Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1I I 6 THE \AGRAKKHEDIKA of the decay of the good Law, who, when these very words of the SCitras are being preached, will frame a true idea ' ? The Bhagavat said : ' Do not speak thus, Subhuti. 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 SubhClti, 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 Sutras are being preached, will frame a true idea. But those noble-minded Bodhisattvas, O Subhuti, will not have served one Buddha only, and the stock intended here is evidently the last of the periods of 500 years each, which, according to the Mahayana-Buddhists, elapsed after the death of Buddha. The following extract from the MahasannipatasQtra (Ta-tsi-king, No. 61 inTripi/aka), given to me by]\Ir.B. Nanjio, fully explains the subject. ' It is stated in the fifty-first section of the IMahasannipata-sutra, that Buddha e^aid : " After my Nirvawa, in the first 500 years, all the Bhikshus and others will be strong in deliberation in my correct Law. (Those who first obtain the ' holy fruit,' i.e. the Srota-apannas, are called those who have obtained deliberation.) In the next or second 500 years, they will be strong in meditation. In the next or third 500 years, they will be strong in 'much learning,' i.e. bahu.rruta, religious knowledge. In the next or fourth 500 years, they will be strong in founding monasteries, &c. In the last or fifth 500 years, they will be strong in fighting and rcjjroving. The pure (lit. white) Law will then become invisible. ' The question then fore amounts to this, whether in that corrupt age the law of Buddha will still be understood .-' and the answer is, that there will l)e always some excellent Boddhisaitvas who, even in the age of corruption, can understand the preaching of the Law. ' Will understand them properly.
2OR DIAMOND-CUTTER. I I 7 of their merit will not have been accumulated under one Buddha only ; on the contrary, O Subhuti, 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 Sutras are being preached, will obtain one and the same faith ^ They are known, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata through his Buddha-knowledge ; they are seen, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata through his Buddha-eye ; they are understood, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata. All these, O Subhuti, will produce and will hold fast an immeasurable and innumerable stock of merit. And why ? Because, O Subhuti, 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 Subhuti, for these noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of quality (dharma), nor of no-quality. Neither does there exist, O Subhuti, any idea (sa;;2^/la) or no-idea. And why ? Because, O Subhuti, 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, ^ I am doubtful about the exact meaning of eka^ittaprasSda. Childers gives eka^'itta, as an adjective, with the meaning of ' having the same thought,' and /tittaprasada, as faith in Buddha. But eka/^ittaprasada may also be ' faiih produced by one thought,' ' immediate faith,' and this too is a recognised form of faith in Buddhism. See Sukhavati, pp. 71, 108.
3Il8 THE VAGRAKKHEDlVik they would believe in a being, they would believe in a living being, they would believe in a person. And wh)' ? Because, O Subhuti, neither quality nor noquality is to be accepted by a noble-minded Bodhisattva. Therefore this hidden saying has been preached b\- the Tathagata : " By those who know the teaching of the Law, as like unto a raft, all qualities indeed must be abandoned ; much more no-qualities '. ' (6) \TL And again Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhuti : 'What do you think, O Subhuti, is there anything (dharma) that was known by the Tathagata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, or anything that was taught by the Tathagata ? ' After these w^ords, the venerable SubhCiti 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 Tathagata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, nor is there an)lhing that is taught by the Tathagata. And why ? Because that thing which w^as known or taught by the Tathagata is incomprehensible and inexpressible. It is neither a thing nor no-thing. And why ? Because the holy persons ^ are of imperfect power ^.' (7) ' The same line is quoted in the Abhidharmakosha-vyakhya. ' Arya[iudgala need not be Bodhisattvas, but all who have entered on ihe paih leading to Nirvawa. * Ilarlcz : ' Parceque les entitcs supdrieures sont produitcs tcllcs sans 6tre rdelles et parfaites pour ccla. If sawskr/ta can be used in Buddhist literature in the sense of pcrfocl, and prabhavita as power, my translation might pass, but even then the ' because ' remains difficult.