The Diamond Sutra (Chin-Kang-Ching) or Prajna-ParamitaUnknown
Religion
The Diamond Sutra (Chin-Kang-Ching) or Prajna-Paramita
Unknown
Buddhism; Buddhism -- Sacred books
[7] “And why, O Subhuti, the name of Tathagata? It expresses ‘true
suchness.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It expresses that ‘he had
no origin.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It expresses ‘the
destruction of all qualities.’ And why Tathagata, O Subhuti? It
expresses ‘one who has no origin whatever.’ And why this? Because,
O Subhuti, ‘no origin is the highest goal.’”—_The Vagrakkhedika_.
Max Müller.
The familiar word Buddha, seems to convey to devout Buddhist
minds, a meaning consonant with the ethical idea of Love, as
understood generally by the followers of Christ. Within it are
potential spiritual elements, which, according to their judgment,
perfectly fulfil the Law. The Chinese text, _Ju-Lai-che,
chi-chu-fah-ru-i_, may bear the following interpretation, _Buddha
is the One in whom all Laws become intelligible_. With this
particular definition before us, and bearing in mind the general
substance of the Mahayana faith, we may perhaps appreciate the
sense in which the distinguished missionary, Dr Richard of
Shanghai, ventured to render the Chinese term _Ju-Lai_ (Buddha),
in a translation of Asvaghocha’s _The Awakening of Faith_, by the
English synonym God. Few Christians would controvert the statement
_that God, is the One in whom all Laws become intelligible!_
[8] “And if a Bodhisattva were to say: ‘I shall deliver all
beings,’ he ought not to be called a Bodhisattva. And why? Is
there anything, O Subhuti, that is called a Bodhisattva? Subhuti
said: ‘Not indeed!’ Bhagavat said: ‘Those who were spoken of as
beings, beings indeed, O Subhuti, they were spoken of as no beings
by the Tathagata, and, therefore, they are called beings.
Therefore Tathagata says: “All beings are without self, all beings
are without life, without manhood, without personality.”’”—_The
Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.
“Subhuti, so it is with the Bodhisatwa, if he should say: ‘I ought
to destroy all recollection of the countless kinds of creatures,’
this Bodhisatwa would not be really one, but only a nominal
one.... Hence Buddha says that all things ought to be without any
individual distinction.”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.
[9] “The fountain of knowledge is the pure, bright,
self-enlightening mind.”—_Twan-Tsi-Sin-Yao_ (_Tang Dynasty_).
Compare Edkins’ _Chinese Buddhism_.
[10] “A Bodhisattva, O Subhuti, who believes that all things are
without self, he has faith, he is called a noble-minded
Bodhisattva by the holy and fully enlightened Tathagata.”—_The
Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.
In the _Mo-Wei-Sutra_, the ordinary concepts of an entity, a
being, a living being, or a personality, are referred to as
_blots_ or _stains_ upon the mind.
[Chapter 18]
The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the
Lord Buddha possess the physical eye?” Subhuti assented, saying:
“Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the physical
eye.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account