[Chapter 31]
The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple affirmed that the Lord Buddha enunciated a belief[1] 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 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.’”
[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.
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.
[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.
“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.
[Chapter 32]