The Diamond Sutra, passage 353

[2] “All these beings will equally remember the _Bodhi_ (the highest Buddhic knowledge), will receive it and understand it.”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 329

[6] ... “For birth and death End hence for me and those who learn my Law.”—_The Light of Asia_. Sir Edwin Arnold.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 397

The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the eye of truth?”[1] Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the eye of truth.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 221

[6] “What then, Subhuti? All the Buddhas, and all the perfect laws of the Buddhas, have sprung from (the principles of) this one Sutra; but, Subhuti, that which is spoken of as the Law of Buddha, is after all not such a Law (or, is a Law of no Buddha).”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 500

“And in what way can the disciple ‘proclaim them generally?’ Simply by relying on no conditions or distinctions whatever; thus he will act without agitation or excitement. Wherefore the conclusion is this—that all things which admit of definition are as a dream, a phantom, a bubble, a shadow, as the dew and lightning flash. They ought to be regarded thus.”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 54

Perhaps we might appropriately indicate that however interesting, or even fascinating, may be the nice distinction between _mind_ and _essence of mind_, in relation to phenomena, so far as we are aware, the distinction may be implied, but is never precisely stated, in the text of _The Diamond Sutra_.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 363

“Again, Subhuti, in future ages, if a good disciple, whether man or woman, be enabled to rigorously observe and to study consecutively the texts of this Scripture, were I to elaborate either the nature or extent of this merit, those who heard it might become delirious, or entirely doubt its credibility.[3] Subhuti, it is necessary to realise, that as the meaning of this Scripture is beyond ordinary comprehension, the scope of its fruitful rewards is equally incomprehensible.”[4]

The Diamond Sutra, passage 42

“_Every species of life, whether hatched in the egg, formed in the womb, evolved from spawn, produced by metamorphosis, with or without form or intelligence, possessing or devoid of natural instinct—from these changeful conditions of being I command you to seek deliverance in the transcendental concept of Nirvana. Thus you shall obtain deliverance from the idea of an immeasurable, innumerable, and illimitable world of sentient life; but, in reality there is no idea of a world of sentient life from which to obtain deliverance. And why? Because, in the mind of an enlightened disciple, there have ceased to exist such arbitrary ideas of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality._”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 86

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.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 415

“The second body is the _Sambhoga-Kaya_, ‘body of conscious bliss,’ which is of a less ethereal and more material nature than the last. Its Brahmanical analogue appears to be the intermediate body (belonging to departed spirits) called _Bhoga-Deha_, which is of an ethereal character, though composed of sufficiently gross (Sthula) material particles to be capable of experiencing happiness or misery.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 133

[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.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 140

[11] “By many of the Buddhists it is considered to be an act of great merit to make a vow never to partake of food without giving a portion to the priests.”—_Eastern Monachism_. Spence Hardy.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 261

“Subhuti, what think you? are the various lands and territories of the Buddhas completely perfected by the Bodhisatwas who occupy them? No! World-honoured one! for this complete perfection of which we speak is after all no perfection at all, it is only an empty name.”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 75

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.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 171

[2] By adopting the term _Mieh-Tu_, Chinese Buddhists appear well prepared to refute a prevalent notion that their concept of deliverance is equivalent to annihilation. _Mieh_ usually means annihilation, but _Tu_—to cross over in safety, is the antithesis of annihilation. After due consideration of the significance of the terminology, perhaps it will be generally conceded that English renderings of _Mieh-Tu_ as Deliverance or Salvation, are not without some degree of justification.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 459

[4] The following Gatha, translated by Max Müller, and concluding the twenty-sixth section of _The Vagrakkhedika_, is not incorporated in the Chinese text.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 436

The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If within this universe of universes, the seven treasures[1] were heaped together, forming as many great elevations as there are Sumerus, prince of mountains, and these treasures bestowed entirely in the exercise of charity; and if a disciple were to select a stanza of this Scripture, rigorously observe it, and diligently explain it to others, the merit[2] thus obtained would so far exceed the former excellence, that it cannot be stated in terms of proportion, nor comprehended by any analogy.”[3]

The Diamond Sutra, passage 469

[2] “Subhuti asked Buddha: World-honoured One! what is this you say, that Bodhisatwas cannot be said to appreciate reward? ‘Subhuti, the reward which a Bodhisatwa enjoys ought to be connected with no covetous desire; this is what I mean by non-appreciation of reward.’”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 259

