Part 1

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._”