..續本文上一頁nded 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,

　　[1. I am doubtful about the exact meaning of ekakittaprasâda. Childers gives ekakitta, as an adjective, with the meaning of ”having the same thought,” and kittaprasâda, as faith in Buddha. But ekakittaprasâda may also be ”faith producted by one thought,” ”immediate faith,” and this too is a recognised form of faith in Buddhism. See Sukhâvatî, pp. 71, 108.]

　　{p. 118}

　　they would believe in a being, they would believe in a living being, they would believe in a person. And why

　　 Because, O Subhûti, neither quality nor no-quality is to be accepted by a noble-minded Bodhisattva. Therefore this hidden saying has been preached by the Tathâgata: "By those who know the teaching of the Law, as like unto a raft, all qualities indeed must be abandoned; much more no-qualities[1]"” (6)

　　VII.

　　 And again Bhagavat spoke thus to the venerable Subhûti: ”What do you think, O Subhûti, is there anything (dharma) that was known by the Tathâgata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, or anything that was taught by the Tathâgata

　　”

　　 After these words, the venerable Subhûti 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 Tathâgata under the name of the highest perfect knowledge, nor is there anything that is taught by the Tathâgata. And why

　　 Because that thing which was known or taught by the Tathâgata is incomprehensible and inexpressible. It is neither a thing nor no-thing. And why

　　 Because the holy persons[2] are of imperfect power[3].” (7)

　　[1. The same line is quoted in the Abhidharmakosha-vyâkhyâ.

　　2. Âryapudgala need not be Bodhisattvas, but all who have entered on the path leading to Nirvâna.

　　3. Harlez: ”Parceque les entités supérieures sont produites telles sans être réelles et parfaites pour cela.” If samskrita can be used in Buddhist literature in the sense of perfect, and prabhâvitâ as power, my translation might pass, but even then the ”because” remains difficult.]

　　{p. 119}

　　VIII.

　　 Bhagavat said: ”What do you think, O Subhûti, 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 Tathâgatas, would that son or daughter of a good family on the strength of this produce a large stock of merit

　　” Subhûti 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 Tathâgata as the stock of merit, that was preached by the Tathâgata as no-stock of merit. Therefore the Tathâgata preaches: "A stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed!"” Bhagavat said: ”And if, O Subhûti, 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 Tathâgatas, and if another after taking from this treatise of the Law one Gâthâ 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 Subhûti, the highest perfect knowledge of the holy and enlightened Tathâgatas is produced from it; the blessed Buddhas are produced from it. An…

《金剛經 Diamond-Cutter Translated by E· B· Cowell, F· Max Mulller, and J· Takakusu》全文未完，請進入下頁繼續閱讀…