The Diamond Sutra

by Red Pine

  Vasubandhu also considered this problem and used his spiritual power to find an answer. According to the Bronze Memorial Record (T’ung Pei Chi), “When Vasubandhu ascended to the Tushita Palace he asked Maitreya Bodhisattva which four-line gatha the Buddha was referring to in the Diamond Sutra. Maitreya said, ‘No perception of a self, no perception of a being, no perception of a life, and no perception of a soul.’” (quoted by Yen Ping) Since these four lines are not one of the two verses in this sutra (which appear at the end of Chapters Twenty-six and Thirty-two), it suggests that Vasubandhu’s understanding of “gatha” did not, as noted above, refer to a four-line poem but simply a unit of comparable length. Further support for this view comes from the fact that the sutra’s central teaching has now been presented, and no gathas have appeared, while the Buddha has repeatedly stressed non-attachment to these four perceptions of self, being, life, and soul as essential to the bodhisattva path.

  Regardless of which gatha, if any, the Buddha had in mind, the conclusion itself deserves attention. In what sense is the body of merit produced by this teaching greater than the body of merit produced by the stupendous act of material charity mentioned above? Is this body of merit not also “no body of merit”? And if so, how can one no-body be greater than another no-body? Once again, the Buddha turns our world inside out. One no-body can be greater than another no-body if that no-body is a buddha dharma. The Buddha does not want Subhuti to think that just because all things are empty they are useless. Although material and spiritual charity are empty, the power of the latter to help liberate others ensures it of a place in the repertoire of all buddhas and bodhisattvas. Thus, their body of merit is infinitely greater. It has to be if they are to liberate all beings.

  The Chinkang Samadhi Sutra says, “All dharmas are contained in a single four-line gatha.”

  Asanga says, “Learning and teaching others aren’t devoid of merit. Enlightenment, however, doesn’t rest on merit, rather it rests on these.” (16) Vasubandhu comments, “Although dharmas cannot be learned or taught, they still possess benefits. For while such merit cannot support enlightenment, these two can. By ‘these’ are meant ‘learning’ and ‘teaching others.’ As these two are the cause of enlightenment, their merit is even greater. But how can they support enlightenment? To explain this, the sutra says that tathagatas and enlightenment come from this sutra.”

  Hung-lien says, “Everyone possesses this sutra. It is complete in everyone. From the buddhas above to the ants below, they all possess this sutra, which is the wondrous and perfectly enlightened mind, to which nothing can compare.”

  Tao-yuan says, “Before the Buddha has even finished this sutra, he talks about keeping in mind one of its gathas. Why is this? Because these first eight chapters contain the essential teaching of the whole sutra.”

  Yen Ping says, “This is like someone whose lamp lights a million other lamps. Their merit exceeds all those whose lamps they light, whereas making offerings attached to form is like shooting an arrow into the sky. When its force is spent, it falls back to earth.”

  Fu Hsi says, “Someone who makes an offering of all the precious things in a billion worlds in order to obtain merit only reaps more karma. They still don’t leave the realm of gods and humans. However, reciting a four-line gatha of this sutra creates a beneficial connection with all sages. Nevertheless, to enter the sea of the uncreated, you must board the boat of prajna. You do not have to look somewhere else for a gatha. There is already one present in your own mind.”

  Hsuan-tsung says, “Though the merit that results from an offering of all the seven precious things in a billion worlds is great, once it is gone, the suffering of life and death resume. Though a four-line gatha of this sutra is small, it leads directly to enlightenment.”

  Tao-ch’uan says, “My song goes, ‘If you fill a billion worlds with jewels / such merit won’t get you past gods and men / but who knows merit has no nature of its own / doesn’t need money to buy sunshine or wind.’”

  Textual note: Kumarajiva does not include “if . . . fully-enlightened ones,” nor does Conze in his English translation—although the above text is fully present in his Sanskrit edition. Dharmagupta does not include deshaya (make known), while neither Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, nor Yi-ching includes vistarena sanprakashaya (explain in detail). Hsuan-tsang adds chiu ching t’ung-li, k’ai-shih, ju-li tso-yi (plumbed its depths, opened it up, and focused on its truth). The Tibetan has yan dag par rab tu ston na (truly explained). Kumarajiva does not include aprameyan asankhyeyan (immeasurably, infinitely).

