Part 2

Again, in the seventeenth chapter of _The Diamond Sutra_, it is declared that in the word “Buddha,” every Law is intelligibly comprehended.[40] To Western minds, it might become necessary to resist a natural inclination to ascribe to those elements of thought, an influence which had its inception in a nation other than the Indian.[41] But, lest we should appear to detract from the native glory of Sakyamuni Buddha, perhaps it might prove opportune to remark, that there is sufficient evidence in the ancient Vedic hymns, Upanishads, etc., to indicate clearly the probable starting-points in the evolution of his thought. It seems to be to the everlasting honour of some early Indian philosophers, that they endeavoured carefully to combine in an abstract spiritual unity, all the essential elements usually comprehended under the term “Divinity.”[42] This may in a manner explain why the devout Buddhist, possessing a natural mental tendency—induced by persistent Hindoo influence—is enabled to regard “Buddha”[43] in a purely spiritual sense, as the One[44] in whom all Laws are comprehended and become perfectly intelligible.

In _The Diamond Sutra_ it may be observed that incidental reference is made by Sakyamuni Buddha to the doctrines of Karma and Reincarnation. It seems to be an old truth to which expression is given in the _Epistle to the Galatians_: “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”[45]

To the Buddhist mind, Karma is indissolubly associated with “the Law which moves to Righteousness.” Thus it is accustomed to view the traditional Christian idea of “justification by Faith,” rather as a devoutly-conceived theory, than as a reasonably-constructed truth.

Occasionally we have heard a gentle affirmation, that the Western mind seems unwittingly inclined to confound the doctrine of Karma with a concept which is almost suggestive of Fatalism. If Karma contains even a germ of thought which corresponds to “blind fatalism,” the idea is perhaps quite felicitously expressed in the following sentences, culled from a valued letter written by an aged Chinese monk: “Karma is a universal Law which gently binds us to the rhythmic cycle of evolving life. It operates so quietly and imperceptibly that we scarcely are conscious of its presence. The absolute truth of Karma greatly attracts our minds, which approve naturally of its consummate justice and perfect righteousness.”

Those ideas of “consummate justice” and “perfect righteousness,” seem to be faithfully portrayed in the following quotation, gleaned from _The Light of Asia_:—

“_What hath been bringeth what shall be, and is, Worse—better—last for first and first for last: The Angels in the Heavens of Gladness reap Fruits of a holy past._”

It would therefore appear that Karma may be regarded generally, as comprising the constituent moral elements derived consecutively from the thoughts, words, and actions of an interminable life’s cycle. Perhaps it is in this connection that Chinese Buddhists frequently assume Karma to resemble “a moral fibre, indissolubly entwined in sentient life.” It may be believed to recede far into the past, and to extend indefinitely into the future.

Although realising the significance of Karma,[46] the devout Buddhist mind is not usually disturbed by fearful forebodings. Ostensibly, it has evolved to a condition of holiness, wherein “the dross of sin” is entirely consumed in the “white flames” of Sakyamuni’s “transcendent wisdom” and “boundless love.”

Within the realm of Buddhist philosophy, the doctrine of reincarnation is conspicuous by reason of its peculiarly attractive charms. On first acquaintance, the European mind may be somewhat “startled” to discover, that a satisfactory explanation of the interminable evolution of life, is sought for by the earnest Buddhist in the theory of reincarnation.

In the text of _The Diamond Sutra_, it may be observed that Sakyamuni Buddha, in discoursing to Subhuti, referred incidentally to personal reminiscences, one of which belonged to a distant period of five hundred incarnations.

According to the text of _The Light of Asia_, the spiritual consciousness of Sakyamuni Buddha extended to a period even more remote, as may be judged by these remarkable lines:—

“_I now remember, myriad rains ago, What time I roamed Himâla’s hanging woods._”

In considering briefly the doctrine of reincarnation, perhaps it might readily be conceded to our Buddhist friends, that there were exemplified in the Founder of their faith, a wonderful potency of intellect, and a marvellous degree of spiritual intuition. Quite agreeable, also, may be the suggestion, that this potency of intellect might become intensified, and probably “rendered subjective,” by “ascetic exercises,” abstract contemplation, and “determined effort.”

