Thus it was heard by me: At one time Bhagavat (the blessed Buddha) dwelt in Śrāvastī, in the grove of Jeta, in the garden of Anāthapiṇḍada, together with a large company of Bhikshus (mendicants), viz. with 1250 Bhikshus, with many noble-minded Bodhisattvas.
Then Bhagavat having in the forenoon put on his undergarment, and having taken his bowl and cloak, entered the great city of Śrāvastī to collect alms. Then Bhagavat, after he had gone to the great city of Śrāvastī to collect alms, performed the act of eating, and having returned from his round in the afternoon, he put away his bowl and cloak, washed his feet, and sat down on the seat intended for him, crossing his legs, holding his body upright, and turning his reflection upon himself. Then many Bhikshus approached to where Bhagavat was, saluted his feet with their heads, turned three times round hira to the right, and sat down on one side.
At that time again the venerable Subhūti came to that assembly and sat down. Then rising from his seat and putting his robe over one shoulder, kneeling on the earth with his right knee, he stretched out his folded hands towards Bhagavat and said to him: ‘It is wonderful, O Bhagavat, it is exceedingly wonderful, O Sugata, how much the noble-minded Bodhisattvas have been favoured with the highest favour by the Tathāgata, the holy and 113 fully enlightened! It is wonderful how much the noble-minded Bodhisattvas have been instructed with the highest instruction by the Tathāgata, the holy and fully enlightened! How then, O Bhagavat, should the son or the daughter of a good family, after having entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas, behave, how should he advance, and how should he restrain his thoughts?’
After the venerable Subhūti had thus spoken, Bhagavat said to him: ‘Well said, well said, Subhūti! So it is, Subhūti, so it is, as you say. The noble-minded Bodhisattvas have been favoured with the highest favour by the Tathāgata, the noble-minded Bodhisattvas have been instructed with the highest instruction by the Tathāgata. Therefore, O Subhūti, listen and take it to heart, well and rightly. I shall tell you, how any one who has entered on the path of Bodhisanvas should behave, how he should advance, and how he should restrain his thoughts.’ Then the venerable Subhūti answered the Bhagavat and said: ‘So be it, O Bhagavat.’
Then the Bhagavat thus spoke to him: ‘Any one, O Subhūti, who has entered here on the path of the Bodhisattvas must thus frame his thought: As many beings as there are in this world of beings, comprehended under the term of beings (either born of eggs, or from the womb, or from moisture, or miraculously), with form or without form, with name or without name, or neither with nor without name, as far as 114 any known world of beings is known, all these must be delivered by me in the perfect world of Nirvāṇa. And yet, after I have thus delivered immeasurable beings, not one single being has been delivered. And why? If, O Subhūti, a Bodhisattva had any idea of (belief in) a being, he could not be called a Bodhisattva (one who is fit to become a Buddha). And why? Because, O Subhūti, no one is to be called a Bodhisattva, for whom there should exist the idea of a being, the idea of a living being, or the idea of a person.’
‘And again, O Subhūti, a gift should not be given by a Bodhisattva, while he believes in objects; a gift should not be given by him, while he believes in anything; a gift should not be given by him, while he believes in form; a gift should not be given by him, while he believes in the special qualities of sound, smell, taste, and touch. For thus, O Subhūti, should a gift be given by a noble-minded Bodhisattva, that he should not believe even in the idea of cause. And why? Because that Bodhisattva, O Subhūti, who gives a gift, without believing in anything, the measure of his stock of merit is not easy to learn.’—‘What do you think, O Subhūti, is it easy to learn the measure of space in the eastern quarter?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat.’—Bhagavat said: ‘In like manner, is it easy to learn the measure of space in the southern, western, northern quarters, below and above (nadir and zenith), in quarters and subquarters, in the ten quarters all round?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, 115 O Bhagavat.’ Bhagavat said: ‘In the same manner, O Subhūti, the measure of the stock of merit of a Bodhisattva, who gives a gift without believing in anything, is not easy to learn. And thus indeed, O Subhūti, should one who has entered on the path of Bodhisattvas give a gift, that he should not believe even in the idea of cause.’
‘Now, what do you think, O Subhūti, should a Tathāgata be seen (known) by the possession of signs?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs. And why? Because what has been preached by the Tathāgata as the possession of signs, that is indeed the possession of no-signs.’
After this, Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhūti: ‘Wherever there is, O Subhūti, the possession of signs, there is falsehood; wherever there is no possession of signs, there is no falsehood. Hence the Tathāgata is to be seen (known) from no-signs as signs.’