  And how so? Subhuti, from this is born the

  unexcelled, perfect enlightenment of tathagatas,

  arhans, and fully-enlightened ones. From this are

  born buddhas and bhagavans.

  This chapter explains the difference between the arhan and bodhisattva paths. Arhans are able to attain liberation from suffering and rebirth, but as long as they remain limited by the emptiness and detachment of their practice, they can be of no help to others. Here, and in the following chapter, the Buddha contrasts these two spiritual paths in order to reveal the true nature of this teaching. Here, we also see somewhat more clearly the connection between the bodies produced and obtained by bodhisattvas and buddhas with buddhahood. For the bodies of both are one and the same body. Both bodies have the same source and are simply synonyms for the experience of enlightenment. The difference is the difference between the child and the adult. They are different, and yet they are the same person. Both arise from this teaching, which is the dharma body of every buddha.

  Chung-kuo says, “This sutra is like the earth. What creature is not born from it? All buddhas only point to the one mind. What dharma is not produced from it? Thus do all buddhas and dharmas come from this sutra.”

  Wang Jih-hsiu, “If all dharmas and buddhas come from this sutra, its merit must be great, indeed, and also inexhaustible.”

  Yen Ping says, “There is no other sutra except this sutra.”

  Juo-na says, “To ‘come from this sutra’ does not refer to the words of this sutra but prajna.”

  Chiang Wei-nung says, “In the Maha Prajnaparamita Sutra, the Buddha says all dharmas are contained in prajna. Thus, prajna is the most important of all dharmas, and the Diamond Sutra is the most important of all sutras. Among the truths expressed in the Maha Prajnaparamita Sutra, this sutra contains them all. Hence, reading this sutra is no different from reading the entire Maha Prajnaparamita Sutra. In fact, it is no different from reading the entire Buddhist Canon, for all dharmas and all buddhas come from this sutra.”

  Conze says, “The prajna-paramita is both the cause and the effect of buddhahood. Because when they were bodhisattvas, the study of the prajna-paramita enabled them to win buddhahood. The prajna-paramita, and the merit derived from teaching it, is therefore here proclaimed as the real decisive cause and condition of buddhahood.”

  The Heart Sutra says, “By depending on the prajna-paramita, all buddhas of the past, the present, and the future are able to attain unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.”

  Tao-ch’uan says, “My song goes, ‘Buddha dharmas aren’t dharmas we can grasp or follow / they open and shut, give birth and kill / the light between his brows shines forever / fools still need to ask the bodhisattvas.’”

  Textual note: In place of the second and third sentences, Kumarajiva has: yi-ch’ieh chu-fo chi chu-fo a-nuo-to-lo san-mao san-p’u-t’i-fa chieh ts’ung tz’u ching ch’u (all buddhas and their teaching of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment are born from this sutra). Neither Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, nor Paramartha includes arhat samyak-sanbuddha (arhans, fully-enlightened ones). Paramartha specifies ts’ung tz’u fu ch’u (born from this merit), while Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Hsuan-tsang, and Yi-ching have ts’ung tz’u ching ch’u (born from this sutra), and Dharmagupta has tz’u ch’u (born from this). Note that nirjata (born from) is used when referring to the creation of any of the bodies of a buddha. This distinction is also noted by Vasubandhu.

&n
bsp; And how so? Buddha dharmas, Subhuti, ‘buddha

  dharmas’ are spoken of by the Tathagata as no buddha

  dharmas. Thus are they called ‘buddha dharmas.’”

  And how is it that a bodhisattva’s body of merit and a buddha’s reward body arise from this teaching? Because this teaching is the teaching of buddhas, it is their dharma body. And it is their dharma body because it is no teaching of buddhas. Thus, it is called the teaching of buddhas. Every teaching focuses on this to the exclusion of that, upholds one thing and ignores or denies something else. The teaching of prajna focuses on nothing, upholds nothing. It is no teaching. Only such a teaching as this can clear away all obstacles to liberation, which is the bodhisattva’s goal.

