contrary to the entire genius of Buddhism. The Dharmma is therefore emphatically the Truth.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

“The second of the three great treasures is called Dhamma, or in Singhalese, Dharmma. This word has several meanings, but here it should be understood as Truth. It's often translated as ‘the Law,’ but this interpretation goes against the core principles of Buddhism. Therefore, Dharmma is emphatically the Truth.”—Eastern Monachism. Spence Hardy.

2 “Supernatural talents, which the founder of Buddhism, Sakyamuni, is believed to have acquired in the night before he became Buddha, and which every Arhat takes possession of by means of the fourth degree of Dhyana (abstract contemplation). Most Chinese texts reckon six such talents, while the Singhalese know only five. Sometimes, however, only five are mentioned.”—Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

2 “Supernatural powers that the founder of Buddhism, Sakyamuni, is thought to have gained the night before he became the Buddha, and which every Arhat obtains through the fourth level of Dhyana (deep meditation). Most Chinese texts list six of these powers, while the Singhalese only recognize five. However, sometimes only five are mentioned.” —Handbook of Chinese Buddhism. Eitel.

The physical eye has an ordinary local function. The divine or spiritual eye has a universal function. The eye of wisdom is affiliated with the Law, and attests its immutability. The eye of truth is exegetical and synthetical. The Buddhic eye is the instrument of salvation.—Chinese Annotation.

The physical eye has a regular local function. The divine or spiritual eye has a global function. The eye of wisdom is connected to the Law and confirms its consistency. The eye of truth is analytical and holistic. The Buddhic eye is the tool for salvation.—Chinese Annotation.

3 “Bhagavat said, as many beings as there would be in all those worlds, I know the manifold trains of thought of them all. And why? Because, what was preached as the trains of thought, the trains of thought indeed, O Subhuti, that was preached by Tathagata as no train of thoughts, and therefore it is called the train of thoughts. And why? Because, O Subhuti, a past thought is not perceived, a future thought is not perceived,, and the present thought is not perceived.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Bhagavat said, as many beings as there are in all those worlds, I understand the diverse thoughts of them all. And why? Because what was taught as thoughts, those thoughts indeed, O Subhuti, were taught by Tathagata as no thoughts, and that's why it's called thoughts. And why? Because, O Subhuti, a past thought isn't realized, a future thought isn't realized, and the present thought isn't realized.” —The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Gautama himself was very early regarded as omniscient, and absolutely sinless. His perfect wisdom is declared by the ancient epithet of Samma-Sambuddha, ‘the completely enlightened one,’ found at the commencement of every Pali text; and at the present day in Ceylon, the usual way in which Gautama is styled is Sarwajnan-Wahanse, ‘the venerable omniscient one.’ From his perfect wisdom, according to Buddhist belief, his sinlessness would follow as a matter of course.”—Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.

“Gautama was recognized early on as all-knowing and completely without sin. His perfect wisdom is indicated by the ancient term Samma-Sambuddha, ‘the fully enlightened one,’ which appears at the beginning of every Pali text; today in Sri Lanka, Gautama is commonly referred to as Sarwajnan-Wahanse, ‘the venerable all-knowing one.’ In Buddhist belief, his sinlessness naturally follows from his perfect wisdom.” —Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.


[Chapter 19]

[Chapter 19]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? If a disciple, having obtained all the treasures of this universe,1 were to bestow these in the exercise of charity, would such a disciple consequently enjoy a considerable merit?” Subhuti assenting, said: “Honoured of the Worlds! such a disciple would consequently enjoy a very considerable merit.”2

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking: “What do you think? If a disciple, having received all the treasures of this universe,1 decided to give these away in charity, would that disciple then gain significant merit?” Subhuti agreed, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! That disciple would indeed gain a lot of merit.”2

The Lord Buddha thereupon addressed Subhuti, saying: “If there were any real or permanent quality in merit, the Lord Buddha would not have spoken of such merit as ‘considerable.’ It is because there is neither a tangible nor material quality in merit, that the Lord Buddha referred to the merit of that disciple as ‘considerable.’”

The Lord Buddha then spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If merit had any real or lasting quality, the Lord Buddha wouldn’t have called it ‘considerable.’ It’s because merit doesn’t have a physical or material quality that the Lord Buddha described that disciple’s merit as ‘considerable.’”

1 The seven treasures—gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal.

1 The seven treasures—gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal.

2 “Because, what was preached as a stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed, O Subhuti, that was preached as no stock of merit by the Tathagata, and therefore it is called a stock of merit. If, O Subhuti, there existed a stock of merit, Tathagata would not have preached a stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed!”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 "Because what was taught as a collection of good deeds, truly a collection of good deeds, O Subhuti, was actually described by the Tathagata as not a collection of good deeds, and that’s why it's called a collection of good deeds. If, O Subhuti, there were such a collection of good deeds, the Tathagata would not have taught a collection of good deeds, truly a collection of good deeds!"—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

Within the meaning of the Buddhic Law, charity is purely a spiritual concept; and merit consequent upon fulfilling the Law of charity, must have a purely spiritual realisation. This is the sense in which the Lord Buddha referred to merit as “considerable.”—Chinese Annotation.

Within the meaning of the Buddhic Law, charity is simply a spiritual idea; and the benefit that comes from following the Law of charity must be understood in a purely spiritual way. This is the sense in which the Lord Buddha referred to merit as “considerable.”—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 20]

[Chapter 20]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of his perfect material body?”1 Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! it is improbable that the Lord Buddha can be perceived by means of his perfect material body. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as a ‘perfect material body,’ is not in reality a ‘perfect material body,’ it is merely termed a ‘perfect material body.’”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking, “What do you think? Can the Lord Buddha be seen through his perfect physical form?”1 Subhuti responded, “Honored of the Worlds! It’s unlikely that the Lord Buddha can be seen through his perfect physical form. And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha calls a ‘perfect physical form’ isn’t actually a ‘perfect physical form’; it’s just labeled a ‘perfect physical form.’”

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of any physical phenomena?”2 Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! it is improbable that the Lord Buddha can be perceived by means of any physical phenomena. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as ‘physical phenomena,’ are not in reality ‘physical phenomena,’ these are merely termed ‘physical phenomena.’”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking, “What do you think? Can the Lord Buddha be seen through any physical phenomena?”2 Subhuti replied, saying, “Honored of the Worlds! It’s unlikely that the Lord Buddha can be seen through any physical phenomena. And why is that? Because what the Lord Buddha called ‘physical phenomena’ are not truly ‘physical phenomena’; they are simply labeled as ‘physical phenomena.’”

1 “The first of the Buddha’s bodies is the Dharma-Kaya (body of the Law), supposed to be a kind of ethereal essence of a highly sublimated nature and co-extensive with space. This essence was believed to be eternal, and after the Buddha’s death, was represented by the Law or doctrine (Dharma) he taught.”

1 “The first of the Buddha’s bodies is the Dharma-Kaya (body of the Law), which is thought to be an ethereal essence of a refined nature that exists throughout space. This essence was believed to be eternal, and after the Buddha’s death, it was symbolized by the teachings or doctrine (Dharma) he shared.”