After this, the venerable Subhūti spoke thus to the Bhagavat: ‘Forsooth, O Bhagavat, will there be any beings in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the time 116 of the decay of the good Law, who, when these very words of the Sūtras are being preached, will frame a true idea?’ The Bhagavat said: 'Do not speak thus, Subhūti. Yes, there will be some beings in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the decay of the good Law, who will frame a true idea when these very words are being preached.
‘And again, O Subhūti, there will be noble-minded Bodhisattvas, in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the decay of the good Law, there will be strong and good and wise beings, who, when these very words of the Sūtras are being preached, will frame a true idea. But those noble-minded Bodhisattvas, O Subhūti, will not have served one Buddha only, and the stock 117 of their merit will not have been accumulated under one Buddha only; on the contrary, O Subhūti, those noble-minded Bodhisattvas will have served many hundred thousands of Buddhas, and the stock of their merit will have been accumulated under many hundred thousands of Buddhas; and they, when these very words of the Sūtras are being preached, will obtain one and the same faith. They are known, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-knowledge; they are seen, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-eye; they are understood, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata. All these, O Subhūti, will produce and will hold fast an immeasurable and innumerable stock of merit. And why? Because, O Subhūti, there does not exist in those noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of self, there does not exist the idea of a being, the idea of a living being, the idea of a person. Nor does there exist, O Subhūti, for these noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of quality (dharma), nor of no-quality. Neither does there exist, O Subhūti, any idea (saṃjñā) or no-idea. And why? Because, O Subhūti, if there existed for these noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of quality, then they would believe in a self, they would believe in a being, they would believe in a living being, they would believe in a person. And if there existed for them the idea of no-quality, even then they would believe in a self, 118 they would believe in a being, they would believe in a living being, they would believe in a person. And why? Because, O Subhūti, neither quality nor no-quality is to be accepted by a noble-minded Bodhisattva. Therefore this hidden saying has been preached by the Tathāgata: “By those who know the teaching of the Law, as like unto a raft, all qualities indeed must be abandoned; much more no-qualities”’
And again Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhūti: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, is there anything (dharma) that was known by the Tathāgata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, or anything that was taught by the Tathāgata?’
After these words, the venerable Subhūti spoke thus to Bhagavat: ‘As I, O Bhagavat, understand the meaning of the preaching of the Bhagavat, there is nothing that was known by the Tathāgata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, nor is there anything that is taught by the Tathāgata. And why? Because that thing which was known or taught by the Tathāgata is incomprehensible and inexpressible. It is neither a thing nor no-thing. And why? Because the holy persons are of imperfect power.’ 119
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, if a son or daughter of a good family filled this sphere of a million millions of worlds with the seven gems or treasures, and gave it as a gift to the holy and enlightened Tathāgatas, would that son or daughter of a good family on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, O Bhagavat, yes, O Sugata, that son or daughter of a good family would on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, what was preached by the Tathāgata as the stock of merit, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-stock of merit. Therefore the Tathāgata preaches: “A stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed!”’ Bhagavat said: 'And if, O Subhūti, the son or daughter of a good family should fill this sphere of a million millions of worlds with the seven treasures and should give it as a gift to the holy and enlightened Tathāgatas, and if another after taking from this treatise of the Law one Gāthā of four lines only should fully teach others and explain it, he indeed would on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit immeasurable and innumerable. And why? Because, O Subhūti, the highest perfect knowledge of the holy and enlightened Tathāgatas is produced from it; the blessed Buddhas are produced from it. And why? Because, O Subhūti, when the Tathāgata preached:
“The qualities of Buddha, the qualities of Buddha indeed!” they were preached by him as no-qualities of Buddha. Therefore they are called the qualities of Buddha.’
Bhagavat said: ‘Now, what do you think, O Subhūti, does a Srota-āpanna think in this wise: The fruit of Srota-āpatti has been obtained by me?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Srota-āpanna does not think in this wise: The fruit of Srota-āpatti has been obtained by me. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, he has not obtained any particular state (dharma). Therefore he is called a Srota-āpanna. He has not obtained any form, nor sounds, nor smells, nor tastes, nor things that can be touched. Therefore he is called a Srota-āpanna. If, O Bhagavat, a Srota-āpanna were to think in this wise: The fruit of Srota-āpatti has been obtained by me, he would believe in a self, he would believe in a being, he would believe in a living being, he would believe in a person.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, does a Sakṛdāgāmin think in this wise: The fruit of a Sakṛdāgāmin has been obtained by me?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Sakṛdāgāmin 121 does not think in this wise: The fruit of a Sakṛdāgāmin has been obtained by me. And why? Because he is not an individual being (dharma), who has obtained the state of a Sakṛdāgāmin. Therefore he is called a Sakṛdāgāmin.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, does an Anāgāmin think in this wise: The fruit of an Anāgāmin has been obtained by me?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, an Anāgāmin does not think in this wise: The fruit of an Anāgāmin has been obtained by me. And why? Because he is not an individual being, who has obtained the state of an Anāgāmin. Therefore he is called an Anāgāmin.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, does an Arhat think in this wise: The fruit of an Arhat has been obtained by me?’ Subhūti said: 'Not indeed, O Bhagavat, an Arhat does not think in this wise: The fruit of an Arhat has been obtained by me. And why? Because he is not an individual being, who is called an Arhat. Therefore he is called an Arhat. And if, O Bhagavat, an Arhat were to think in this wise: The state of an Arhat has been obtained by me, he would believe in a self, he would believe in a being, he would believe in a living being, he would believe in a person.