  It should be noted that the word dharma also refers to certain characteristics possessed by a buddha, as distinct from those possessed by an arhan. Thus, buddha dharmas are also the attributes of a buddha’s sanbhoga-kaya, or reward body, just as the set of thirty-two attributes are those of a buddha’s nirmana-kaya, or apparition body. Although the attributes of the reward body are said to be infinite, eighteen avenika-dharmas (unique attributes) are usually mentioned: such things as blameless behavior, perfect mindfulness, constant energy, unfailing wisdom, and knowledge of the past, future, and present. Since these attributes are the result of a bodhisattva’s acts of merit, this meaning of dharma is also appropriate here. Certainly, in the longer perfection of wisdom sutras, the term buddha dharmas has both meanings: the teachings of buddhas as well as the attributes of buddhas. This is because the body is the teaching and vice versa.

  Finally, in distinguishing what is basically indistinguishable, it is a buddha’s reward body that possesses the virtue of prajna wisdom, while a buddha’s real body is said to possess the virtue of absolute independence, and a buddha’s apparition body the virtue of liberation. This sutra, however, does not separate these three but treats them as different facets of the same diamond.

  In the Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Lines, the Buddha asks Manjushri, “Have you realized unobstructed wisdom?” And Manjushri answers, “I am the unobstructed. How can the unobstructed realize the unobstructed?”

  Lao-tzu says, “Thus, the sage performs effortless deeds and teaches wordless lessons.” (Taoteching: 2)

  Asanga says, “When the cause of self-nature is grasped, the others are born from this. Only the dharmas of buddhas can lead to the highest merit.” (17) Vasubandhu comments, “This says enlightenment is our dharma body, and because of its uncreated nature, we call it our ‘self-nature.’ These other bodies are the result of this and not the cause of this. However, because these ‘others,’ namely our incarnation and reward bodies, are themselves causes and are able to support enlightenment, they thus produce even more merit. What the Tathagata means by ‘no buddha dharmas’ is that the dharmas of enlightenment can only be realized by buddhas and are thus the cause of the highest merit.”

  T’ung-li says, “The Buddha says, ‘What I mean by the enlightenment of buddhas and the dharmas they teach is not the enlightenment of buddhas or the dharmas they teach.’ This is because buddhas do not actually have a self. Although they become buddhas, they are free of the appearance of becoming. Although they attain enlightenment, they are free of the appearance of attainment. And although they teach dharmas, they are free of the appearance of teaching.”

  Te-ch’ing says, “This chapter uses formless merit to demonstrate the formless dharma. Subhuti already understands the truth of formlessness but does not know how to use the truth of formlessness to obtain formless merit or whether such merit would be better than what has form. Hence, the Buddha uses the example of charity that has form and finds it unequal to the merit of keeping in mind a single gatha of this sutra. Because all buddhas come from prajna, thus its merit is great. Likewise, people say, ‘The mother is known by her children.’ But although prajna can give birth to the dharmas of buddhas, prajna is not itself a dharma of buddhas. Thus is it said that buddha dharmas are no buddha dharmas.”

  Wang Jih-hsiu says, “What the Buddha is referring to by buddha dharmas is the dharma of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.”

  Manjushri says, “It’s like seeing without seeing or hearing without hearing. Both the mind and the world are utterly empty and perfectly pure. Thus, buddha dharmas are not buddha dharmas. Once someone realizes the Way, they realize that all forms are empty and only use the knowledge they obtain as medicine to cure the mind’s illnesses of delusion and attachment.” (quoted by Hung-lien)

  Conze says, “In the Absolute, there can be no distinction between subject and attribute, between a buddha and his dharmas, and in consequence they are not a buddha’s dharmas. They are also not special to buddhas, but common to all things, as we are told in Chapter Seventeen. The dharmas of the Buddha lie beyond the categories of reflective thought, and each of us must realize them in ourselves.”

  Yen Ping says, “Whatever the Buddha says, he negates.”

  Tao-ch’uan says, “Here’s a bitter melon in exchange for that sweet date of yours.” [The k’u-kua (bitter melon), Momordica charantta, is eaten in China to reduce heat.]

  Textual note: Neither Kumarajiva, Paramartha, nor Yi-ching includes the second ‘buddha dharmas.’ Nor do Kumarajiva or Bodhiruci include the final sentence. At the end of the last sentence, Hsuan-tsang has an additional chu-fo-fa (buddha dharmas).

