Subhúti, what think you? Has Tathágata obtained the condition of the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart? Or has Tathágata any law which can be put into words by which this state may be attained? Subhúti answered and said: As I understand the system which Buddha is now explaining, there can be no fixed and unchangeable law (_i.e._, condition), as that which is called the unsurpassed, just, and enlightened heart; and so there can be no fixed law which can be expressed in words by Tathágata. Hence it seems that the various systems which have been explained by Tathágata can none of them be comprehended within fixed limits, or dogmatically explained; they cannot be spoken of as, “not a system of law,” nor yet as the opposite of that which is “not a system.” 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. _Cap. VIII.—All former systems whatever have sprung from this._ Subhúti! what think you, if there was a man who distributed in alms sufficient of the seven precious substances to fill the whole of the great chiliocosm, would his merit and consequent reward be considerable or not? Subhúti said: 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 Tathágata speaks of it as being “much.” (Buddha resumed): If there be a man who receives and adopts the principles of this Sútra up to the point _of the four sections_,[8] I say on that man’s behalf, that his merit is much greater than the other’s. What then, Subhúti? all the Buddhas, and all the perfect laws of the Buddhas, have sprung from (the principles of) this one Sútra; but, Subhúti, that which is spoken of as the law of Buddha, is after all not such a law (or, is a law of no-Buddha). _Cap. IX.—The only true distinction is that which is not to be distinguished._ Subhúti, what think you? is the Śrotápatti able to reflect thus with himself: “I shall now obtain the fruit of having entered this first path of a Śrotápatti?” Subhúti said: No, world-honoured one! And why? this word Śrotápatti is a mere phrase, which signifies “once entered the stream,” and after all there is nothing to enter; for he cannot enter on that which comes under the category of form, or sound, or odour, or taste, or touch, or thought. This term, then, Śrotápatti, is a mere word, and no more. Subhúti, what think you? is the Sakṛid-ágámí able to reflect thus with himself: “I shall now obtain the fruit of having entered on this second path of a Sakṛid-ágámí?” Subhúti replied: No, world-honoured one! And why? this word Sakṛid-ágámí signifies “one more return to life,” and there is in truth no going or returning. This term, then, is but a mere name, and no more.