'And why? I have been pointed out, O Bhagavat, by the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata, as the foremost of those who dwell in virtue.
I, O Bhagavat, am an Arhat, freed from passion. And yet, O Bhagavat, I do not think in this wise: I am an Arhat, I am freed from passion. If, O Bhagavat, I should think in this wise, that the state of an Arhat has been obtained by me, then the Tathāgata would not have truly prophesied of me, saying: “Subhūti, the son of a good family, the foremost of those dwelling in virtue, does not dwell anywhere, and therefore he is called a dweller in virtue, a dweller in virtue indeed!”’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, is there anything (dharma) which the Tathāgata has adopted from the Tathāgata Dīpankara, the holy and fully enlightened?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat; there is not anything which the Tathāgata has adopted from the Tathāgata Dīpankara, the holy and fully enlightened.’
Bhagavat said: 'If, O Subhūti, a Bodhisattva should say: “I shall create numbers of worlds,” he would say what is untrue. And why? Because, O Subhūti, when the Tathāgata preached: Numbers of worlds, numbers of worlds indeed! they were preached by him as no-numbers. Therefore they are called numbers of worlds.
‘Therefore, O Subhūti, a noble-minded Bodhisattva should in this wise frame an independent 123 mind, which is to be framed as a mind not believing in anything, not believing in form, not believing in sound, smell, taste, and anything that can be touched. Now, for instance, O Subhūti, a man might have a body and a large body, so that his size should be as large as the king of mountains, Sumeru. Do you think then, O Subhūti, that his selfhood (he himself) would be large?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, O Bhagavat, yes, O Sugata, his selfhood would be large. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, when the Tathāgata preached: “Selfhood, selfhood indeed!” it was preached by him as no-selfhood. Therefore it is called selfhood.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, if there were as many Gangā rivers as there are grains of sand in the large river Gangā, would the grains of sand be many?’ Subhūti said: ‘Those Gangā rivers would indeed be many, much more the grains of sand in those Gangā rivers.’ Bhagavat said: ‘I tell you, O Subhūti, I announce to you, If a woman or man were to fill with the seven treasures as many worlds as there would be grains of sand in those Gangā rivers and present them as a gift to the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgatas—What do you think, O Subhūti, would that woman or man on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, O Bhagavat, yes, O Sugata, that woman or man would on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.’ Bhagavat said: ‘And if, O Subhūti, a woman or man having filled so many worlds with the seven treasures should give them as a gift to the holy and enlightened Tathāgatas, 124 and if another son or daughter of a good family, after taking from this treatise of the Law one Gāthā of four lines only, should fully teach others and explain it, he, indeed, would on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.’
‘Then again, O Subhūti, that part of the world in which, after taking from this treatise of the Law one Gāthā of four lines only, it should be preached or explained, would be like a Caitya (holy shrine) for the whole world of gods, men, and spirits; what should we say then of those who learn the whole of this treatise of the Law to the end, who repeat it, understand it, and fully explain it to others? They, O Subhūti, will be endowed with the highest wonder. And in that place, O Subhūti, there dwells the teacher, or one after another holding the place of the wise preceptor.’
After these words, the venerable Subhūti spoke thus to Bhagavat: ‘O Bhagavat, how is this treatise of the Law called, and how can I learn it?’ After this, Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhūti: 'This treatise of the Law, O Subhūti, is called the Prajñā-pāramitā (Transcendent wisdom), and you should learn it by that name. And why? Because, O Subhūti, what was preached by the Tathāgata as the Prajñā-pāramitā, that was preached by the 125 Tathāgata as no-Pāramitā. Therefore it is called the Prajñā-pāramitā.