[2] “It is maintained by the Buddhists that the founder of their faith was entirely _αὐτοδιδακτος_. The wisdom that he manifested was the outbeaming of a self-enkindled flame, not an inspiration from any exterior source, nor was it the result of any process of thought or reason. To whatever object he directed his intellectual vision, whether it was near or remote, whether past, present, or future, he saw it in a moment, intuitively, and yet in a manner the most absolutely perfect.”—_Eastern Monachism_. Spence Hardy.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 360

[6] “Then the king, with his assembled ministers and all the priests belonging to the capital (of Kashmir), advanced to the preaching hall (_Dharmasala_) and escorted him (the Master of the Law) onwards, being altogether something like a thousand men, with standards and parasols, with incense and flowers filling the roads. When they met (the Master of the Law) they all performed a humble salutation, and spread before him countless flowers as religious offerings.”—_The Life of Hiuen-Tsang_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 55

Nevertheless, we may readily appreciate the subtle intellectual movement, which endeavours to distinguish clearly between the phenomena of mind, and an unchanging principle underlying it, capable of being defined as Essence of Mind. Yet we have a notion that our Japanese Buddhist friends intuitively find in their beautiful concept, infinitely more of a purely spiritual nature, than they attempt to express by the mere metaphysical term.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 157

Every species of life, whether hatched in the egg, formed in the womb, evolved from spawn, produced by metamorphosis, with or without form or intelligence, possessing or devoid of natural instinct—from these changeful[1] conditions of being, I command you to seek deliverance,[2] in the transcendental concept of Nirvana.[3] Thus, you shall be delivered from an immeasurable, innumerable, and illimitable world of sentient life; but, in reality, there is no world of sentient life from which to seek deliverance.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 388

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!_

The Diamond Sutra, passage 16

A rendering into English of Kumarajiva’s Chinese translation was accomplished by the Rev. S. Beal, and published in The _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_, 1864–65. The text and German translation of the Tibetan version were published in 1873 by M. Schmidt, in _The Mémoires de l’Académie St Pétersbourg_. The Mongolian translation was presented by the Baron de Constadt to the library of the Institut de France. The Manchu translation is in the possession of M.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 285

[3] “Earnestness is the path of immortality (Nirvana), thoughtlessness the path of death. Those who are in earnest do not die, those who are thoughtless are as if dead already.”—_Dhammapada_. Max Müller.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 404

The physical eye has an ordinary local function. The divine or spiritual eye has a universal function. The eye of wisdom is affiliated with the Law, and attests its immutability. The eye of truth is exegetical and synthetical. The Buddhic eye is the instrument of salvation.—_Chinese Annotation_.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 490

[1] “Because, O Subhuti, if a man were to say that belief in self, belief in a being, belief in life, belief in personality, had been preached by the Tathagata, would he be speaking truly? Subhuti said, not indeed, Bhagavat, he would not be speaking truly. And why? Because, what was preached by the Tathagata as a belief in self, that was preached as no-belief, therefore it is called belief in self.”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 191

Postulating the inviolate nature of qualities or ideas which have an existence apart from the Law, there yet remain to be explained these abstruse distinctions—an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Therefore, enlightened disciples ought not to affirm the permanency or reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, nor postulate as being of an inviolate nature, qualities or ideas having an existence apart from the concept of Law.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 299

It appears to be one of the distinctive features of primitive Buddhism, that its founder made provision for the utmost development of the human intellect, within the spheres of religion and philosophy. According to the text of _The Diamond Sutra_, the Lord Buddha evidently disclaims any suggestion on his part to formulate a “precise system of Law or doctrine” corresponding to the idea of a _creed_.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 130

[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_)

The Diamond Sutra, passage 102

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.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 193

[1] Compare the question addressed by Jesus to His disciples, “When the Son of Man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 281

[1] Adopting Max Müller’s rendering. In the Chinese text are _Tien_, _Ren_, and _O-Siu-Lo_—heaven, or gods—men, and _Asurus_; the latter defined as _fei-tien_—not celestial spirits.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 478

Subhuti continuing, addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! what the Lord Buddha discoursed upon as ‘infinite worlds,’ these are not in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ they are merely termed ‘infinite worlds.’ And why? Because, if these were in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ there would of necessity be unity and eternity of matter. But the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon the ‘unity and eternity of matter,’ declared that there is neither ‘unity’ nor ‘eternity of matter,’ therefore it is merely termed ‘unity and eternity of matter.’”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 63