Spence Hardy indicated in _Eastern Monachism_ that the Buddhist mind conceives of “spiritual powers” arising from the aforementioned “potency of intellect” and “spiritual intuition,” which in other systems of religion are usually regarded as partaking of the nature of “Divinity.” If it be admitted that those potential “powers” are probably susceptible of affiliation with the Divine Spirit, then the way of approach to an understanding of the Buddhist theory of intuition becomes, perhaps, tolerably clear. Concrete knowledge acquired by intuition, appears to assure our Buddhist friends of the _fact_ of reincarnation. But they invariably refrain from a vain attempt to _prove_ the “fact,” by an authorised—and consequently stereotyped—process of reasoning.

The unknown Hindoo author of The _Bhagavad-Gita_ revealed in simple phraseology the native idea of reincarnation; and suggested, happily, an instructive theory concerning the advent of great Teachers and Saviours in every age. To Krishna are ascribed the following sayings;—

“_Manifold the renewals of my birth Have been.... When Righteousness Declines, O Bharata, when Wickedness Is strong, I rise, from age to age, and take Visible shape, and move a man with men, Succouring the good, thrusting the evil back, And setting Virtue on her seat again._”

Rhys Davids justly observed that “to the pious Buddhist it is a constant source of joy and gratitude that ‘the Buddha,’ not only then, but in many former births, when emancipation from all the cares and troubles of life was already within his reach, should again and again, in mere love for man, have condescended to enter the world, and live amidst the sorrows inseparable from finite existence.”[47] Perhaps in a more general sense the idea of reincarnation appealed strongly to the imagination of Wordsworth, when he was inspired to write these familiar, yet exquisite, lines:—

“_Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting; The soul that rises with us, our life’s star, Hath had elsewhere its setting And cometh from afar._”

Regarding the doctrines of Individuality and non-Individuality, which characterise the text of _The Diamond Sutra_, wherein are found to occur frequently Chinese equivalents for the ordinary concepts of an entity, a being, a living being and a personality, the following passage from _The Bhagavad-Gita_, suggestive almost of complete harmony with the Buddhist doctrine, may serve to make even a cursory consideration of the subject perhaps more illuminating. The passage, rendered by Sir Edwin Arnold, is as follows:—

“_There is ‘true’ Knowledge, Learn it thou in this: To see one changeless Life in all the Lives, And in the Separate, One Inseparable. There is imperfect Knowledge: that which sees The separate existences apart, And, being separated, holds them real._”

As Nirvana is only referred to casually in _The Diamond Sutra_, that familiar Buddhist term hardly calls for any present detailed explanation. Within a brief compass probably no better explanation may be forthcoming than what is already given in this concise exposition gathered from _The Light of Asia_:—

“_If any teach Nirvana is to cease, Say unto such they lie. If any teach Nirvana is to live, Say unto such they err; not knowing this, Nor what light shines beyond their broken lamps, Nor lifeless, timeless bliss._”

In concluding, it might be opportune to observe, that the _Werthurtheile_,[48] known amongst modern theologians as characterising the teaching of Albrecht Ritschl—sounds, upon intimate acquaintance, merely as a faint echo of the logic of Sakyamuni Buddha. Ritschl might apply his _Werthurtheile_ to the presumed interpretation of a “miracle,” etc. Buddha suggested by his “method,” that what is ordinarily referred to as a “miracle,” is not in _reality_ a “miracle,” therefore it is merely _defined_ as a “miracle.” So, also, with the various dogmas which distinguish every religious creed. By many Chinese it is regarded as an evidence of Divinity, that in the mind of Sakyamuni Buddha there was conceived this incisive logical method; and amongst the learned monks, profound homage is rendered, and much wonder expressed, because the Lord Buddha[49] did not hesitate to apply its principles to every doctrine synonymous with his own accredited “Law.”

[1] “The Sutra of firm establishment in all doctrine, describing clearly the secret merit and attainments in the religious life of Tathagata.” (Compare Edkins’ _Chinese Buddhism_.)

[2] See the preface to _The Vagrakkhedika_.

[3] “A native of Western India who lived as a hermit under an Arguna tree, whence he derived his name. Converted by Kapimala, he laboured in Southern India as the fourteenth patriarch.... He is the chief representative, if not originator, of the Mahayana school, the greatest philosopher of the Buddhists, and as such styled ‘one of the four suns which illuminate the world.’ His own peculiar tenets have been perpetuated by a distinct metaphysical school called Madhyamika (_Lit_. Juste Milieu), the characteristics of which are a sophistic nihilism which dissolves every proposition into a thesis and its antithesis, and denies both. ‘The soul,’ said Nagarjuna, ‘has neither existence nor non-existence, it is neither eternal nor non-eternal, neither annihilated by death nor non-annihilated.’ The tenets of this school are condensed in Nagardjuna’s commentary on the Mahaprajna Paramita S’astra. He spent the later part of his life in a monastery at Kosala ... (correct date probably A.D. 194). After his death he received the title Bodhisattva. He is the author of many S’atras.” (Compare Eitel’s _Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_.)