‘Then, what do you think, O Subhūti, is there anything (dharma) that was preached by the Tathāgata?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagvat, there is not anything that was preached by the Tathāgata.’
Bhagavat said. ‘What do you think then, O Subhūti,—the dust of the earth which is found in this sphere of a million millions of worlds, is that much?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, O Bhagavat, yes, O Sugata, that dust of the earth would be much. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, what was preached by the Tathāgata as the dust of the earth, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-dust. Therefore it is called the dust of the earth. And what was preached by the Tathāgata as the sphere of worlds, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-sphere. Therefore it is called the sphere of worlds.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, is a holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata to be seen (known) by the thirty-two signs of a hero?’ Subhūti said: ‘No indeed, O Bhagavat; a holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the thirty-two signs of a hero. And why? Because what was preached by the Tathāgata as the thirty-two signs of a hero, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-signs. Therefore they are called the thirty-two signs of a hero.’
Bhagavat said: ‘If, O Subhūti, a woman or man should day by day sacrifice his life (selfhood) as 126 many times as there are grains of sand in the river Gangā, and if he should thus sacrifice his life for as many kalpas as there are grains of sand in the river Gangā, and if another man, after taking from this treatise of the Law one Gāthā of four lines only, should fully teach others and explain it, he indeed would on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.’
At that time, the venerable Subhūti was moved by the power of the Law, shed tears, and having wiped his tears, he thus spoke to Bhagavat: 'It is wonderful, O Bhagavat, it is exceedingly wonderful, O Sugata, how fully this teaching of the Law has been preached by the Tathāgata for the benefit of those beings who entered on the foremost path (the path that leads to Nirvāṇa), and who entered on the best path, from whence, O Bhagavat, knowledge has been produced in me. Never indeed, O Bhagavat, has such a teaching of the Law been heard by me before. Those Bodhisattvas, O Bhagavat, will be endowed with the highest wonder, who when this Sūtra is being preached hear it and will frame to themselves a true idea. And why? Because what is a true idea is not a true idea. Therefore the Tathāgata preaches: “A true idea, a true idea indeed!”
'It is no wonder to me, O Bhagavat, that I accept and believe this treatise of the Law, which has been preached. And those beings also, O Bhagavat, 127 who will exist in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the time of the decay of the good Law, who will learn this treatise of the Law, O Bhagavat, remember it, recite it, understand it, and fully explain it to others, they will indeed be endowed with the highest wonder.
‘But, O Bhagavat, there will not arise in them any idea of a self, any idea of a being, of a living being, or a person, nor does there exist for them any idea or no-idea. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, the idea of a self is no-idea, and the idea of a being, or a living being, or a person is no-idea. And why? Because the blessed Buddhas are freed from all ideas.’
After these words, Bhagavat thus spoke to the venerable Subhūti: 'So it is, O Subhūti, so it is. Those beings, O Subhūti, who when this Sūtra was being recited here will not be disturbed or frightened or become alarmed, will be endowed with the highest wonder. And why? Because, O Subhūti, this was preached by the Tathāgata, as the Paramapāramitā, which is no-Pāramitā. And, O Subhūti, what the Tathāgata preaches as the Paramapāramitā, that was preached also by immeasurable blessed Buddhas. Therefore it is called the Paramapāramitā.
'And, O Subhūti, the Pāramitā or the highest perfection of endurance (kshānti) belonging to a Tathāgata, that also is no-Pāramitā. And why? Because, O Subhūti, at the time when the king of Kalinga cut my flesh from every limb, I had no idea of a self, of a being, of a living being, or of 128 a person; I had neither an idea nor no-idea. And why? Because, O Subhūti, if I at that time had had an idea of a self, I should also have had an idea of malevolence. If I had had an idea of a being, or of a living being, or of a person, I should also have had an idea of malevolence. And why? Because, O Subhūti, I remember the past 500 births, when I was the Ṛshi Kshāntivādin (preacher of endurance). At that time also, I had no idea of a self, of a being, of a living being, of a person. Therefore then, O Subhūti, a noble-minded Bodhisattva, after putting aside all ideas, should raise his mind to the highest perfect knowledge. He should frame his mind so as not to believe (depend) in form, sound, smell, taste, or anything that can be touched, in something (dharma), in nothing or anything. And why? Because what is believed is not believed (not to be depended on). Therefore the Tathāgata preaches: “A gift should not be given by a Bodhisattva who believes in anything, it should not be given by one who believes in form, sound, smell, taste, or anything that can be touched.”
