(255) There is no path through the air, a man is not a Samana by outward acts. No creatures are eternal; but the awakened (Buddha) are never shaken.

(18) Indeed, it is not possible for the embodied being to give up all actions completely; He who renounces the desire for the fruits of action is called (the true) Tyagi (renouncer).

(254) There is no path through the air, a man is not a Samana by outward acts. The world delights in vanity, the Tathâgatas (the Buddhas) are free from vanity.

(3) Man does not match the actionless state of Brahman by mere non-performance of work, nor does he attain perfection by renunciation only.

(3) There is danger of doing this. I do not mean that no trouble is to be taken, but the right behaviour lies in the middle way between being and non-being. If one can attain purposelessness through purpose, then the thing has been grasped. Supreme and without confusion, one goes along in an, independent way. Furthermore, one must not fall victim to the ensnaring world. The ensnaring world is whc e the tive kinds of dark demons disport themselves.

(1) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple asserts that the Lord Buddha comes or goes, sits or reclines, obviously he has not understood the meaning of my discourse. And why? Because, the idea ‘Buddha’ implies neither coming from anywhere, nor going to anywhere, and hence the synonym ‘Buddha!’”

(3) “Subhuti, the Lord Buddha by his prescience, is perfectly cognisant of all such potential disciples, and for these also there is reserved an immeasurable merit. And why? Because, the minds of these disciples will not revert to such arbitrary concepts of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, a personality, qualities or ideas coincident with Law, or existing apart from the idea of Law. And why? Because, assuming the permanency and reality of phenomena, the minds of these disciples would be involved in such distinctive ideas as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Affirming the permanency and reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, their minds would inevitably be involved in resolving these same definitions. Postulating the inviolate nature of qualities or ideas which have an existence apart from the Law, there yet remain to be explained these abstruse distinctions—an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Therefore, enlightened disciples ought not to affirm the permanency or reality of qualities or ideas coincident with Law, nor postulate as being of an inviolate nature, qualities or ideas having an existence apart from the concept of Law.”

(6) The Lord Buddha, thereupon, addressed Subhuti, saying: “Thus it is with an enlightened disciple: if he were to expatiate after this manner, ‘I must become oblivious to every idea of sentient life,’ he could not be described as fully enlightened. And why? Because, there is no Law whereby a disciple can be approved as ‘fully enlightened.’ Therefore, the Lord Buddha declared that within the realm of spiritual Law, there is neither an entity, a being, a living being, nor a personality.”