[4] _See_ the preface to _The Vagrakkhedika_.

[5] Kumarajiva was referred to as “one of the four suns of Buddhism” (Tchatvara Suryas). He laboured in China as a most active and judicious translator, and is credited with having introduced a new alphabet. One of Kumarajiva’s Chinese designations—Tung-Sheo—meant that, although young in years, he was ripe in the wisdom and virtues of old age. (Compare Eitel’s _Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_.)

[6] Beal stated in his preface to the _Kin-Kong-King_, that “it was translated first into the Chinese by Kumara-Jiva (A.D. 405), who was brought into China from Thibet.”

[7] Other translations, worthy of recognition, are those attributed respectively to Bodhiruki (A.D. 509), Paramartha (A.D. 562), Dharmagupa, of the Sui dynasty (A.D. 589–618), and I-Tsing (A.D. 703). (Compare the preface to _The Vagrakkhedika_.)

[8] This information may be found in Max Müller’s _Vagrakkhedika_, and represented, doubtless, at the period when it was written, a considerable part of the knowledge available on the subject.

[9] By Max Müller.

[10] The Chinese Ma-Ming.

[11] Compare the Chinese text of the Chi-Sin-Pien—_The Awakening of Faith_.

[12] In the preface to _The Vagrakkhedika_.

[13] “Supreme spiritual wisdom.” In Beal’s _Kin-Kong-King_, “The unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart.” (Sanscrit, “_Annuttara Samyak Sambodhi Hridaya_.”)

[14] According to the text of _The Diamond Sutra_, the intellect of Sakyamuni Buddha sank so profoundly into the past, that he was enabled to speak confidently of his experiences in previous incarnations. (Compare pp. 56, 57.)

[15] From the text adopted by Mr H. Oelsner, M.A., Ph.D., for _The Temple Classics_.

[16] Dr Edkins, in his scholarly work _Chinese Buddhism_, seems to have regarded “the Law or body of doctrine” as an accurate definition of Dharma.

Dr Eitel, in his _Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_, explained Dharma by “Fah”—“Law”; and observed that it is “a general term for religious objects, especially for the Buddhistic Canon.”

Mr Vincent A. Smith, in _Asoka, Buddhist Emperor of India_, suggested that the Chinese _Hsiao_ (piety), and the Latin Pietas, coincide with the Sanscrit term Dharma.

[17] The Chinese phrase is “Fah-sing-chen-ru-hai.”

[18] _See_ the _Tao-Teh-Ching_. Compare, also, the statement attributed to Confucius—“Nature and Truth cannot be adequately expressed.”

[19] Or Dharma.

[20] Compare _The Light of Asia_. Perhaps this aspect of the “Law” of Buddha may be conceived of as harmonising with Shakespeare’s idea of a “Divinity.”

[21] It may be interesting to observe that, according to our Chinese text, Sakyamuni Buddha evidently disclaimed any desire to formulate, or to perpetuate, a stereotyped system of “Law” or “doctrine.” Sakyamuni Buddha also made it plain, that the “Law” which he enunciated, was presented before the minds of his disciples in the simile of a “raft”—a thing to be abandoned when the mind “touched the further shore” of everlasting truth. It seems to be in this tentative sense that intellectual Buddhists regard all ecclesiastical institutions, priesthoods, dogmas, ordinances, etc.; and we have met monks who would classify belief in the “efficacy” of religious rites or ceremonies, with obnoxious forms of “heresy” and “immorality.” (Compare Rhys Davids’ _Buddhism_.) With regard to the Buddhist objection concerning the “efficacy” of religious “rites,” compare the noble sentiments expressed in the following lines, delightfully rendered by Sir Edwin Arnold from the _Bhagavad-Gita_ (_The Song Celestial_):—

“Serenity of soul, benignity, Sway of the silent spirit, constant stress To sanctify the nature,—these things make Good rite, and true religiousness of mind.”

[22] Max Müller suggests that Samgna and Dharma “correspond in many respects to the Vedantic Namarupe”—in Chinese Ming-Seh—name, form, or characteristic.