  Chapter Nine: “Tell me, Subhuti. Do those who find the river think, ‘I have attained the goal of finding the river’?”

  Subhuti replied, “No, indeed, Bhagavan. Those who find the river do not think, ‘I have attained the goal of finding the river.’ And why not? Bhagavan, they do not find any such dharma. Thus are they said to ‘find the river.’ They do not find a sight, nor do they find a sound, a smell, a taste, a touch, or a dharma. Thus are they said to ‘find the river.’ Bhagavan, if those who found the river should think, ‘I have attained the goal of finding the river,’ they would be attached to a self, they would be attached to a being, a life, and a soul.”

  The Buddha said, “Tell me, Subhuti. Do those who return once more think, ‘I have attained the goal of returning once more’?”

  Subhuti replied, “No, indeed, Bhagavan. Those who return once more do not think, ‘I have attained the goal of returning once more.’ And why not? Bhagavan, they do not find any such dharma as ‘returning once more.’ Thus are they said to ‘return once more.’”

  The Buddha said, “Tell me, Subhuti. Do those who return no more think, ‘I have attained the goal of returning no more’?”

  Subhuti replied, “No, indeed, Bhagavan. Those who return no more do not think ‘I have attained the goal of returning no more.’ And why not? Bhagavan, they do not find any such dharma as ‘returning no more.’ Thus are they said to ‘return no more.’”

  The Buddha said, “Tell me, Subhuti. Do those who are free from rebirth think, ‘I have attained freedom from rebirth’?”

  Subhuti replied, “No, indeed, Bhagavan. Those who are free from rebirth do not think, ‘I have attained freedom from rebirth.’ And why not? Bhagavan, there is no such dharma as ‘freedom from rebirth.’ Thus are they said to be ‘free from rebirth.’ If, Bhagavan, those who are free from rebirth should think, ‘I have attained freedom from rebirth,’ they would be attached to a self, they would be attached to a being, a life, and a soul.

  “And how so? Bhagavan, the Tathagata, the Arhan, the Fully-Enlightened One has declared that I am foremost among those who dwell free of passion. Bhagavan, although I am free from rebirth and without desires, I do not think, ‘I am free from rebirth and without desires.’ Bhagavan, if I thought, ‘I have attained freedom from rebirth,’ the Tathagata would not have singled me out by saying, ‘Foremost among those who dwell free of passion is the noble son Subhuti. For he dwells nowhere at all. Thus is he called one who dwells free of passion who “dwells free of passion.”’

  CHAPTER NINE

  WHILE SUBHUTI RE-CONSIDERS the nature of enlightenment and th
e origin of “sages,” the Buddha asks him about the four stages of practice through which Subhuti and his fellow shravakas have passed on their way to “sagehood.” As their names make clear, all four reflect a concern with ending the cycle of birth and death. But if these would-be sages succeeded in not being reborn, how then could they “arise from the uncreated?” Such a goal is sterile. There is no compassion in Subhuti’s path. Despite its emphasis on detachment, it is self-centered, not being-centered. The shravaka’s quest for no rebirth is not the same as the bodhisattva’s realization of no birth. The difference is profound. Shravakas dam the river. Bodhisattvas swallow it at its source.

  Despite his interest in the bodhisattva path, Subhuti is still a shravaka, “one who hears from a distance” or “above the din.” This word originally referred to those disciples who actually heard the Buddha teach. These early disciples, and their later followers, saw themselves progressing through a series of four stages to the final goal of arhanship, which they considered more or less equivalent to buddhahood. But from the Mahayana point of view, shravakas are still far from the goal, for they are held back by the selfishness of their detachment from the self. Although Subhuti has attained the final fruit of such practice, he clearly has not yet attained the goal of buddhahood. Still, Subhuti is not about to slight his fellow shravakas and does his best to represent their level of attainment as essentially equal to that of bodhisattvas. For they, too, are free of attachments to a self, a being, a life, and a soul. But they neither produce nor obtain the infinite body of merit that comes from liberating others. For unless detachment is based on compassion, it may lead to nirvana, but it does not lead to buddhahood.