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1I I 6 THE \AGRAKKHEDIKA of the decay of the good Law, who, when these very words of the SCitras are being preached, will frame a true idea ' ? The Bhagavat said : ' Do not speak thus, Subhuti. 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 SubhClti, 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 Sutras are being preached, will frame a true idea. But those noble-minded Bodhisattvas, O Subhuti, will not have served one Buddha only, and the stock intended here is evidently the last of the periods of 500 years each, which, according to the Mahayana-Buddhists, elapsed after the death of Buddha. The following extract from the MahasannipatasQtra (Ta-tsi-king, No. 61 inTripi/aka), given to me by]\Ir.B. Nanjio, fully explains the subject. ' It is stated in the fifty-first section of the IMahasannipata-sutra, that Buddha e^aid : " After my Nirvawa, in the first 500 years, all the Bhikshus and others will be strong in deliberation in my correct Law. (Those who first obtain the ' holy fruit,' i.e. the Srota-apannas, are called those who have obtained deliberation.) In the next or second 500 years, they will be strong in meditation. In the next or third 500 years, they will be strong in 'much learning,' i.e. bahu.rruta, religious knowledge. In the next or fourth 500 years, they will be strong in founding monasteries, &c. In the last or fifth 500 years, they will be strong in fighting and rcjjroving. The pure (lit. white) Law will then become invisible. ' The question then fore amounts to this, whether in that corrupt age the law of Buddha will still be understood .-' and the answer is, that there will l)e always some excellent Boddhisaitvas who, even in the age of corruption, can understand the preaching of the Law. ' Will understand them properly.
2OR DIAMOND-CUTTER. I I 7 of their merit will not have been accumulated under one Buddha only ; on the contrary, O Subhuti, 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 Sutras are being preached, will obtain one and the same faith ^ They are known, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata through his Buddha-knowledge ; they are seen, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata through his Buddha-eye ; they are understood, O Subhuti, by the Tathagata. All these, O Subhuti, will produce and will hold fast an immeasurable and innumerable stock of merit. And why ? Because, O Subhuti, 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 Subhuti, for these noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of quality (dharma), nor of no-quality. Neither does there exist, O Subhuti, any idea (sa;;2^/la) or no-idea. And why ? Because, O Subhuti, 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, ^ I am doubtful about the exact meaning of eka^ittaprasSda. Childers gives eka^'itta, as an adjective, with the meaning of ' having the same thought,' and /tittaprasada, as faith in Buddha. But eka/^ittaprasada may also be ' faiih produced by one thought,' ' immediate faith,' and this too is a recognised form of faith in Buddhism. See Sukhavati, pp. 71, 108.
3Il8 THE VAGRAKKHEDlVik they would believe in a being, they would believe in a living being, they would believe in a person. And wh)' ? Because, O Subhuti, neither quality nor noquality is to be accepted by a noble-minded Bodhisattva. Therefore this hidden saying has been preached b\- the Tathagata : " By those who know the teaching of the Law, as like unto a raft, all qualities indeed must be abandoned ; much more no-qualities '. ' (6) \TL And again Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhuti : 'What do you think, O Subhuti, is there anything (dharma) that was known by the Tathagata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, or anything that was taught by the Tathagata ? ' After these w^ords, the venerable SubhCiti 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 Tathagata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, nor is there an)lhing that is taught by the Tathagata. And why ? Because that thing which w^as known or taught by the Tathagata is incomprehensible and inexpressible. It is neither a thing nor no-thing. And why ? Because the holy persons ^ are of imperfect power ^.' (7) ' The same line is quoted in the Abhidharmakosha-vyakhya. ' Arya[iudgala need not be Bodhisattvas, but all who have entered on ihe paih leading to Nirvawa. * Ilarlcz : ' Parceque les entitcs supdrieures sont produitcs tcllcs sans 6tre rdelles et parfaites pour ccla. If sawskr/ta can be used in Buddhist literature in the sense of pcrfocl, and prabhavita as power, my translation might pass, but even then the ' because ' remains difficult.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.