“The second body is the Sambhoga-Kaya, ‘body of conscious bliss,’ which is of a less ethereal and more material nature than the last. Its Brahmanical analogue appears to be the intermediate body (belonging to departed spirits) called Bhoga-Deha, which is of an ethereal character, though composed of sufficiently gross (Sthula) material particles to be capable of experiencing happiness or misery.”

“The second body is the Sambhoga-Kaya, ‘body of conscious bliss,’ which is less ethereal and more physical than the last. Its Brahmanical counterpart seems to be the intermediate body (associated with departed spirits) called Bhoga-Deha, which has an ethereal nature, but is made of relatively coarse (Sthula) material particles that can feel happiness or suffering.”

“The third body is the Nirmana-Kaya, ‘body of visible shapes and transformations,’ that is to say, those various concrete material forms in which every Buddha who exists as an invisible and eternal essence, is manifested on the earth or elsewhere for the propagation of the true doctrine.”—Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

“The third body is the Nirmana-Kaya, ‘body of visible forms and transformations,’ meaning the different tangible material forms in which every Buddha, who exists as an invisible and eternal essence, is expressed on earth or elsewhere for spreading the true teachings.”—Buddhism. Sir Monier Williams.

2 “What think you then, O Subhuti, is a Tathagata to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body? Subhuti said, not indeed, a Tathagata is not to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body. And why? Because, what was preached as the shape of the visible body, the shape of the visible body indeed, that was preached by Tathagata as no-shape of the visible body, and therefore it is called the shape of the visible body.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “What do you think, Subhuti? Can a Tathagata be recognized by the appearance of his physical body?” Subhuti replied, “No, a Tathagata cannot be recognized by the appearance of his physical body. And why is that? Because what was taught as the form of the physical body, the form of the physical body, was actually taught by the Tathagata as the absence of form, and that’s why it’s referred to as the form of the physical body.” —The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

Herein is exemplification of the surpassing excellence of spiritual phenomena: although outwardly possessed of the thirty-two primal signs of a Buddha, there were also the essential evidences of those marvellous spiritual perfections which constitute the real Buddha.—Chinese Annotation.

Here’s an example of the outstanding nature of spiritual phenomena: although externally showing the thirty-two main signs of a Buddha, there were also the key signs of those incredible spiritual qualities that define the true Buddha.—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 21]

[Chapter 21]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “Do not affirm that the Lord Buddha thinks thus within himself, ‘I ought to promulgate a system of Law or doctrine.’ Have no such irrelevant thought! And why? Because, if a disciple affirmed that the Lord Buddha promulgated a system of Law or doctrine, he would defame the Lord Buddha, being manifestly unable to understand the purport of my instruction. Subhuti, regarding the promulgation of a ‘system of Law or doctrine,’ there is in reality no ‘system of Law or doctrine’ to promulgate, it is merely termed a ‘system of Law or doctrine.’”1

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “Don’t claim that the Lord Buddha thinks to himself, ‘I should establish a system of Law or doctrine.’ Don’t have such a pointless thought! And why? Because if a disciple claimed that the Lord Buddha established a system of Law or doctrine, he would misrepresent the Lord Buddha, clearly unable to grasp the true meaning of my teachings. Subhuti, when it comes to the establishment of a ‘system of Law or doctrine,’ there is actually no ‘system of Law or doctrine’ to establish; it's just called a ‘system of Law or doctrine.’”1

Upon that occasion, the virtuous and venerable Subhuti enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! in ages to come, will sentient beings destined to hear this Law,2 engender within their minds the essential elements of faith?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “Subhuti, it cannot be asserted that these are sentient beings, or that these are not sentient beings. And why? Because, Subhuti, regarding ‘sentient beings,’ the Lord Buddha declared that in reality these are not ‘sentient beings,’ they are merely termed ‘sentient beings.’” 3

On that occasion, the wise and respected Subhuti asked the Lord Buddha, “Honored One! In the future, will the beings who are meant to hear this teaching truly develop the essential aspects of faith in their minds?” The Lord Buddha responded, “Subhuti, we cannot definitively say that these are sentient beings or that they are not. Why is that? Because, Subhuti, when it comes to 'sentient beings,' the Lord Buddha stated that in truth, they are not ‘sentient beings’; they are simply called ‘sentient beings.’”

1 “Bhagavat said: What do you think, O Subhuti, does Tathagata think in this wise: the Law has been taught by me? Subhuti said: Not indeed, O Bhagavat, does the Tathagata think in this wise: the Law has been taught by me. Bhagavat said: If a man should say that the Law has been taught by the Tathagata, he would say what is not true; he would slander me with untruth which he has learned. And why? Because, O Subhuti, it is said the teaching of the Law, the teaching of the Law indeed, O Subhuti, there is nothing that can be perceived by the name of the teaching of the Law.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “Bhagavat said: What do you think, Subhuti? Does the Tathagata believe that the Law has been taught by me? Subhuti replied: Not at all, Bhagavat. The Tathagata does not think that the Law has been taught by me. Bhagavat said: If someone claims that the Law has been taught by the Tathagata, they are speaking falsely; they are misrepresenting me with falsehoods they have learned. And why is that? Because, Subhuti, it is said that the teaching of the Law is indeed just that, and there is nothing that can be perceived under the name of the teaching of the Law.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

Eminent wisdom possesses the natural beauty of a pellucid stream, flowing swiftly between rugged mountain crags; but a mind at rest from ‘systems of Law or doctrine,’ is reminiscent of the loveliness of a waterfall, frozen into shining icicles, and resplendent in the light of the moon.—Chinese Annotation.

Eminent wisdom has the natural beauty of a clear stream, flowing quickly between rough mountain cliffs; but a calm mind, free from 'systems of law or doctrine,' resembles the beauty of a waterfall turned into shining icicles, glowing in the moonlight.—Chinese Annotation.

2 “He is the best of all guides of men, no other being is like unto him; he is like a jewel, of imperishable glory, who hears this Law with a pure heart.”—The Buddha-Karita. E. B. Cowell.

2 “He is the greatest guide for humanity; there’s no one else like him. He’s like a priceless jewel, shining forever, who embraces this teaching with a pure heart.” —The Buddha-Karita. E.B. Cowell.

3 “Bhagavat said: These, O Subhuti, are neither beings nor no-beings. And why? Because, O Subhuti, those who were preached as beings, beings indeed, they were preached as no-beings by the Tathagata, and therefore they are called beings.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Bhagavat said: These, O Subhuti, are neither beings nor non-beings. And why? Because, O Subhuti, those who were referred to as beings, yes, they were indeed called beings by the Tathagata, but they were also referred to as non-beings, and that’s why they are called beings.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

Although these are ordinarily referred to as sentient beings, there are spiritual elements in their real natures, which place them in a category only imperfectly described by the term “sentient beings”; but possessing also evident material qualities, it might be an error to assert that these are not “sentient beings”; hence the declaration of the Lord Buddha, “they are merely termed sentient beings.”—Chinese Annotation.

