Chapter II: Part 2

[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.

[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,[3] 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?”

[2] “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.

[5] “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.

[8] “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.’”

[11] “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.

[Chapter 7]

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

Subhuti replied, saying: “As I understand the meaning of the Lord Buddha’s discourse, he has no system of doctrine which can be specifically formulated; nor can the Lord Buddha express, in explicit terms, a form of knowledge which can be described as supreme spiritual wisdom. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha adumbrated in terms of the Law, is transcendental and inexpressible. Being a purely spiritual concept, it is neither consonant with Law, nor synonymous with anything apart from the Law. Thus[1] is exemplified the manner by which wise disciples and holy Buddhas, regarding intuition[2] as the Law of their minds, severally attained to different planes of spiritual wisdom.”[3]

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

[2] The Chinese text “_i-wu-wei-fah_,” is explained by a learned
expositor as _tsz-ran-choih-sing_—the intuitive faculty.

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

[Chapter 8]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? If a benevolent person bestowed as alms, an abundance of the seven treasures[1] sufficient to fill the universe, would there accrue to that person a considerable merit?”

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

The Lord Buddha rejoined, saying: “If a disciple adhered with implicit faith to a stanza[3] of this Scripture, and diligently explained it to others, the intrinsic merit of that disciple would be relatively greater. And why? Because, Subhuti, the holy Buddhas, and the Law[4] by which they attained to supreme spiritual wisdom, severally owe their inception to the truth[5] of this sacred Scripture. Subhuti, what is ordinarily termed the Buddhic Law, is not really a Law attributive to Buddha.”[6]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 9]

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May a Scrotapatti[1] (having entered the stream which bears on to Nirvana) thus moralise within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits[2] commensurate with the merit of a Scrotapatti’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Scrotapatti is simply a descriptive term signifying ‘having entered the stream.’ A disciple who avoids the seductive phenomena of form, sound, odour, taste, touch, and Law,[3] is named a Scrotapatti.”

The Lord Buddha again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May a Sakridagami[4] (who is subject only to one more reincarnation) thus muse within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits consonant with the merit of a Sakridagami’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Sakridagami is merely a descriptive title denoting ‘only one more reincarnation’;[5] but in reality there is no such condition as ‘only one more reincarnation,’ hence Sakridagami is merely a descriptive title.”

The Lord Buddha once again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Anagami[6] (having entire immunity from reincarnation) thus reflect within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits which accord with the merit of an Anagami?’” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Anagami is merely a designation meaning ‘immunity from reincarnation’; but in reality there is no such condition as ‘immunity from reincarnation,’ hence Anagami is merely a convenient designation.”

The Lord Buddha yet again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Arhat[7] (having attained to absolute quiescence of mind) thus meditate within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, there is not in reality a condition synonymous with the term Arhat. Honoured of the Worlds! if an Arhat thus meditates within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’ there would be obvious recurrence of such arbitrary concepts as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Honoured of the Worlds! When the Lord Buddha declared that in absolute quiescence[8] of mind, perfect observance of the Law,[9] and true spiritual perception, I was pre-eminent amongst the disciples, I did not cogitate thus within myself, ‘I am an Arhat, freed[10] from desire!’ Had I thus cogitated, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’[11] the ‘Honoured of the Worlds’ would not have declared concerning me, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka’;[12] but, in reality, Subhuti was perfectly quiescent and oblivious to phenomena;[13] hence the allusion, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka.’”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[7] “Explained by _Fuh-Ko_—the Fruit of Buddha (Buddhaphalam). The
original meaning of Arhat (deserving, worthy) is overlooked by
most Chinese commentators, who explained the term as if it were
written _Ari-Hat_—Destroyer of the Enemy. The following two
explanations are given, _Shah-Tseh_—Destroying the Enemy, and
_Puh-Seng_—not to be reborn, _i.e._, except from transmigration.
There is, however, a third explanation which is based on the
original meaning of Arhat, namely _Ying-Kong_—deserving worship.
The Arhat is the perfected Arya (one who has mastered the four
spiritual truths—_Sz-Ti_—and thereby entered the path to Nirvana
called Arya-Marga), and the state of Arhat can accordingly be
attained only by passing through the different degrees of
saintship. Arhatship implies possession of supernatural powers,
and is to be succeeded either by Buddhaship or by immediate
entrance into Nirvana.”—_Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_. Eitel.

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

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

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

[9] “More is the treasure of the Law than gems;
Sweeter than comb its sweetness; its delights
Delightful past compare.”—_The Light of Asia_.
Sir Edwin Arnold.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 10]

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

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

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

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

[1] “_Ran-Teng-Fuh_—the Buddha who illuminates brightly,
_Ting-Kwang-Fuh_—the Buddha of fixed light. The twenty-fourth
predecessor of Sakyamuni, from whom the latter received the
assurance of his being destined for Buddhaship.”—_Handbook of
Chinese Buddhism_. Eitel.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[4] A Buddhist kingdom has no outward manifestation; it is a pure
and holy condition of mind.—_Chinese Annotation_.