'And again, O Subhūti, a Bodhisattva should in such wise give his gift for the benefit of all beings. And why? Because, O Subhūti, the idea of a being is no-idea. And those who are thus spoken of by the Tathāgata as all beings are indeed no-beings. And why? Because, O Subhūti, a Tathāgata says what is real, says what is true, says the things as they are; a Tathāgata does not speak untruth.
'But again, O Subhūti, whatever doctrine has been 129 perceived, taught, and meditated on by a Tathāgata, in it there is neither truth nor falsehood. And as a man who has entered the darkness would not see anything, thus a Bodhisattva is to be considered who is immersed in objects, and who being immersed in objects gives a gift. But as a man who has eyes would, when the night becomes light, and the sun has risen, see many things, thus a Bodhisattva is to be considered who is not immersed in objects, and who not being immersed in objects gives a gift.
‘And again, O Subhūti, if any sons or daughters of good families will learn this treatise of the Law, will remember, recite, and understand it, and fully explain it to others, they, O Subhūti, are known by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-knowledge, they are seen, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-eye. All these beings, O Subhūti, will produce and hold fast an immeasurable and innumerable stock of merit.’
'And if, O Subhūti, a woman or man sacrificed in the morning as many lives as there are grains of sand in the river Gangā and did the same at noon and the same in the evening, and if in this way they sacrificed their lives for a hundred thousands of niyutas of koṭīs of ages, and if another, after hearing this treatise of the Law, should not oppose it, then the latter would on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable. What should we say then of him who after having written it, learns it, remembers it, understands it, and fully explains it to others?
'And again, O Subhūti, this treatise of the Law is 130 incomprehensible and incomparable. And this treatise of the Law has been preached by the Tathāgata for the benefit of those beings who entered on the foremost path (the path that leads to Nirvāṇa), and who entered on the best path. And those who will learn this treatise of the Law, who will remember it, recite it, understand it, and fully explain it to others, they are known, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-knowledge, they are seen, O Subhūti, by the Tathāgata through his Buddha-eye. All these beings, O Subhūti, will be endowed with an immeasurable stock of merit, they will be endowed with an incomprehensible, incomparable, immeasurable and unmeasured stock of merit. All these beings, O Subhūti, will equally remember the Bodhi (the highest Buddha-knowledge), will recite it, and understand it. And why? Because it is not possible, O Subhūti, that this treatise of the Law should be heard by beings of little faith, by those who believe in self, in beings, in living beings, and in persons. It is impossible that this treatise of the Law should be heard by beings who have not acquired the knowledge of Bodhisattvas, or that it should be learned, remembered, recited, and understood by them. The thing is impossible.
‘And again, O Subhūti, that part of the world in which this Sūtra will be propounded, will have to be honoured by the whole world of gods, men, and evil spirits, will have to be worshipped, and will become like a Caitya (a holy sepulchre).’
And, O Subhūti, sons or daughters of a good family who will learn these very Sūtras, who will 131 remember them. recite them, understand them, thoroughly take them to heart, and fully explain them to others, they will be overcome, they will be greatly overcome. And why? Because, O Subhūti, whatever evil deeds these beings have done in a former birth, deeds that must lead to suffering, those deeds these beings, owing to their being overcome, after they have seen the Law, will destroy, and they will obtain the knowledge of Buddha.
'I remember, O Subhūti, in the past, before innumerable and more than innumerable kalpas, there were eighty-four hundred thousands of niyutas of koṭīs of Buddhas following after the venerable and fully enlightened Tathāgata Dīpankara, who were pleased by me, and after being pleased were not displeased. And if, O Subhūti, these blessed Buddhas were pleased by me, and after being pleased were not displeased, and if on the other hand people at the last time, at the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the time of the decay of the good Law, will learn these very Sūtras, remember them, recite them, understand them, and fully explain them to others, then, O Subhūti, in comparison with their stock of merit that former stock of merit will not come to one hundredth part, nay, not to one thousandth part, not to a hundred thousandth part, not to a ten millionth part, not to a hundred millionth part, not to a hundred thousand ten millionth part, not to a hundred thousands of niyutas ten millionth part. It will not bear number, nor fraction, nor counting, nor comparison, nor approach, nor analogy.
‘And if, O Subhūti, I were to tell you the stock of 132 merit of those sons or daughters of good families, and how large a stock of merit those sons or daughters of good families will produce, and hold fast at that time, people would become distracted and their thoughts would become bewildered. And again, O Subhūti, as this treatise of the Law preached by the Tathāgata is incomprehensible and incomparable, its rewards also must be expected (to be) incomprehensible.’
