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.