THE
DIAMOND SUTRA
(CHIN-KANG-CHING)
OR
PRAJNA-PARAMITA
TRANSLATED FROM THE CHINESE
WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES
BY
WILLIAM GEMMELL
金剛經
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
WM. GEMMELL.
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.”
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.
In Japan, The Diamond Sutra appears to be perused extensively by what Max Müller[2] termed the Shin-Gon sect, founded by Ko-Bo, a disciple of the renowned pilgrim Hiuen-Tsang, about the year 816 a.d.
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.
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]
To Kumarajiva,[5] a native of Kashmir, who gained distinction as a monk of the later Chin dynasty[6] (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]
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 observed[9] 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.”
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 Asvaghocha[10] 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 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:—
“And time hath blurred their script and ancient sense,
Which once was new and mighty, moving all.”
Max Müller stated[12] 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.”
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.
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:—
“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 intelletto[14] 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.
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.
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.”
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]
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.”
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.”
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:—
“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]
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.
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.
“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.”
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.”
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.”
Perhaps it might prove of interest to quote the following outline of Mahayana doctrine[29] prepared by Mr S. Kuroda, which was approved by several influential Buddhist communions in Japan, “and published with authority at 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 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]
“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?”
“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 Bodhisattvas[33] believe, understand, and become perfectly convinced of these through the contemplation of Vidyamatara[34] (all things are nothing but phenomena in mind); hence they are called imperceptible and unknowable. What are the perceptible 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.”
“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....”
“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.”
“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.”
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]
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.
Concluding the [twenty-sixth chapter] of The Diamond Sutra, wherein “the spiritual[36] 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 Gatha[37]:—
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:—
“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.”
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 One[44] in whom all Laws are comprehended and become perfectly intelligible.
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]
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.
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.”
Those ideas of “consummate justice” and “perfect righteousness,” seem to be faithfully portrayed in the following quotation, gleaned 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.
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.”
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.
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.
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:—
“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.”
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.
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;—
“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:—
“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:—
“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:—
“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 Buddha[49] did not hesitate to apply its principles to every doctrine synonymous with his own accredited “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.)
[2] See the preface 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.)
[4] 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.)
[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.”
[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.)
[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.
[9] By Max Müller.
[10] The Chinese Ma-Ming.
[11] Compare the Chinese text of the Chi-Sin-Pien—The Awakening of Faith.
[12] In the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.
[13] “Supreme spiritual wisdom.” In Beal’s Kin-Kong-King, “The unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart.” (Sanscrit, “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].)
[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.
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.”
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.
[17] 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.”
[19] 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.”
[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):—
“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.
[28] Some modern Japanese Buddhists appear to regard this purely spiritual element as “essence of mind.”
[29] From the preface to The Vagrakkhedika.
[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.
[32] Compare pp. [102, 103].
[33] Bodhisattvas—greatly enlightened disciples.
[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.)
[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.
[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.
[37] Gatha—usually a Scripture verse comprising four lines.
[38] Compare 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.
[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:—
“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.”
[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.”
[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.
[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).
[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.)
[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.”
[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.
[47] 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.
[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.
THE DIAMOND SUTRA
[Chapter 1]
Thus have I heard[1] concerning our Lord Buddha:—
Upon a memorable occasion, the Lord Buddha[2] 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.
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.
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 meal[12] 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.
[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)
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.)
[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.
[Chapter 2]
Upon that occasion, the venerable Subhuti[1] 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]
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 subjection[7] 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:—
[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.
[2] “Pu-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.
[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.
[4] “ho-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.
“The unsurpassed, just, 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.
[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).
[7] “Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of 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.”
[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.
[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 changeful[1] 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 minds[4] 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]
“Moreover, Subhuti, an enlightened disciple ought to act spontaneously in the exercise of charity,[6] uninfluenced by sensuous phenomena[7] 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.”
“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 merit[10] 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]
[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.
“The very nature of phenomena demonstrates 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.
“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.
[3] “The dewdrop slips into the shining sea.” —Light of Asia. Sir Edwin Arnold.
“The dewdrop re-becomes 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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
[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.
“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]
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]
[1] “Primitive Buddhism distinguished a material, visible, and perishable body (Seh-Shen—lit., the Body of Form) and an immaterial, invisible, immortal body (Fah-Shen—lit., 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.
[2] The spiritual Buddha must be realised within the mind, otherwise there can be no true perception of the Lord Buddha.—Chinese Annotation.
[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]
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 faith[5] thus conceived, is not exclusively in virtue of the insular thought of any particular Buddha, but because of its affiliation with the concrete[6] thoughts of myriad Buddhas, throughout infinite ages. Therefore, amongst the beings destined to hear this Scripture proclaimed, many, by momentary reflection, will intuitively[7] conceive a pure and holy 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.”
“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?’”
[1] Compare the question addressed by Jesus to His disciples, “When the Son of Man cometh, shall 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.)
[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.
“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).
[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.
“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.
[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.’”
“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.