Although these are usually called sentient beings, there are spiritual aspects to their true nature that make the term “sentient beings” only a partial description; however, since they also have clear physical qualities, it would be mistaken to claim they are not “sentient beings.” That’s why the Lord Buddha said, “they are merely termed sentient beings.”—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 22]

[Chapter 22]

Subhuti enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! did the Lord Buddha, in attaining to supreme spiritual wisdom, obtain nothing of a real or tangible nature?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “In attaining to supreme spiritual wisdom, not a vestige of Law or doctrine was obtained,1 and therefore it is termed ‘supreme spiritual wisdom.’”

Subhuti asked the Buddha, “Honored One, when you achieved supreme spiritual wisdom, did you gain anything real or tangible?” The Buddha replied, “In achieving supreme spiritual wisdom, I didn’t acquire a single bit of Law or doctrine, and that’s why it’s called ‘supreme spiritual wisdom.’”

1 “To affirm the existence of anything real or tangible in the nature of the Law, would be tantamount to being firmly bound by the Law; but to affirm that ‘not even the vestige of Law or doctrine was obtained,’ is the equivalent of being absolutely free from the Law.”—Yen-Ping (a Chinese monk).

1 "Claiming that anything real or solid exists within the nature of the Law would mean being tightly bound by it; however, saying that 'not even a trace of Law or doctrine was found' means being completely free from the Law." —Yen-Ping (a Chinese monk).

“Buddha said: ‘True, true, Subhuti! I, as possessed of this heart, have come into the condition above described. This term the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart, is but a mere name.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Buddha said: ‘That’s right, Subhuti! I, having this heart, have entered the state previously described. This expression, the unmatched, fair, and awakened heart, is just a name.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.


[Chapter 23]

[Chapter 23]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “This Law is coherent and indivisible,1 it is neither ‘above’ nor ‘below,’2 therefore it is termed ‘supreme spiritual wisdom.’ It excludes such arbitrary ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality; but includes every Law pertaining to the cultivation of goodness.3 Subhuti, what were referred to as ‘Laws pertaining to goodness,’ these the Lord Buddha declared are not in reality ‘Laws pertaining to goodness,’ they are merely termed ‘Laws pertaining to goodness.’”4

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “This Law is consistent and unified, it is neither ‘above’ nor ‘below,’ therefore it is called ‘supreme spiritual wisdom.’ It does not include arbitrary concepts like an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality; instead, it encompasses every Law related to the cultivation of goodness. Subhuti, what has been labeled as ‘Laws related to goodness,’ the Lord Buddha stated are not truly ‘Laws related to goodness,’ they are simply referred to as ‘Laws related to goodness.’”

1 The Abbé Dubois in his valuable book, Hindu Manners, Customs, and Ceremonies, carefully observes that amongst the attributes which the Jains ascribe to the Supreme Being, the first is that He is “one” and “indivisible”; and this observation of the learned Abbé becomes quite illuminating, when we remember the intimate relationship which has existed between the Jains and the Law of Buddha.

1 The Abbé Dubois in his valuable book, Hindu Manners, Customs, and Ceremonies, carefully points out that among the qualities the Jains attribute to the Supreme Being, the foremost is that He is “one” and “indivisible.” This insight from the knowledgeable Abbé becomes especially enlightening when we consider the close relationship that has existed between the Jains and the teachings of Buddha.

“Within it first arose desire, the primal germ of mind,
 Which nothing with existence links, as sages searching find.
 The cord, transversely stretched, that spanned this universal frame,
 Was it beneath? was it above? can any sage proclaim?”
“Progress of the Vedic religion towards abstract conceptions of the Deity.” John Muir (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society).

3 “Free from self, free from life, free from personality, that highest perfect knowledge is always the same, and thus known with all good things. And why? Because, what was preached as good things, good things, indeed, O Subhuti, they were preached by the Tathagata as no-things, and therefore are they called good things.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

3 “Liberated from ego, liberated from existence, liberated from identity, that ultimate truth is always constant, and is recognized alongside all positive aspects. And why is that? Because what was presented as positive aspects, truly positive aspects, O Subhuti, were actually described by the Tathagata as non-existent, and thus they are referred to as positive aspects.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“This condition which is named the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened (heart), consists in nothing more than the exclusion of all individual distinctions. A man who practices all the rules of virtuous conduct will forthwith attain this condition. But, Subhuti, when we speak of rules of virtuous conduct, Tathagata declares that these rules are after all no real and lasting rules; the term is but a mere name,”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“This state, referred to as the unmatched, just, and enlightened heart, is simply about leaving behind all individual differences. A person who follows all the principles of virtuous behavior will quickly reach this state. However, Subhuti, when we talk about the principles of virtuous behavior, the Tathagata says that these principles aren’t truly real or permanent; they're just a name,”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

4 The six Paramita—charity, morality, endurance, energy, contemplation, wisdom, comprehended under the term “Laws pertaining to goodness,” merely constitute an open door by means of which disciples are ushered into the presence of truth.—Chinese Annotation.

4 The six Paramita—generosity, ethics, patience, effort, meditation, and wisdom—are understood as the "Laws of Goodness," which serve simply as an open door through which followers can enter the realm of truth.—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 24]

[Chapter 24]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If within this universe of universes, the seven treasures1 were heaped together, forming as many great elevations as there are Sumerus, prince of mountains, and these treasures bestowed entirely in the exercise of charity; and if a disciple were to select a stanza of this Scripture, rigorously observe it, and diligently explain it to others, the merit2 thus obtained would so far exceed the former excellence, that it cannot be stated in terms of proportion, nor comprehended by any analogy.”3

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If we gathered all the seven treasures and stacked them up into mountains as tall as the Sumeru, the king of mountains, and if these treasures were given away entirely out of charity; and if a disciple were to choose a verse from this Scripture, strictly follow it, and thoughtfully teach it to others, the good karma gained from that would surpass the previous greatness to such an extent that it can't be measured or compared to anything else.”

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal.

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal.

2 “And whosoever in days when the good Law is abolished, abandons love for his own body and life, and proclaims day and night these good words—pre-eminent is his merit from this.”

2 “And whoever, in times when the good Law is no longer followed, gives up love for their own body and life, and speaks these good words day and night—his merit is exceptional because of this.”

“He obtains a glorious and endless splendour who teaches even one word thereof; he will not miss one consonant nor the meaning who gives this Sutra to others.”

"Whoever teaches even a single word of this will gain amazing and endless glory; anyone who shares this Sutra with others won't miss a single consonant or its meaning."

“Therefore let those who are endowed with lofty ambitions, always hear this Law which causes transcendent merit; let them hear it and gladly welcome it and lay it up in their minds and continually worship the three jewels (the Buddha, the Law, and the assembly of monks) with faith.”—Buddha-Karita. E. B. Cowell.

“Therefore, let those with high aspirations always pay attention to this Law that brings great merit; let them listen to it, welcome it with joy, keep it in their thoughts, and continuously honor the three jewels (the Buddha, the Law, and the community of monks) with faith.”—Buddha-Karita. E.B. Cowell.

3 “I declare that his happiness and consequent merit would be incomparably greater than that of the other, so much so, that no number could express the excess of one over the other.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

3 “I say that his happiness and resulting worth would be way greater than the other’s, to the point that no amount could capture the difference between them.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.