At that time the venerable Subhūti thus spoke to the Bhagavat: ‘How should a person, after having entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas, behave, how should he advance, and how should he restrain his thoughts?’ Bhagavat said: 'He who has entered on the path of the Bodhisativas should thus frame his thought: All beings must be delivered by me in the perfect world of Nirvāṇa; and yet after I have thus delivered these beings, no being has been delivered. And why? Because, O Subhūti, if a Bodhisattva had any idea of beings, he could not be called a Bodhisattva, and so on from the idea of a living being to the idea of a person; if he had any such idea, he could not be called a Bodhisattva. And why? Because, O Subhūti, there is no such thing (dharma) as one who has entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas.
'What do you think, O Subhūti, is there anything which the Tathāgata has adopted from the Tathāgata Dīpankara with regard to the highest perfect knowledge? 'After this, the venerable Subhūti 133 spoke thus to the Bhagavat: ‘As far as I, O Bhagavat, understand the meaning of the preaching of the Bhagavat, there is nothing which has been adopted by the Tathāgata from the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata Dīpankara with regard to the highest perfect knowledge.’ After this, Bhagavat thus spoke to the venerable Subhūti: 'So it is, Subhūti, so it is. There is not, O Subhūti, anything which has been adopted by the Tathāgata from the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata Dīpankara with regard to the highest perfect knowledge. And if, O Subhūti, anything had been adopted by the Tathāgata, the Tathāgata Dīpankara would not have prophesied of me, saying: “Thou, O boy, wilt be in the future the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata called Śākyamuni.” Because then, O Subhūti, there is nothing that has been adopted by the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata with regard to the highest perfect knowledge, therefore I was prophesied by the Tathāgata Dīpankara, saying: “Thou, boy, wilt be in the future the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata called Śākyamuni.”
'And why, O Subhūti, the name of Tathāgata? It expresses true suchness. And why Tathāgata, O Subhūti? It expresses that he had no origin. And why Tathāgata, O Subhūti? It expresses the destruction of all qualities. And why Tathāgata, O Subhūti? It expresses one who had no origin whatever. And why this? Because, O Subhūti, no-origin is the highest goal.
'And whosoever, O Subhūti, should say that, by the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata, the highest 134 perfect knowledge has been known, he would speak an untruth, and would slander me, O Subhūti, with some untruth that he has learned. And why? Because there is no such thing, O Subhūti, as has been known by the Tathāgata with regard to the highest perfect knowledge. And in that, O Subhūti, which has been known and taught by the Tathāgata, there is neither truth nor falsehood. Thetefore the Tathāgata preaches: “All things are Buddha-things.” And why? Because what was preached by the Tathāgata, O Subhūti, as all things, that was preached as no-things; and therefore all things are called Buddha-things.
‘Now, O Subhūti, a man might have a body and a large body.’ The venerable Subhūti said: That man who was spoken of by the Tathāgata as a man with a body, with a large body, he, O Bhagavat, was spoken of by the Tathāgata as without a body, and therefore he is called a man with a body and with a large body.’
Bhagavat said: ‘So it is, O Subhūti; 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 Subhūti, that is called a Bodhisattva?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, Bhagavat, there is nothing which is called a Bodhisattva.’ Bhagavat said: 'Those who were spoken of as beings, beings indeed, O Subhūti, they were spoken of as no-beings by the Tathāgata, and therefore they are called beings. Therefore the Tathāgata says: “All beings are without self all beings are without life, without manhood, without a personality.” 135 'If, O Subhūti, a Bodhisattva were to say: “I shall create numbers of worlds,” he would say what is untrue. And why? Because, what were spoken of as numbers of worlds, numbers of worlds indeed, O Subhūti, these were spoken of as no-numbers by the Tathāgata, and therefore they are called numbers of worlds.
‘A Bodhisattva, O Subhūti, who believes that all things are without self, that all things are without self, he has faith, he is called a noble-minded Bodhisattva by the holy and fully enlightened Tathāgata.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, has the Tathāgata the bodily eye?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has the bodily eye.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, has the Tathāgata the heavenly eye?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has the heavenly eye.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, has the Tathāgata the eye of knowledge?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has the eye of knowledge.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, has the Tathāgata the eye of the Law?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has the eye of the Law.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, has the Tathāgata the eye of Buddha?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has the eye of Buddha.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, as many grains of sand as there are in the great river Gangā—were they preached by the Tathāgata 136 as grains of sand?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, so it is, O Sugata, they were preached as grains of sand by the Tathāgata.’ Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, if there were as many Gangā rivers as there are grains of sand in the great river Gangā; and, if there were as many worlds as there are grains of sand in these, would these worlds be many?’ Subhūti said: ‘So it is, O Bhagavat, so it is, O Sugata, these worlds would be many.’ Bhagavat said: ‘As many beings as there are in all those worlds, I know the manifold trains of thought of them all. And why? Because what was preached as the train of thoughts, the train of thoughts indeed, O Subhūti, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-train of thoughts, and therefore it is called the train of thoughts. And why? Because, O Subhūti, a past thought is not perceived, a future thought is not perceived, and the present thought is not perceived.’
