Diamond Sutra (Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita)

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.’” “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. “Nothing in this world is single, All things by a law divine In one another’s being mingle.”—Shelley. “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. 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.? [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!’” “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. “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. 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. 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.

“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). [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.’” 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.’”

The Lord Buddha thereupon declared unto Subhuti, “Belief in the unity or eternity of matter is incomprehensible; and only common, worldly-minded people, for purely materialistic reasons, covet this hypothesis.” 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. “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. “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.

“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. “Annihilation of matter is inconceivable, but annihilation of all its forms and qualities is conceivable.” 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. “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.

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.” [Chapter 31] The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple affirmed that the Lord Buddha enunciated a belief 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: “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.’” “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. “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] The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple, having immeasurable spheres filled with the seven treasures, 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.” “In what attitude of mind should it be diligently explained to others? Not assuming the permanency or the reality of earthly phenomena, but in the conscious blessedness of a mind at perfect rest. And why? Because, the phenomena of life may be likened unto a dream, a phantasm, a bubble, a shadow, the glistening dew, or lightning flash, and thus they ought to be contemplated.”

When the Lord Buddha concluded his enunciation of this Scripture, the venerable Subhuti, the monks, 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. Gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal. “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. “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.

“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 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. “Fa-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.

“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. “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. “_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!’_”