[Chapter 25]

[Chapter 25]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? You disciples, do not affirm that the Lord Buddha reflects thus within himself, ‘I bring salvation to every living being.’ Subhuti, entertain no such delusive thought! And why? Because, in reality there are no living beings to whom the Lord Buddha can bring salvation.1 If there were living beings to whom the Lord Buddha could bring salvation, the Lord Buddha would necessarily assume the reality of such arbitrary concepts as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha adverted to as an entity, is not in reality an entity; it is only understood to be an entity, and believed in as such, by the common, uneducated people. Subhuti, what are ordinarily referred to as the ‘common, uneducated people,’ these the Lord Buddha declared to be not merely ‘common, uneducated people.’”2

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, asking: “What do you think? You disciples, do not believe that the Lord Buddha thinks to himself, ‘I bring salvation to every living being.’ Subhuti, do not hold onto such a misleading thought! And why? Because, in reality, there are no living beings to whom the Lord Buddha can bring salvation. If there were living beings to whom the Lord Buddha could bring salvation, the Lord Buddha would have to acknowledge the reality of arbitrary concepts like entity, being, living being, and personality. Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha referred to as an entity is not truly an entity; it is only understood and believed to be an entity by ordinary, uneducated people. Subhuti, those typically called ‘ordinary, uneducated people,’ the Lord Buddha declared are not merely ‘ordinary, uneducated people.’”

1 As the primordial human mind is void and quiescent, so also is the wisdom of this Sutra full and overflowing. Therefore, hearing the text of this Sutra expounded, and meditating upon its truth, there are formed spontaneously within the minds of those living beings, all the essential elements of salvation. As these mature and develop into a Law of spiritual liberty, the Lord Buddha obviously relinquishes every duty consonant with the idea of a delegated Saviour.—Chinese Annotation.

1 Just as the original human mind is empty and still, the wisdom of this Sutra is abundant and overflowing. Therefore, when people hear this Sutra explained and reflect on its truth, the essential elements of salvation naturally arise in their minds. As these elements grow and evolve into a path of spiritual freedom, the Lord Buddha clearly steps away from any role that resembles that of a designated Savior.—Chinese Annotation.

“What do you think then, O Subhuti, does a Tathagata think in this wise: beings have been delivered by me? You should not think so. And why? Because, there is no being that has been delivered by the Tathagata. And if there were a being, O Subhuti, that had been delivered by the Tathagata, then Tathagata would believe in a self, a being, a living being, and a person. And what is called a belief in self, O Subhuti, that is preached as a no-belief by the Tathagata. And this is learned by children and ignorant persons, and they who were preached as children and ignorant persons, O Subhuti, were preached as no-persons by the Tathagata, and therefore they are called children and ignorant persons.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“What do you think, Subhuti? Does a Tathagata think like this: I have saved beings? You shouldn't think that way. And why? Because there is no being that has been saved by the Tathagata. And if there were a being, Subhuti, that had been saved by the Tathagata, then the Tathagata would have a belief in a self, a being, a living being, and a person. And what is called a belief in self, Subhuti, is taught as a belief in no self by the Tathagata. And this is understood by children and ignorant individuals, and those who are referred to as children and ignorant individuals, Subhuti, are described as no persons by the Tathagata, which is why they are called children and ignorant individuals.” —The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “Difference there is in beings endowed with bodies, but amongst men this is not the case, the difference amongst men is nominal only.”—Dhammapada. Max Müller.

2 “There's a difference in beings that have bodies, but among humans, this isn’t true; the differences among people are only nominal.” —Dhammapada. Max Müller.

“Worldly profit is fleeting and perishable, religious (holy) profit is eternal and inexhaustible; a man though a king is full of trouble, a common man who is holy, has everlasting rest.”—Fo-Sho-Hing-Tsan-King. Beal.

“Worldly gain is temporary and doesn't last, while spiritual (holy) gain is lasting and limitless; a man, even if he’s a king, is full of troubles, but a humble, holy person has everlasting peace.”—Fo-Sho-Hing-Tsan-King. Beal.


[Chapter 26]

[Chapter 26]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions?”1 Subhuti replied, saying: “Even so,2 the Lord Buddha can be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “Can anyone really see the Lord Buddha through his thirty-two physical characteristics?”1 Subhuti answered, saying: “Yes,2 the Lord Buddha can indeed be seen through his thirty-two physical characteristics.”

The Lord Buddha, continuing, said unto Subhuti: “If by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions it were possible to perceive the Lord Buddha, then the Lord Buddha would merely resemble one of the great wheel-turning kings.”3

The Lord Buddha continued and said to Subhuti, “If you could recognize the Lord Buddha just by his thirty-two physical features, then the Lord Buddha would only look like one of the great wheel-turning kings.”3

Subhuti thereupon addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! According as I am able to interpret the Lord Buddha’s instruction, it is improbable that the Lord Buddha may be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions.”

Subhuti then spoke to the Lord Buddha, saying: “Respected One! Based on my understanding of your teachings, it seems unlikely that anyone can truly see the Lord Buddha through his thirty-two physical features.”

Thereafter, the “Honoured of the Worlds” delivered this sublime Gatha:

Thereafter, the “Honored of the Worlds” delivered this sublime Gatha:

I am not to be perceived by means of any visible form,
 Nor sought after by means of any audible sound;
 Whosoever walks in the way of iniquity,
 Cannot perceive the blessedness of the Lord Buddha.4

1 “This probably refers to the auspicious signs discovered in Sakyamuni at his birth, which left it open whether he would become a king or a Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “This likely refers to the promising signs observed at Sakyamuni's birth, which left it uncertain whether he would become a king or a Buddha.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 Subhuti failed to apprehend the idea as expressed by the Lord Buddha, and inadvertently replied, saying: “Even so, Even so.”—Chinese Annotation.

2 Subhuti didn’t understand the concept as explained by the Lord Buddha, and accidentally responded, saying: “That’s right, That’s right.”—Chinese Annotation.

“The portends troubled, till his dream readers
 Augured a prince of earthly dominance,
 A Chakravartin, such as rise to rule
 Once in a thousand years.”
The Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.

“A king who rules the world, and causes the wheel of doctrine everywhere to revolve. The great Asoka (King of Central India, who reigned near Patna, about 150–200 years after the demise of Buddha) was a ‘wheel king.’ The word is Chakravarti in Sanscrit, from Chakra ‘wheel,’ the symbol of activity, whether of Buddha in preaching, or of kings like Asoka in ruling.”—Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

“A king who rules the world and makes the wheel of teaching turn everywhere. The great Ashoka (King of Central India, who reigned near Patna, about 150–200 years after the death of Buddha) was a ‘wheel king.’ The term is Chakravarti in Sanskrit, derived from Chakra ‘wheel,’ the symbol of action, whether it’s Buddha preaching or kings like Ashoka ruling.” —Chinese Buddhism. Edkins.