‘What do you think, O Subhūti, if a son or a daughter of a good family should fill this sphere of a million millions of worlds with the seven treasures, and give it as a gift to holy and fully enlightened Buddhas, would that son or daughter of a good family produce on the strength of this a large stock of merit?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, a large one.’ Bhagavat said: ‘So it is, Subhūti, so it is; that son or daughter of a good family would produce on the strength of this a large stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable. And why? Because what was preached as a stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed, O Subhūti, that was preached as no-stock 137 of merit by the Tathāgata, and therefore it is called a stock of merit. If, O Subhūti, there existed a stock of merit, the Tathāgata would not have preached: “A stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed!”’
‘What do you think then, O Subhūti, is a Tathāgata to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body. And why? Because, what was preached, O Bhagavat, as the shape of the visible body, the shape of the visible body indeed, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-shape of the visible body, and therefore it is called the shape of the visible body.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, should a Tathāgata be seen (known) by the possession of signs?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs. And why? Because, what was preached by the Tathāgata as the possession of signs, that was preached as no-possession of signs by the Tathāgata, and therefore it is called the possession of signs.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhūti, does the Tathāgata think in this wise: The Law has been taught by me?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, does the Tathāgata think in this wise: The Law has been taught by me.’ Bhagavat said: ‘If a man should say that the Law has been taught by the Tathāgata, he would say what is not true; he 138 would slander me with untruth which he has learned. And why? Because, O Subhūti, it is said the teaching of the Law, the teaching of the Law indeed. O Subhūti, there is nothing that can be perceived by the name of the teaching of the Law.’
After this, the venerable Subhūti spoke thus to the Bhagavat: ‘Forsooth, O Bhagavat, will there be any beings in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the time of the decay of the good Law, who, when they have heard these very Laws, will believe?’ Bhagavat said: ‘These, O Subhūti, are neither beings nor no-beings. And why? Because, O Subhūti, those who were preached as beings, beings indeed, they were preached as no-beings by the Tathāgata, and therefore they are called beings.’
‘What do you think then, O Subhūti, is there anything which has been known by the Tathāgata in the form of the highest perfect knowledge?’ The venerable Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, there is nothing, O Bhagavat, that has been known by the Tathāgata in the form of the highest perfect knowledge.’ Bhagavat said: ‘So it is, Subhūti, so it is. Even the smallest thing is not known or perceived there, therefore it is called the highest perfect knowledge.’
‘Also, Subhūti, all is the same there, there is no difference there, and therefore it is called the highest perfect knowledge. Free from self, free from being, free from life, free from personality, that 139 highest perfect knowledge is always the same, and thus known with all good things. And why? Because, what were preached as good things, good things indeed, O Subhūti, they were preached as no-things by the Tathāgata, and therefore they are called good things.’
‘And if, O Subhūti, a woman or man, putting together as many heaps of the seven treasures as there are Sumerus, kings of mountains, in the sphere of a million millions of worlds, should give them as a gift to holy and fully enlightened Tathāgatas; and, if a son or a daughter of a good family, after taking from this treatise of the Law, this Prajñāpāramitā, one Gāthā of four lines only, should teach it to others, then, O Subhūti, compared with his stock of merit, the former stock of merit would not come to the one hundredth part,’ &c., till ‘it will not bear an approach.’
‘What do you think then, O Subhūti, does a Tathāgatas think in this wise: Beings have been delivered by me? You should not think so, O Subhūti. And why? Because there is no being, O Subhūti, that has been delivered by the Tathāgata. And, if there were a being, O Subhūti, that has been delivered by the Tathāgatas, then the Tathāgata would believe in self, believe in a being, believe in a living being, and believe in a person. And what is called a belief in self, O Subhūti, that is preached 140 as no-belief by the Tathāgata. And this is learned by children and ignorant persons; and they who were preached as children and ignorant persons, O Subhūti, were preached as no-persons by the Tathāgata, and therefore they are called children and ignorant persons.’
