Search

(3) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the eye of wisdom?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the eye of wisdom.”

(4) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the eye of truth?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the eye of truth.”

(5) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the Buddhic eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the Buddhic eye.”

(2) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of any physical phenomena?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! it is improbable that the Lord Buddha can be perceived by means of any physical phenomena. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as ‘physical phenomena,’ are not in reality ‘physical phenomena,’ these are merely termed ‘physical phenomena.’”

(1) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the physical eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the physical eye.”

(2) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Does the Lord Buddha possess the divine or spiritual eye?” Subhuti assented, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha truly possesses the divine or spiritual eye.”

(3) Subhuti thereupon addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! According as I am able to interpret the Lord Buddha’s instruction, it is improbable that the Lord Buddha may be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions.”

(2) Subhuti replied, saying: “A very considerable merit, Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, what is referred to does not partake of the nature of ordinary merit, and in this sense the Lord Buddha made mention of a ‘considerable’ merit.”

(4) But when the sun has set, Yajnavalkya, what light does a person here have? ' 'The moon, indeed, is his light/ said he, c for with the moon, indeed, as his light one sits, moves around, does his work, and returns/ ' Quite so, Yajnavalkya.

(508) Neither sight nor the eye in which sight resides is the sun? No. Yet of all the organs of sense the eye is the most like the sun? By far the most like. And the power which the eye possesses is a sort of effluence which is dispensed from the sun? Exactly. Then the sun is not sight, but the author of sight who is recognised by sight? True, he said. And this is he whom I call the child of the good, whom the good begat in his own likeness, to be in the visible world, in relation to sight and the things of sight, what the good is in the intellectual world in relation to mind and the things of mind: Will you be a little more explicit? he said. Why, you know, I said, that the eyes, when a person directs them towards objects on which the light of day is no longer shining, but the moon and stars only, see dimly, and are nearly blind; they seem to have no clearness of vision in them? Very true. But when they are directed towards objects on which the sun shines, they see clearly and there is sight in them? Certainly. And the soul is like the eye: when resting upon that on which truth and being shine, the soul perceives and understands, and is radiant with intelligence; but when turned towards the twilight of becoming and perishing, then she has opinion only, and goes blinking about, and is first of one opinion and then of another, and seems to have no intelligence? Just so.

(2) Subhuti thereupon enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! in what respect are enlightened disciples unaffected by considerations of ‘reward or merit’?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “Enlightened disciples do not aspire, in a spirit of covetousness, to rewards commensurate with their merit; therefore, I declare that they are entirely unaffected by considerations of ‘reward or merit.’”

(1) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of his perfect material body?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! it is improbable that the Lord Buddha can be perceived by means of his perfect material body. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as a ‘perfect material body,’ is not in reality a ‘perfect material body,’ it is merely termed a ‘perfect material body.’”

(6) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Concerning the sands of the Ganges, did the Lord Buddha declare that these were grains of sand?” Subhuti assenting, said: “Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha declared that these were grains of sand.”

(2) Upon that occasion, the virtuous and venerable Subhuti enquired of the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! in ages to come, will sentient beings destined to hear this Law, engender within their minds the essential elements of faith?” The Lord Buddha replied, saying: “Subhuti, it cannot be asserted that these are sentient beings, or that these are not sentient beings. And why? Because, Subhuti, regarding ‘sentient beings,’ the Lord Buddha declared that in reality these are not ‘sentient beings,’ they are merely termed ‘sentient beings.’”