“Those of the Bikkhus who carry in their hearts the words of excellent knowledge that is immeasurable, who are free from bonds, whose fame and power and glory no man can weigh, who (in imitation of their master) keep the royal chariot wheel of the kingdom of righteousness rolling on, who have reached perfection in knowledge.”—Questions of King Milinda. T. W. Rhys Davids.

“Those among the monks who hold in their hearts the profound and limitless wisdom, who are free from attachments, whose renown and influence no one can quantify, who (following the example of their teacher) keep the royal chariot wheel of righteousness moving forward, who have attained perfection in knowledge.”—Questions of King Milinda. T.W. Rhys Davids.

4 The following Gatha, translated by Max Müller, and concluding the twenty-sixth section of The Vagrakkhedika, is not incorporated in the Chinese text.

4 The following verse, translated by Max Müller, and finishing the twenty-sixth section of The Vagrakkhedika, is not included in the Chinese text.

“A Buddha is to be seen (known) from the Law;
 For the Lords (Buddha) have the Law-Body;
 And the nature of the Law cannot be understood,
 Nor can it be made to be understood.”

[Chapter 27]

[Chapter 27]

The Lord Buddha said unto Subhuti: “If you think thus within yourself ‘The Lord Buddha did not, by means of his perfect bodily distinctions, obtain supreme spiritual wisdom,’ Subhuti, have no such deceptive thought! Or if you think thus within yourself, ‘In obtaining supreme spiritual wisdom, the Lord Buddha declared the abrogation of every Law,’ Subhuti, have no such delusive thought! And why? Because, those disciples who obtain supreme spiritual wisdom, neither affirm the abrogation of any Law, nor the destruction of any distinctive quality of phenomena.”1

The Buddha said to Subhuti, "If you think to yourself, 'The Buddha didn’t achieve ultimate spiritual wisdom through his perfect physical traits,' Subhuti, don’t entertain such misleading thoughts! Or if you think, 'In gaining ultimate spiritual wisdom, the Buddha declared that all laws are no longer valid,' Subhuti, don’t be fooled by such delusions! And why? Because those disciples who attain ultimate spiritual wisdom neither assert the invalidation of any law nor the elimination of any unique qualities of phenomena."1

1 “What do you think then, O Subhuti, has the highest perfect knowledge been known by the Tathagata by the possession of signs? You should not think so, O Subhuti. And why? Because, the highest perfect knowledge will not be known by the Tathagata through the possession of signs. Nor should anybody, O Subhuti, say to you that the destruction or annihilation of anything is proclaimed by those who have entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “What do you think, Subhuti, does the Tathagata understand the highest perfect knowledge through the use of symbols? You shouldn’t think that, Subhuti. And why? Because the Tathagata does not understand the highest perfect knowledge through symbols. And no one, Subhuti, should tell you that the destruction or annihilation of anything is stated by those who have embarked on the path of the Bodhisattvas.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti, if you should think thus, ‘Tathagata, by means of his personal distinctions has attained to the unsurpassable condition,’ you would be wrong.... But, Subhuti, do not come to such an opinion as this, viz., ‘that what is called the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart is nothing more than the mere neglect and destruction of all rules and conditions.’ Think not so, for why? the exhibition of this perfect and unsurpassed heart is not the consequence of having disregarded and destroyed all rules, in the active discharge of duty.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, if you think that the Tathagata has reached the ultimate state because of his unique qualities, you would be mistaken.... But, Subhuti, don't hold the belief that the so-called ultimate, just, and enlightened heart is simply a result of ignoring and breaking all rules and conditions. Don't think that way, because the display of this perfect and unparalleled heart is not the result of disregarding and destroying all rules in actively fulfilling one's duties.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

Concerning the phenomena of Law, if these were abrogated and entirely discarded, where would the mind receive its guiding light, or the human spirit its power of discernment? To attempt a process of reasoning apart from such necessary postulates as the distinctive qualities of Law and phenomena, would prove to be as futile as an effort to cross a river without a raft, and would inevitably end in oblivion.—Chinese Annotation.

Regarding the phenomena of Law, if these were completely abolished and disregarded, where would the mind find its guiding light, or the human spirit its ability to discern? Trying to reason without essential principles like the unique characteristics of Law and phenomena would be as pointless as trying to cross a river without a raft, and would ultimately lead to nothingness.—Chinese Annotation.


[Chapter 28]

[Chapter 28]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If an enlightened disciple, in the exercise of charity, bestowed as considerable an amount of the seven treasures as might fill worlds numerous as the sands of the Ganges; and if a disciple, realising that within the meaning and purport of the Law, there is no abstract individual existence,1 perfects himself in the virtue of endurance, this latter disciple will have a cumulative merit, relatively greater than the other. And why? Because, enlightened disciples are entirely unaffected by considerations of ‘reward or merit.’”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If an enlightened disciple, while practicing generosity, gave away a huge amount of the seven treasures—enough to fill worlds as numerous as the grains of sand in the Ganges; and if another disciple, understanding that within the teachings of the Law, there is no separate self, truly masters the virtue of endurance, that second disciple will have a greater cumulative merit than the first. And why is that? Because enlightened disciples are completely unaffected by thoughts of 'reward or merit.'”

Subhuti thereupon enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! in what respect are enlightened disciples unaffected by considerations of ‘reward or merit’?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “Enlightened disciples do not aspire, in a spirit of covetousness, to rewards commensurate with their merit; therefore, I declare that they are entirely unaffected by considerations of ‘reward or merit.’”2

Subhuti then asked the Buddha, “Honored One, how are enlightened disciples not influenced by thoughts of ‘reward or merit’?” The Buddha replied, “Enlightened disciples don’t seek rewards out of greed for their merit, so I say they are completely unaffected by thoughts of ‘reward or merit.’”2

1 “And if a Bodhisattva acquired endurance in selfless and uncreated things, then he would enjoy a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “And if a Bodhisattva developed patience in selfless and uncreated things, then he would gain a greater amount of merit, beyond measure and count.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Nothing in this world is single,
 All things by a law divine
 In one another’s being mingle.—Shelley.

2 “Subhuti asked Buddha: World-honoured One! what is this you say, that Bodhisatwas cannot be said to appreciate reward? ‘Subhuti, the reward which a Bodhisatwa enjoys ought to be connected with no covetous desire; this is what I mean by non-appreciation of reward.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

2 “Subhuti asked Buddha: World-honored One! What do you mean when you say that Bodhisattvas can't be said to appreciate reward? ‘Subhuti, the reward that a Bodhisattva enjoys shouldn't be linked to any greedy desire; that’s what I mean by non-appreciation of reward.’”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

This passage, concluding the twenty-eighth section of The Diamond Sutra, not being incorporated in the translation of The Vagrakkhedika by Max Müller, may be suggestive of a noteworthy interpolation in the Chinese text, or is it a probable lacuna in the Sanscrit MSS.?

This passage, concluding the twenty-eighth section of The Diamond Sutra, not being included in the translation of The Vagrakkhedika by Max Müller, might indicate a significant addition in the Chinese text, or could it be a possible gap in the Sanskrit manuscripts?