[23] Compare p. 86.

[24] Compare p. 55.

[25] Compare p. 80.

[26] Compare p. 76.

[27] Compare p. 95.

[28] Some modern Japanese Buddhists appear to regard this purely spiritual element as “essence of mind.”

[29] From the preface to _The Vagrakkhedika_.

[30] Compare p. 110.

[31] Compare the interesting dialogue entitled _The Enlightenment of Ananda_, in which Sakyamuni instructs his distinguished disciple in ideas concerning the subjective and objective phenomena of mind.

[32] Compare pp. 102, 103.

[33] Bodhisattvas—greatly enlightened disciples.

[34] _Vidya Matra Siddhi_, a philosophical work by Vasubandhu, a native of Radjagriha, and disciple of Nagarjuna, founder of the Mahayana school. (Compare Eitel’s _Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_.)

[35] Compare the process of reasoning which permeates the entire _Diamond Sutra_. We hope no injustice is done to our Japanese friends, by applying to their beautiful concept “essence of mind,” this familiar logical method of Sakyamuni Buddha.

[36] Fah-Shen—the Law, or spiritual body. Compare Shen-Shen, the term usually employed in the Chinese rendering of the New Testament Scriptures to denote the spiritual body.

[37] Gatha—usually a Scripture verse comprising four lines.

[38] Compare the following lines from _The Song Celestial_.—

“I am not known To evil-doers, ... nor to those Whose mind is cheated by the show of things.”

[39] In Buddhist phraseology, Yuen-Chioh means the study, by means of contemplation, of primary spiritual causes.

[40] Compare Beal’s rendering in the Kin-Kong-King, “Tathagata is the explanation as it were of all systems of Law.” See also _The Book of the Manifesting of the One and Manifold_ in _The Song Celestial_, the verse commencing:—

“Thou, of all souls the Soul! The comprehending whole!”

In conversation with Chinese monks regarding the meaning of this impressive passage, we found that they invariably approved of a suggested rendering, that “Buddha is the _One_ in whom all Laws become intelligible.”

[41] Compare the observations made by Sir Edwin Arnold in his preface to _The Song Celestial_, regarding the date when that famous Brahmanic poem was composed; and the gentle indication that in its teaching may be found “echoes of the lessons of Galilee, and of the Syrian incarnation.”

[42] An instructive exposition of this subject by J. Muir, Esq., entitled _The Progress of the Vedic Religion towards Abstract Conceptions of the Deity_, may be consulted in the _Jour. R.A.S.,_ 1864–65.

[43] In colloquial Chinese there is a noteworthy saying, that “Buddha is simply a condition of mind.” This “condition of mind” is beautifully expressed by a “classic” couplet, which, rendered into English, means “as pure as the image of the moon in a river,” and “as lovely as the bloom of a flower in a mirror” (Shui-Li-Chï-Yüeh, Ching-Li-Chï-Wha).

[44] Compare the beautifully expressed sentiment of Akhnaton, Pharaoh of Egypt, concerning “the One in whom all Laws are intelligibly comprehended.” “There is no poverty for him who hath Thee in his heart.” (See _Life and Times of Akhnaton_.)

[45] Rhys Davids, when he expounded the doctrine of Karma in _Buddhism_, clearly indicated the Buddhist position, “that whatever a man reaps, that he must also have sown.” Chinese Buddhists appear to be assured, “that if a man reaps sorrow, disappointment, pain, he himself, and no other, must at some time have sown folly, error, sin; and if not in this life, then in some former birth. Where then, in the latter case, is the identity between him who sows and him who reaps? _In that which alone remains_ when a man dies, and the constituent parts of the sentient being are dissolved; in the result, namely, of his action, speech, and thought, in his good or evil _Karma_ (literally his ‘doing’) which _does not_ die.”

[46] In the concept Karma, Sakyamuni Buddha suggested the revealing of a _moral cause_ which explained the otherwise insoluble riddle of the evident inequalities, and consequent sufferings of life.

[47] Compare _Buddhism_.

[48] “The much-canvassed Ritschlian doctrine of the _Worth_—or ‘value-judgments,’ in which the peculiarity of religious knowledge is supposed to lie.” For the introduction of the term into theology we are indebted to Herrmann, _Die Religion, etc._, and Kaftan, _Das Wesen_. _See_ Orr’s, _The Ritschlian Theology and The Evangelical Faith_.

