Buddhist Mahâyâna Texts — SBE Vol. 49 — trans. Cowell, Müller & Takakusu (1894)

OR DIAMOND-CUTTER. II9 VIII. Bhagavat said : ' What do you think, O Subhuti, if a son or daughter of a good family filled this sphere of a million millions of worlds' with the seven orems or treasures, and gave it as a gift to the holy and enlightened Tathagatas, would that son or daughter of a good family on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit ?

' Subhuti 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 Tathagata as the stock of merit, that was preached by the Tathagata as no-stock of merit. Therefore the Tathagata preaches : " A stock of merit, a stock of merit ^ indeed !

" ' Bhagavat said : ' And if, O Subhuti, 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 Tathagatas, and if another after takinof from this treatise of the Law one Gatha 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 Subhuti, the highest perfect knowledge of the holy and enlightened Tathagatas is produced from it ; the blessed Buddhas are produced from it. And why ? Because, O Subhuti, when the Tathagata preached : ^ See Childers, s. v. Lokadhatu. * Or should it be, bhashate^puwyaskandhaj^ puwyaskandha iti, i. e. he preaches no-stock of merit is the slock of merit ? It would not be applicable to later passages, but the style of the SQtras varies.

I20 THE XAGKAKKIIEDIKA " The qualities of Buddha, the quahties of Buddha indeed ! " they were preached by him as no-qualities of Buddha. Therefore they are called the qualities of Buddha." (8) IX. Bhagavat said ' : ' Now, what do you think, O Subhuti, does a Srota-dpanna ' think in this wise: The fruit of Srota-apatti has been obtained by me ?

' Subhuti said : ' Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Srotaapanna does not think in this wise : The fruit of Srota-apatti has been obtained by me. And why ? Because, O Bhagavat, he has not obtained any particular state (dharma). Therefore he is called a Srota-^panna. He has not obtained any form, nor sounds, nor smells, nor tastes, nor things that can be touched. Therefore he is called a Srotaapanna.

If, O Bhagavat, a Srota-apanna were to think in this wise : The fruit of Srota-apatti 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 Subhuti, does a Sakr/dagamin think in this wise : The fruit of a Sakr/dagamin has been obtained by me ?

' Subhuti said : ' Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Sak/V- ' This phrase is wanting in ihe Sanskrit MSS., but it is found in the Chinese transkilion of Dharmagupta, of the Sui dynasty (a.d. 589-618). * Srota-apanna, a man who has obtained the first grade of sanctification, Utcrally, who has entered the stream. The second grade is that of the Sak;7dagamin, who returns once.

The third grade is that of the Anagamin, who does not return at all, but is born in the IJrahman world from whence he becomes an Arhat and may obtain Nirvawa.

p. 121dagamin does not think in this wise : The fruit of a Sakrz'dagamin has been obtained by me. And why ? Because he is not an individual being (dharma), who has obtained the state of a Sakr/dagamin. Therefore he is called a Sakr/- dagamin. Bhagavat said : * What do you think, O Subhuti, does an Anagamin think in this wise : The fruit of an Anagamin has been obtained by me ?

' Subhuti said : ' Not indeed, O Bhagavat, an Anagamin does not think in this wise : The fruit of an Anagamin has been obtained by me. And why ? Because he is not an individual being, who has obtained the state of an Anagamin. Therefore he is called an Anagamin. Bhagavat said : ' What do you think, O Subhuti, does an Arhat think in this wise : The fruit of an Arhat has been obtained by me ?

' Subhuti 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 Tathagata, as the foremost of those who dwell in virtue \ ^ Arawaviharin.

Rawa is strife, then sin, therefore ara«a might be peace and virtue, only the a would be short. Probably arawaviharin was formed with reference to ara«ya-viharin, living in