[Chapter 29]

[Chapter 29]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple asserts that the Lord Buddha comes or goes, sits or reclines, obviously he has not understood the meaning of my discourse. And why? Because, the idea ‘Buddha’ implies neither coming from anywhere, nor going to anywhere, and hence the synonym ‘Buddha!’”1

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple claims that the Lord Buddha comes or goes, sits or lies down, it's clear that he hasn't grasped the meaning of my teachings. And why? Because the concept of ‘Buddha’ doesn't suggest coming from anywhere or going anywhere, and that's why we use the term ‘Buddha!’”1

1 “And why? Because the word Tathagata means one who does not go to anywhere, and does not come from anywhere, and therefore he is called the Tathagata (truly come), holy and fully enlightened.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “And why? Because the term Tathagata refers to someone who doesn’t go anywhere and doesn’t come from anywhere, and that’s why he is called the Tathagata (truly come), holy and fully enlightened.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“That which is Tathagata has no where whence to come, and no where whither he can go, and is therefore named Tathagata.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“That which is Tathagata has nowhere to come from, and nowhere to go, and is therefore called Tathagata.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

In the heavens above, we cannot discern a place whence he came, nor whither he may return. In his holy, immaculate, and marvellously endowed body, were manifested plenary spiritual powers.—Hua-Yen-Sutra.

In the sky above, we cannot see where he came from or where he might go back. In his holy, pure, and wonderfully gifted body, complete spiritual powers were revealed.—Hua-Yen-Sutra.

Like drifting clouds, like the waning moon, like ships that sail the ocean, like shores that are washed away—these are symbolic of endless change. But the blessed Buddha, in his essential, absolute nature, is changeless and everlasting.—Yuen-Chioh-Sutra.

Like drifting clouds, like the fading moon, like ships that sail the ocean, like shores that are eroded—these symbolize endless change. But the blessed Buddha, in his true and absolute nature, is unchanging and eternal.—Yuen-Chioh-Sutra.

“If the pool be of pure water, the shining moon is reflected upon its limpid surface; and yet we cannot affirm that the moon really came from anywhere, or that it is actually in the pool. If the pool be disturbed and the dense mud raised, immediately the bright reflection becomes obscured; and yet we dare not affirm that the moon has really gone to anywhere, or that it has actually departed from the pool. It is entirely a question of the purity or impurity of the water, and has no reasonable affinity with theories concerning the existence or non-existence of the moon. So, also, with the true concept of Buddha; only those whose minds are immaculate in their pristine purity, can ever realise his transcendent blessedness.”—Chang-Shui (a Chinese monk).

“If the pool is clear and pure, the shining moon reflects beautifully on its surface; yet we can’t say that the moon actually came from anywhere, or that it’s truly in the pool. If the pool gets disturbed and the muddy sediment rises, the bright reflection disappears right away; still, we wouldn’t claim that the moon has actually gone anywhere, or that it has really left the pool. It’s all about the purity or impurity of the water, and has nothing to do with theories about the existence or non-existence of the moon. Similarly, it’s the case with the true understanding of Buddha; only those whose minds are pure and clear can realize his profound blessedness.” —Chang-Shui (a Chinese monk).


[Chapter 30]

[Chapter 30]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were to take infinite worlds and ‘reduce’ them to minute particles of dust; what think you, would the aggregate of all those particles of dust be great?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the aggregate of all those particles of dust would be exceedingly great. And why? Because, if all those were in reality ‘minute particles of dust,’ the Lord Buddha would not have declared them to be ‘minute particles of dust.’ And why? Because, the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon ‘minute particles of dust,’ declared that in reality those are not ‘minute particles of dust,’ they are merely termed ‘minute particles of dust.’”1

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were to take infinite worlds and turn them into tiny particles of dust; what do you think, would the total of all those particles of dust be great?” Subhuti responded, saying: “Honored One! the total of all those particles of dust would be extremely great. And why? Because if all those were truly ‘tiny particles of dust,’ the Lord Buddha wouldn’t have described them as ‘tiny particles of dust.’ And why? Because, when the Lord Buddha talks about ‘tiny particles of dust,’ he states that in reality, those are not ‘tiny particles of dust,’ they are simply called ‘tiny particles of dust.’”1

Subhuti continuing, addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! what the Lord Buddha discoursed upon as ‘infinite worlds,’ these are not in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ they are merely termed ‘infinite worlds.’ And why? Because, if these were in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ there would of necessity be unity and eternity of matter. But the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon the ‘unity and eternity of matter,’ declared that there is neither ‘unity’ nor ‘eternity of matter,’ therefore it is merely termed ‘unity and eternity of matter.’”

Subhuti continued to speak to the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honored One of the Worlds! What you referred to as ‘infinite worlds’ isn’t truly ‘infinite worlds’; it’s just called that. And why is that? If they were genuinely ‘infinite worlds,’ there would have to be a unity and eternity of matter. However, you have taught about the ‘unity and eternity of matter’ and declared that there is no actual ‘unity’ or ‘eternity of matter,’ so it’s only called ‘unity and eternity of matter.’”

The Lord Buddha thereupon declared unto Subhuti, “Belief in the unity or eternity of matter is incomprehensible;2 and only common, worldly-minded people, for purely materialistic reasons, covet this hypothesis.”

The Lord Buddha then said to Subhuti, “Believing in the unity or eternity of matter is hard to understand;2 and only ordinary, materialistic people, for purely material reasons, desire this idea.”

1 These minute particles of dust, like the great worlds which are composed of them, are deceptive forms of natural phenomena, equally unreal and evanescent. The minute particles which we observe floating in space, are carried hither and thither by atmospheric currents, and eventually pass into regions beyond our cognisance. So, also, with the immense worlds revolving in space; their ever-recurring phenomena of light and darkness, heat and cold, changing seasons, transient scenes of mountain and valley, river and plain. These things indicate that all are ephemeral, and entirely subject to irrevocable laws of change and decay.—Chinese Annotation.

1 These tiny particles of dust, just like the vast worlds made of them, are misleading representations of natural events, equally unreal and fleeting. The tiny particles we see drifting in the air are moved around by atmospheric currents and eventually disappear into areas beyond our understanding. The same goes for the massive worlds moving through space; their constant cycles of light and darkness, heat and cold, changing seasons, and temporary views of mountains and valleys, rivers and plains. These things show that everything is transient and completely governed by unchangeable laws of transformation and decay.—Chinese Annotation.

“Because, what was preached as a mass of many atoms by the Tathagata, that was preached as no-mass of atoms by the Tathagata, and therefore it is called ‘a mass of many atoms.’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Because what was taught as a collection of many atoms by the Tathagata was also taught as no collection of atoms by the Tathagata, and that's why it's referred to as ‘a collection of many atoms.’”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“What then, if Buddha speaks of all these particles, then they are not really what they are called, it is but a mere name, World-Honoured One!”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“What then, if Buddha talks about all these particles, then they aren’t really what they’re named, it’s just a name, World-Honoured One!”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

2 “Bhagavat said, and a belief in matter itself, O Subhuti, is inestimable and inexpressible; it is neither a thing nor a no-thing, and this is known by children and ignorant persons.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “Bhagavat said, and believing in matter itself, O Subhuti, is beyond measure and description; it is neither something nor nothing, and even children and uneducated people understand this.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Annihilation of matter is inconceivable, but annihilation of all its forms and qualities is conceivable.” The World as Idea and Will. Schopenhauer.