‘What do you think then, O Subhūti, is the Tathāgata to be seen (known) by the possession of signs?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat. So far as I know the meaning of the preaching of the Bhagavat, the Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs.’ Bhagavat said: ‘Good, good, Subhūti, so it is, Subhūti; so it is, as you say; a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs. And why? Because, O Subhūti, if the Tathāgata were to be seen (known) by the possession of signs, a wheel-turning king also would be a Tathāgata; therefore a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs.’ The venerable Subhūti spoke thus to the Bhagavat: ‘As I understand the meaning of the preaching of the Bhagavat, a Tathāgata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs.’ Then the Bhagavat at that moment preached these two Gāthās:
They who saw me by form, and they who heard me by sound, They engaged in false endeavours, will not see me. 141 A Buddha is to be seen (known) from the Law; for the Lords (Buddhas) have the Law-body; And the nature of the Law cannot be understood, nor can it be made to be understood.
‘What do you think then, O Subhūti, has the highest perfect knowledge been known by the Tathāgata through the possession of signs? You should not think so, O Subhūti. And why? Because, O Subhūti, the highest perfect knowledge would not be known by the Tathāgata through the possession of signs. Nor should anybody, O Subhūti, say to you that the destruction or annihilation of any thing is proclaimed by those who have entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas.’
'And if, O Subhūti, a son or a daughter of a good family were to fill worlds equal to the number of grains of sand of the river Gangā with the seven treasures, and give them as a gift to holy and fully enlightened Tathāgatas; and if a Bodhisattva acquired endurance in selfless and uncreated things, then the latter will on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.
‘But, O Subhūti, a stock of merit should not be appropriated by a noble-minded Bodhisattva.’ The venerable Subhūti said: ‘Should a stock of merit, O Bhagavat, not be appropriated by a Bodhisattva?’ Bhagavat said: ‘It should be appropriated, O Subhūti; it should not be appropriated; and therefore it is said: It should be appropriated.’ 142
‘And again, O Subhūti, if anybody were to say that the Tathāgata goes, or comes, or stands, or sits, or lies down, he, O Subhūti, does not understand the meaning of my preaching. And why? Because the word Tathāgata means one who does not go to anywhere, and does not come from anywhere; and therefore he is called the Tathāgata (truly come), holy and fully enlightened.’
‘And again, O Subhūti, if a son or a daughter of a good family were to take as many worlds as there are grains of earth-dust in this sphere of a million millions of worlds, and reduce them to such fine dust as can be made with immeasurable strength, like what is called a mass of the smallest atoms, do you think, O Subhūti, would that be a mass of many atoms?’ Subhūti said: ‘Yes, Bhagavat, yes, Sugata, that would be a mass of many atoms. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, if it were a mass of many atoms, Bhagavat would not call it a mass of many atoms. And why? Because, what was preached as a mass of many atoms by the Tathāgata, that was preached as no-mass of atoms by the Tathāgata; and therefore it is called a mass of many atoms. And what was preached by the Tathāgata as the sphere of a million millions of worlds, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-sphere of worlds; and therefore it is called the sphere of a million millions of worlds. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, if there were a sphere of worlds, there would exist a belief in matter; and what was preached as a belief in matter by the Tathāgata, that was 143 preached as no-belief by the Tathāgata; and therefore it is called a belief in matter.’ Bhagavat said: ‘And a belief in matter itself, O Subhūti, is unmentionable and inexpressible; it is neither a thing nor no-thing, and this is known by children and ignorant persons.’
‘And why? Because, O Subhūti, 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 Tathāgata, would he be speaking truly?’ Subhūti said: ‘Not indeed, Bhagavat, not indeed, Sugata; he would not be speaking truly. And why? Because, O Bhagavat, what was preached by the Tathāgata as a belief in self, that was preached by the Tathāgata as no-belief; therefore it is called belief in self.’
Bhagavat said: ‘Thus then, O Subhūti, are all things to be perceived, to be looked upon, and to be believed by one who has entered on the path of the Bodhisattvas. And in this wise are they to be perceived, to be looked upon, and to be believed, that a man should believe neither in the idea of a thing nor in the idea of a no-thing. And why? Because, by saying: The idea of a thing, the idea of a thing indeed, it has been preached by the Tathāgata as no-idea of a thing.’
'And, O Subhūti, if a noble-minded Bodhisattva were to fill immeasurable and innumerable spheres of worlds with the seven treasures, and give them as a gift to holy and fully enlightened Tathāgatas; 144 and if a son or a daughter of a good family, after taking from this treatise of the Law, this Prajñāpāramitā, one Gāthā of four lines only, should learn it, repeat it, understand it, and fully explain it to others, then the latter would on the strength of this produce a larger stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable. And how should he explain it? As in the sky:
Stars, darkness, a lamp, a phantom, dew, a bubble. A dream, a flash of lightning, and a cloud—thus we should look upon the world (all that was made).