This descriptive scene concerning the endless trains of pilg_The Diamond Sutra (Chin-Kang-Ching) or Prajna-Paramita

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.

[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.

[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.”

“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.’”

“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]

[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.

[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.

“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.

[3] Literally, “become as doubtful 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.

[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]

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 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 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 ages[6] 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 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, 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 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]

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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_.)

[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.

[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.

[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.

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!_

[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.

“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.

[9] “The fountain of knowledge is the pure, bright,

self-enlightening 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.

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.

[Chapter 18]