Subhúti, what think you? does Tathágata possess the eyes of Buddha? Yes, certainly, world-honoured one! Tathágata possesses this power. Subhúti, what think you? as many sands as there are in the Ganges can Buddha declare (the number of these sands) (or, does Buddha say that these are [real] sands)? Yes, world-honoured one! Tathágata declares [the number of] these sands. Subhúti, what think you? if there were as many rivers Ganges as there are sands in the Ganges, would the sands of all these rivers be considerable or not? and if there were as many chiliocosms as there are sands, would these be numerous? Very numerous indeed, world-honoured one! Buddha said: As many sentient creatures as there are in all these numerous worlds; if there were as many different dispositions (or hearts) as there are creatures, Tathágata nevertheless distinctly knows them all, and he says that all these different dispositions are after all none at all in reality, and that they are mere names. Wherefore, Subhúti, the various dispositions that have existed in relation with things past, present, or future, are all unsubstantial and unreal. _Cap. XIX. treats of the universal diffusion[12] of the mystical body [of Tathágata.]_ Subhúti, what think you? if there were a man who in the practice of his charity were to bestow in alms enough of the seven precious substances to fill the great chiliocosm, would the merit which this man obtained by the consequent influences of such charity be great or not? Yes, certainly, world-honoured one! the effect of such charity would be very considerable in its consequent merit. Subhúti, if that merit and happiness consequent on it, were real merit and happiness, then Tathágata would not describe it as being “great:” it is when the happiness is in reality vain and transitory that Buddha speaks of it comparatively as “much” or “great.” _Cap. XX.—On the removal of all material forms and all distinctive qualities._ Subhúti, what think you? Is it possible to behold Buddha through the outward distinctions of his perfectly fashioned body? No, world-honoured one! Tathágata is not to be seen through the medium of any such distinctions as these. And why? Tathágata declares that all such distinctions are after all no real distinctions; this term perfectly-fashioned-body, is nothing more than a mere name. Subhúti, what think you? is it possible to behold Tathágata in any of the various changes which his body may be made to undergo (_i.e._ his spiritual transformations)? No, world-honoured one! Juloi must not thus be sought for. What then—Tathágata declares that all these various changes and appearances are after all unreal—by whatever terms they are known they are but mere names. _Cap. XXI.—On the impossibility of expressing this system in words, that which can be so expressed is not agreeable to this body of doctrine._