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 11]

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If there were rivers Ganges as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, would the aggregate grains of sand[1] be of considerable number?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Of very considerable number, Honoured of the Worlds! The rivers Ganges alone would be innumerable, and much more innumerable would be the grains of sand.”

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 12]

The Lord Buddha, continuing, said unto Subhuti: “Wherever this Scripture is proclaimed, even though it were but a stanza comprising four lines, you should realise that that place would be sanctified by the presence of the whole realm of gods, men, and terrestrial spirits,[1] who ought unitedly to worship, as if before a sacred shrine of Buddha.[2] But what encomium shall express the merit of a disciple who rigorously observes, and diligently studies,[3] the text of this Scripture? Subhuti, you should realise that such a disciple will be endowed[4] with spiritual powers commensurate with initiation in the supreme, incomparable, and most wonderful Law.[5] Whatever place constitutes a repository for this sacred Scripture, there also the Lord Buddha may be found, together with disciples worthy of reverence and honour.”

[1] Adopting Max Müller’s rendering. In the Chinese text are
_Tien_, _Ren_, and _O-Siu-Lo_—heaven, or gods—men, and _Asurus_;
the latter defined as _fei-tien_—not celestial spirits.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 13]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[3] “Matter is infinitely divisible.”—_The World as Idea and
Will_. Schopenhauer.

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

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

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

[4] “Characteristic physiological marks by which every Buddha may
be recognised.”—_Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_. Eitel.

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

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

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

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

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

[Chapter 14]

Upon that occasion, the venerable Subhuti, hearing the text of this scripture proclaimed, and profoundly realising its meaning, was moved to tears. Addressing the Lord Buddha, he said: “Thou art of transcendent wisdom, Honoured of the Worlds! The Lord Buddha in expounding this supreme canon of Scripture, surpassed in perspicuity every exposition previously heard by me, since my eyes[1] were privileged to perceive this most excellent wisdom. Honoured of the Worlds! In years to come, if disciples hearing this scripture proclaimed, and having within their minds a pure and holy faith, engender true concepts of the ephemeral nature of phenomena—we ought to realise that the cumulative merit of such disciples will be intrinsic and wonderful. Honoured of the Worlds! The true concept of phenomena is, that these are not essentially phenomena, and hence the Lord Buddha declared that they are merely termed phenomena.”

“Honoured of the Worlds! having heard this unprecedented Scripture, faith, clear understanding, and firm resolve to observe its precepts, follow as a natural sequence. If, in future ages, disciples destined to hear this Scripture, likewise believe, understand, and observe its precepts, their merit will incite the highest wonder and praise.[2] And why? Because, the minds of those disciples[3] will have outgrown such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because, the entity is in reality non-entity; and a being, a living being, or a personality, are ideas equally nebulous and hypothetical.[4] Wherefore, discarding every arbitrary idea of phenomena, the wise and wholly enlightened were severally designated Buddha.”[5]

The Lord Buddha, assenting, said unto Subhuti: “If, in future ages, disciples destined to hear this Scripture, neither become perturbed by its extreme modes of thought,[6] nor alarmed by its lofty sentiments,[7] nor apprehensive about realising its high ideals[8]—these disciples also, by their intrinsic merit, will incite superlative wonder and praise.”

“Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha referred to as the first _Paramita_[9] (charity), is not in reality the first _Paramita_, it is merely termed the first _Paramita_”

“Subhuti, regarding the third _Paramita_ (endurance), it is not in reality a _Paramita_, it is merely termed a _Paramita_. And why? Because, in a previous life, when the Prince of Kalinga[10] (‘Kaliradja’) severed the flesh from my limbs and body, at that time I was oblivious to such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality. And why? Because, upon that occasion, when my limbs and body were rent asunder, had I not been oblivious to such arbitrary ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality, there would have originated within my mind, feelings of anger and resentment.”

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

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

“Subhuti, the sayings of the Lord Buddha are true, credible, and immutable. His utterances are neither extravagant nor chimerical. Subhuti, the plane[17] of thought to which the Lord Buddha attained, cannot be explained in terms synonymous with reality or non-reality.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[6] ... “For birth and death
End hence for me and those who learn my Law.”—_The
Light of Asia_. Sir Edwin Arnold.

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

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

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

“What the Tathagata preaches as the _Prajna-Paramita_, that was
preached also by innumerable Blessed Buddhas. Therefore it is
called the _Prajna-Paramita_,”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

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

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

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

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

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

“Because, O Subhuti, I remember the past five hundred births, when
I was the _Rishi-Kshantivadin_ (preacher of endurance).”—_The
Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

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

[14] “Because what is believed is not believed (not to be depended
on).”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

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

[16] Literally, “Every form of phenomena is really _not_ phenomena;
every form of sentient life is in reality _not_ sentient life.”

[17] The Buddhist term, _Fah_ (Law).