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.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 286

[4] “They, O Subhuti, will be endowed with the highest wonder (with what excites the highest wonder). And in that place, O Subhuti, there dwells the teacher (Sasa, often the name of Buddha), or one after another holding the place of the wise preceptor. (This may refer to a succession of teachers banding down the tradition one to another.)”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 447

[2] “Difference there is in beings endowed with bodies, but amongst men this is not the case, the difference amongst men is nominal only.”—_Dhammapada_. Max Müller.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 493

“Subhuti, the persons who aspire to the perfectly enlightened heart, ought to know accordingly that this is true with respect to all things, and thus prevent the exhibition of any characteristics on any point whatever. Subhuti, these very characteristics of which we speak are after all no characteristics, but a mere name.”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 123

[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.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 311

In years to come, if disciples hearing this scripture proclaimed, and having within their minds a pure and holy faith, engender true concepts of the ephemeral nature of phenomena—we ought to realise that the cumulative merit of such disciples will be intrinsic and wonderful. Honoured of the Worlds! The true concept of phenomena is, that these are not essentially phenomena, and hence the Lord Buddha declared that they are merely termed phenomena.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 322

“Subhuti, in the exercise of charity, if the mind of an enlightened disciple is not independent of every Law, he is like unto a person having entered impenetrable darkness, and to whom every object is invisible. But an enlightened disciple, discharging the exercise of charity with a mind independent of every Law, is like unto a person having the power of vision, in the meridian glory of the sunlight, and to whom every object is visible.”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 248

[12] “Explained by ‘living in retirement,’ ‘a hermit,’ ‘a recluse.’ The term signifies ascetics who live in strict seclusion. There are three classes to be distinguished. The first is called _Dharma Aranyaka_—‘Hermits of the Law,’ their favourite tenet being the doctrine that the principles (_Dharma_) constituting human nature are originally calm, still, and passive. Their favourite tree is the Bodhi tree (tree of intelligence). The second class is called _Matanga Aranyaka_.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 358

[5] “In these two places also Topes (where relics of Buddha are deposited and safeguarded) have been built, both adorned with layers of all the previous substances (gold, silver, pearls, coral, cornelian, glass, and crystal). The kings, ministers, and peoples of the kingdoms vie with one another in making offerings at them. The trains of those who come to scatter flowers and light lamps at them never cease.”—_The Travels of Fa-Hien_. Legge.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 380

[4] Most writers on the Buddhist faith and religion have occasion to refer to the series of events which culminated in the Lord Buddha obtaining “supreme enlightenment.” The founder of the Buddhist faith, dissatisfied with the practice of asceticism, and disappointed by his unfaithful disciples, walked meditatively towards the river Nairanjara, where Sujata, “the daughter of a neighbouring villager,” provided him with his morning meal.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 274

The Lord Buddha thereupon addressed Subhuti, saying: “I have a truth to declare unto you! If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were to bestow in the exercise of charity, an abundance of the seven treasures,[2] sufficient to fill as many boundless universes as there would be grains of sand in these innumerable rivers, would the cumulative merit of such a disciple be considerable?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Very considerable, Honoured of the Worlds!”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 190

Because, assuming the permanency and reality of phenomena, the minds of these disciples would be involved in such distinctive ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Affirming the permanency and reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, their minds would inevitably be involved in resolving these same definitions.

The Diamond Sutra, passage 214

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]

The Diamond Sutra, passage 362

“Furthermore, Subhuti, numberless ages ago, I recollect that before the advent of Dipankara Buddha, there were myriad Buddhas before whom I served and received religious instruction, my conduct being entirely blameless and without reproach. But, in the ages to come, if a disciple be enabled to rigorously observe and to study the text of this Scripture, the merit thus acquired will so far exceed the measure of my merit in the service of those myriad Buddhas, that it cannot be stated in terms of proportion, nor comprehended by means of any ‘analogy.’”

The Diamond Sutra, passage 45

Perhaps it might prove of interest to quote the following outline of Mahayana doctrine[29] prepared by Mr S. Kuroda, which was approved by several influential Buddhist communions in Japan, “and published with authority at Tokyo in 1893”:—

The Diamond Sutra, passage 2

THIS VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED TO MY FRIEND WILLIAM NIVEN, Esq., BY THE AUTHOR.