“Destruction of matter is unimaginable, but destruction of all its forms and qualities is thinkable.” The World as Idea and Will. Schopenhauer.

If the worlds were real and permanent, they would always retain their original forms and primordial natures, and be subject neither to the influence of time nor the Law of change.—Chinese Annotation.

If the worlds were real and permanent, they would always keep their original forms and essential natures, unaffected by time or the laws of change.—Chinese Annotation.

“Subhuti, this characteristic of the one ‘harmonious principle,’ is a thing which cannot be spoken of in words; it is only the vain philosophy of the world, which has grasped the idea of explaining this.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, this feature of the one ‘harmonious principle’ is something that can't be expressed in words; it's just the empty philosophy of the world that tries to explain it.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

This noteworthy statement seems to militate against some opinions expressed in Europe regarding the Buddhist theory of “matter.” According to our Chinese text, it does not appear that Sakyamuni Buddha categorically denied the “presence” or “existence” of matter in the universe, but endeavoured rather to indicate the diversified and evanescent nature of its “forms” and “qualities.” Many devout Buddhists regard even the smallest particle of dust as containing a mysterious and elusive element—probably what we are disposed to term “a spiritual element,” or “principle of life”—and these are not unreasonably regarded as being altogether inscrutable, and therefore “incomprehensible.”

This important statement seems to go against some views in Europe about the Buddhist idea of “matter.” According to our Chinese text, it doesn’t seem that Sakyamuni Buddha completely denied the “presence” or “existence” of matter in the universe; instead, he aimed to highlight the varied and fleeting nature of its “forms” and “qualities.” Many devoted Buddhists see even the tiniest particle of dust as holding a mysterious and elusive element—likely what we might call “a spiritual element” or “principle of life”—and these are often viewed as completely mysterious, and therefore “incomprehensible.”


[Chapter 31]

[Chapter 31]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple affirmed that the Lord Buddha enunciated a belief1 that the mind can comprehend the idea of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality; what think you, Subhuti, would that disciple be interpreting aright the meaning of my discourse?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! that disciple would not be interpreting aright the meaning of the Lord Buddha’s discourse. And why? Because, Honoured of the Worlds! discoursing upon comprehending such ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality, it was declared that these are entirely unreal and illusive, and therefore they are merely termed an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple claimed that I taught a belief that the mind can understand the concept of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality; what do you think, Subhuti, would that disciple be correctly interpreting the meaning of my teachings?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! that disciple would not be correctly interpreting the meaning of the Buddha’s teachings. And why? Because, Honoured of the Worlds! when discussing ideas like an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality, it was stated that these are entirely unreal and illusory, and therefore they are simply referred to as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality.”

The Lord Buddha thereafter addressed Subhuti, saying:2 “Those who aspire to the attainment of supreme spiritual wisdom ought thus to know, believe in, and interpret phenomena. They ought to eliminate from their minds every tangible evidence of every visible object. Subhuti, concerning ‘visible objects,’ the Lord Buddha declared that these are not really ‘visible objects’ they are merely termed ‘visible objects.’”

The Lord Buddha then spoke to Subhuti, saying:2 “Those who seek to achieve the highest spiritual wisdom should understand, believe in, and interpret phenomena in this way. They need to rid their minds of any tangible evidence of visible objects. Subhuti, regarding ‘visible objects,’ the Lord Buddha stated that these aren’t truly ‘visible objects’; they’re only called ‘visible objects.’”

1 “Because, O Subhuti, if a man were to say that belief in self, belief in a being, belief in life, belief in personality, had been preached by the Tathagata, would he be speaking truly? Subhuti said, not indeed, Bhagavat, he would not be speaking truly. And why? Because, what was preached by the Tathagata as a belief in self, that was preached as no-belief, therefore it is called belief in self.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

1 “Because, Subhuti, if someone were to claim that the Tathagata taught belief in self, belief in an individual, belief in existence, or belief in personality, would he be speaking truthfully? Subhuti replied, no, Bhagavat, he would not be speaking truthfully. And why? Because what the Tathagata preached as belief in self was actually taught as not believing in self, which is why it is called belief in self.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

In these words are exemplified another profound aspect of Buddhist doctrine. Apart from interesting questions concerning the existence of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, another problem seems to arise regarding our ability to entirely perceive or “comprehend” those admitted abstract ideas. If we interpret aright the Buddhist doctrine, there are variously compounded within those abstract ideas, so many elusive spiritual elements, that the human mind is incapable of resolving them by any process of reasoning. In short—an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, represents to the Buddhist mind, much more than it attempts to express in terms of philosophy.

In these words, another deep aspect of Buddhist doctrine is illustrated. Beyond the intriguing questions about the existence of an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, there's another issue regarding our ability to fully perceive or "understand" these abstract concepts. If we interpret the Buddhist doctrine correctly, these abstract ideas are filled with so many elusive spiritual elements that the human mind can't fully resolve them through reasoning. In short, to the Buddhist perspective, an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality signifies much more than what philosophy tries to convey.

2 “Thus then, O Subhuti, are all things to be perceived, to be looked upon, and to be believed by one who has entered upon the path of the Bodhisattvas. And in this wise are they to be perceived, to be looked upon, and to be believed, neither in the idea of a thing, nor in the idea of a no-thing? And why? Because by saying: the idea of a thing, the idea of a thing indeed, it has been preached by the Tathagata as the no-idea of a thing.” — The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

2 “Therefore, Subhuti, this is how all things should be understood, viewed, and accepted by someone who is on the path of the Bodhisattvas. This is how they should be seen, considered, and believed, neither as something nor as nothing. And why is that? Because when we talk about the idea of something, indeed, it has been taught by the Tathagata as the idea of nothing.” — The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“Subhuti, the persons who aspire to the perfectly enlightened heart, ought to know accordingly that this is true with respect to all things, and thus prevent the exhibition of any characteristics on any point whatever. Subhuti, these very characteristics of which we speak are after all no characteristics, but a mere name.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“Subhuti, those who aim for a perfectly enlightened heart should understand that this applies to everything and therefore avoid showing any characteristics on any aspect at all. Subhuti, these characteristics we talk about are ultimately not characteristics at all, but just a name.” —Kin-Kong-King. Beal.


[Chapter 32]

[Chapter 32]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple, having immeasurable spheres filled with the seven treasures,1 bestowed these in the exercise of charity; and if a disciple, whether man or woman, having aspired to supreme spiritual wisdom, selected from this Scripture a stanza comprising four lines, then rigorously observed it, studied it, and diligently explained it to others; the cumulative merit of such a disciple would be relatively greater than the other.”

The Lord Buddha spoke to Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple, with countless realms filled with the seven treasures, donated these in the spirit of charity; and if a disciple, whether male or female, aiming for the highest spiritual wisdom, chose a stanza from this Scripture that has four lines, then seriously followed it, studied it, and actively shared it with others; the total merit of that disciple would be much greater than the other.”