[49] It may be observed in this English version of _The Diamond Sutra_, that the Chinese term _Fuh_, in deference to our Oriental friends, is invariably rendered “Lord Buddha”—a designation consonant with _their_ concepts of devotion and piety.

THE DIAMOND SUTRA

[Chapter 1]

Thus have I heard[1] concerning our Lord Buddha:—

Upon a memorable occasion, the Lord Buddha[2] sojourned in the kingdom of Shravasti,[3] lodging in the grove of Jeta,[4] a park within the imperial domain, which Jeta, the heir-apparent, bestowed upon Sutana,[5] a benevolent Minister of State, renowned for his charities and benefactions.

With the Lord Buddha, there were assembled together twelve hundred and fifty mendicant disciples,[6] all of whom had attained to eminent degrees of spiritual wisdom.

As it approached the hour for the morning meal, Lord Buddha, Honoured of the Worlds,[7] attired himself in a mendicant’s robe,[8] and bearing an alms-bowl in his hands, walked towards the great city of Shravasti, which he entered to beg for food.[9] Within the city he proceeded from door to door,[10] and received such donations as the good people severally bestowed.[11] Concluding this religious exercise, the Lord Buddha returned to the grove of Jeta, and partook of the frugal meal[12] received as alms. Thereafter he divested himself of his mendicant’s robe, laid aside the venerated alms-bowl,[13] bathed his sacred feet, and accepted the honoured seat reserved for him by his disciples.

[1] It is generally supposed that the familiar introductory phrase, “Thus have I heard,” was adopted by the writers or editors of Buddhist Sutras in order that their scriptures might assume the same high degree of authority as the Brahmanas and the Mantras, “as forming the ‘S’ruti’ or sacred revelation of the followers of the Vedas.” (Compare Max Müller’s _History of Sanscrit Literature_ and the valuable note in Beal’s _Kin-Kong-King_)

[2] “The term (Buddha) means ‘every intelligent being who has thrown off the bondage of sense perception and self, knows the utter unreality of all phenomena, and is ready to enter Nirvana.’”—_Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_. Eitel.

[3] Shravasti is variously described as the city (or kingdom) of philosophy, of good doctrine, of abundant virtue, and as the abode of immortals. It was situated on the north bank of the Ganges, about 200 miles above Benares. Much interesting information regarding the sacred city Shravasti, is fortunately preserved in the instructive records of the distinguished Chinese pilgrims, _Fa-Hien_ and _Hiuen-Tsang_.

[4] “Prasenajit, the king of Shravasti, was very favourable to the Buddhist religion. It was his minister who bought the garden of Jeta from the prince of that name, and erected in it a residence for Buddha (_see_ Julien’s _Memoirs sur les Contrées Occidentales_). Many of the Sutras attributed to Buddha are said to have been delivered here. _Hiuen-Tsang_ observed the remains of the monastery formerly standing on the site of the garden of Jeta, 2 miles below the city.”—_Chinese Buddhism_. Edkins.

[5] “A person of extraordinary piety and goodness. One of the former Djatakas of Sakyamuni when he was a prince, and forfeited the throne by liberality in almsgiving.”—_Handbook of Chinese Buddhism_. Eitel.

[6] The Chinese text is _ta-pi-k’u_—greater disciples. Our Chinese editor of _The Diamond Sutra_ suggests that there are different grades of discipleship. The “lesser disciples” are those who have abandoned every form of vice, and are striving after virtue. The “greater disciples” are those to whom virtue has become spontaneous, and who have ceased to strive after its attainment.

[7] A title conferred by Chinese Buddhists upon the founder of their faith, believing him to be a Teacher and Saviour whose merit is acclaimed in worlds beyond our own.

[8] Having taken vows of poverty, a robe is one of the following eight articles which Buddhist monks are permitted to possess: three garments of different descriptions, a girdle for the loins, an alms-bowl, a razor, a needle, and a water-strainer.

[9] Buddha has said, “the wise priest never asks for anything; he disdains to beg; it is a proper thing for which he carries the alms-bowl; and this is his only mode of solicitation. But when he is sick, he is permitted to ask for any medicine that he may require, without being guilty of any transgression.”—_Eastern Monachism_. Spence Hardy.

[10] Concerning the manner of begging an alms: “As a bee, injuring not the flower, or its colour, or its scent, flies away, taking the nectar, so let a sage go through the village.”—_Questions of King Milinda_. T. W. Rhys Davids.