“In what attitude of mind should it be diligently explained to others?2 Not assuming the permanency or the reality of earthly phenomena, but in the conscious blessedness of a mind at perfect rest.3 And why? Because, the phenomena of life may be likened unto a dream, a phantasm, a bubble,4 a shadow, the glistening dew, or lightning flash, and thus they ought to be contemplated.”

“In what mindset should it be carefully explained to others?2 Not by assuming that earthly things are permanent or real, but with the joyful awareness of a mind that is completely at peace.3 And why? Because the events of life can be compared to a dream, an illusion, a bubble,4 a shadow, the shining dew, or a flash of lightning, and so they should be reflected upon.”

When the Lord Buddha concluded his enunciation of this Scripture,5 the venerable Subhuti, the monks,6 nuns, lay-brethren and sisters, all mortals, and the whole realm of spiritual beings, rejoiced exceedingly, and consecrated to its practice, they received it and departed.

When the Lord Buddha finished sharing this Scripture, 5 the respected Subhuti, the monks, 6 nuns, laypeople, and all humans, along with the entire realm of spiritual beings, were filled with joy and committed themselves to its practice. They accepted it and went on their way.

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal.

1 Gold, silver, pearls, coral, carnelian, glass, and crystal.

2 “The wise man, the preacher, who wishes to expound this Sutra, must absolutely renounce falsehood, pride, calumny, and envy.... He is always sincere, mild, forbearing; ... he must feel affection for all beings who are striving for enlightenment ... they are greatly perverted in their minds, those beings who do not hear, nor perceive ... the mystery of the Tathagata. Nevertheless will I, who have attained this supreme, perfect knowledge, powerfully bend to it the mind of every one (Burnouf, par la force de mes facultés surnaturelles), whatever may be the position he occupies, and bring about that he accepts, understands, and arrives at full ripeness.”—Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

2 “The wise person, the teacher, who wants to explain this Sutra, must completely give up falsehood, pride, slander, and jealousy.... They are always honest, gentle, patient; ... they should have compassion for all beings who are seeking enlightenment ... those beings who do not hear or understand ... the mystery of the Tathagata are greatly misguided in their minds. However, I, who have achieved this ultimate, perfect knowledge, will strongly direct the mind of everyone (Burnouf, by the power of my supernatural abilities), no matter their position, so that they accept, comprehend, and reach full maturity.” —Saddharma-Pundarika. H. Kern.

3 “By contemplation are obtained those conditions through which is eventually gained that supreme calm, undecaying, immortal state, which is so hard to be reached.”—Buddha-Karita. E. B. Cowell.

3 “Through reflection, we can achieve the state of ultimate peace, which is everlasting and difficult to attain.” —Buddha-Karita. E.B. Cowell.

“And in what way can the disciple ‘proclaim them generally?’ Simply by relying on no conditions or distinctions whatever; thus he will act without agitation or excitement. Wherefore the conclusion is this—that all things which admit of definition are as a dream, a phantom, a bubble, a shadow, as the dew and lightning flash. They ought to be regarded thus.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“And how can the disciple ‘share them broadly?’ Simply by not depending on any conditions or differences at all; this way he will act without stress or disturbance. Therefore, the conclusion is this—that all things that can be defined are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow, like dew and a flash of lightning. They should be viewed this way.”—Kin-Kong-King. Beal.

“And how should he explain it? As in the sky: stars, darkness, a lamp, a phantom, dew, a bubble, a dream, a flash of lightning, and a cloud—thus should we look upon the world (all that was made).”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

“And how should he explain it? Like in the sky: stars, darkness, a lamp, a ghost, dew, a bubble, a dream, a flash of lightning, and a cloud—this is how we should view the world (everything that was created).”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

4Fa-Hien stayed at the dragon Vihara till after the summer retreat, and then, travelling to the south-east for seven Yojanas, he arrived at the city of Kanyakubja, lying along the Ganges.... At a distance from the city of six or seven Le, on the west, on the northern bank of the Ganges, is a place where Buddha preached the Law to his disciples. It has been handed down that his subjects of discourse were such as ‘The bitterness and vanity (of life), as impermanent and uncertain,’ and that ‘The body is as a “bubble” or foam on the water.’”—Travels of Fa-Hien. Legge.

4Fa-Hien stayed at the dragon Vihara until after the summer retreat, and then, traveling southeast for seven Yojanas, he reached the city of Kanyakubja, located along the Ganges.... About six or seven Le to the west, on the northern bank of the Ganges, there's a place where Buddha taught the Law to his disciples. It's been passed down that his topics of discussion included ‘The bitterness and vanity (of life), which are impermanent and uncertain,’ and that ‘The body is like a “bubble” or foam on the water.’”—Travels of Fa-Hien. Law.

5 “Thus spake the Bhagavat enraptured; the elder Subhuti, and the friars, nuns, the faithful lay men and women, and the Bodhisattvas also, and the whole world of gods, men, evil spirits and fairies, praised the preaching of the Bhagavat.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

5 “This is what the Bhagavat said with great joy; the elder Subhuti, along with the monks, nuns, devoted laypeople, and the Bodhisattvas, as well as the entire realm of gods, humans, spirits, and fairies, all praised the teachings of the Bhagavat.”—The Vagrakkhedika. Max Müller.

6 “The vow of ‘obedience’ was never taken by the Buddhist monks and nuns, and in this it may be noticed a fundamental difference between them and monastic orders in the West: mental culture, not mental death, was the aim set before the Buddhist ascetic by the founder of his faith.”—Buddhism. T. W. Rhys Davids.

6 “The vow of ‘obedience’ was never taken by Buddhist monks and nuns, which highlights a key difference between them and Western monastic orders: the goal for the Buddhist ascetic set by the founder of their faith was mental development, not mental suppression.”—Buddhism. T.W. Rhys Davids.

As when men, travelling, feel a glorious perfume sweet
 Pervading all the country side, and gladdening them, infer at once,
Surely ’tis giant forest trees are flowering now!
 So, conscious of this perfume sweet of righteousness
 That now pervades the earth and heavens, they may infer:
A Buddha, infinitely great, must once have lived!’”

INDEX

Printed at
The Edinburgh Press,
9 & 11 Young Street.

Printed at
The Edinburgh Press,
9 & 11 Young Street.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES.

The original printed text scans can be found at: https://archive.org/details/cu31924022914588.

The original printed text scans are available at: https://archive.org/details/cu31924022914588.

The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain. The English title and author text was placed over the original cover image. Library stamps were scrubbed from the cover image.

The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain. The English title and author text were placed over the original cover image. Library stamps were removed from the cover image.

Textual notes:

Textual notes:

  1. Chapter labels have been added in braces (e.g. [Chapter 1]).
  2. Footnotes have been moved to the end of each chapter. As a result, page numbers were not preserved for each page. The page numbers contained in the index link to a paragraph in the text or to the start of a footnote.
  3. Word spellings have been standardized. Words within direct quotations by other authors have been left unchanged.
  4. Some page numbers in the index were corrected.

Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!