Vajrakkhedika (Diamond Cutter) · 4 of 19 · tr. E.B. Cowell, F. Max Müller, and J. Kakakusu
Section 1d
In the next or third 500 years, they will be strong in 'much learning,' i.e.
bahu s ruta, religious knowledge.
In the next or fourth 500 years, they will be strong in founding monasteries, &c.
In the last or fifth 500 years, they will be strong in fighting and reproving.
The pure (lit.
white) Law will then become invisible."' The question therefore amounts to this, whether in that corrupt age the law of Buddha will be understood?
and the answer is, that there will be always some excellent Boddhisatvas who, even in the age of corruption, can understand the preaching of the Law.] of the decay of the good Law, who, when these very words of the Sûtras are being preached, will frame a true idea[1]?' The Bhagavat said: 'Do not speak thus, Subhûti.
Yes, there will be some beings in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the decay of the good Law, who will frame a true idea when these very words are being preached.
'And again, O Subhûti, there will be noble-minded Bodhisattvas, in the future, in the last time, in the last moment, in the last 500 years, during the decay of the good Law, there will be strong and good and wise beings, who, when these very words of the Sûtras are being preached, will frame a true idea.
But those noble-minded Bodhisattvas, O Subhûti, will not have served one Buddha only, and the stock [1.
Will understand them properly.] of their merit will not have been accumulated under one Buddha only; on the contrary, O Subhûti, those noble-minded Bodhisattvas will have served many hundred thousands of Buddhas, and the stock of their merit will have been accumulated under many hundred thousands of Buddhas; and they, when these very words of the Sûtras are being preached, will obtain one and the same faith[1].
They are known, O Subhûti, by the Tathâgata through his Buddha-knowledge; they are seen, O Subhûti, by the Tathâgata through his Buddha-eye; they are understood, O Subhûti, by the Tathâgata.
All these, O Subhûti, will produce and will hold fast an immeasurable and innumerable stock of merit.
And why?
Because, O Subhûti, there does not exist in those noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of self, there does not exist the idea of a being, the idea of a living being, the idea of a person.
Nor does there exist, O Subhûti, for these noble-minded Bodhisattvas the idea of quality (dharma), nor of no-quality.
Neither does there exist, O Subhûti, any idea (sa mgñ â) or no-idea.
And why?
Because, O Subhûti, if there existed for these noble-minded 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 eka k ittaprasâda.
Childers gives eka k itta, as an adjective, with the meaning of 'having the same thought,' and k ittaprasâda, as faith in Buddha.
Themes
◆Apophatic Theologytheology
Describing the divine only by negation—God transcends all positive categories and concepts; the via negativa.
The state of the Bodhisattva is described through negation, stating what does not exist (no idea of self, being, quality, etc.).
Eckhart's Abgeschiedenheit/Gelassenheit — radical letting-go of will, image, and grasping that opens the soul to God; distinct from inner_silence (quietness) and from material renunciation, and adjacent to Sufi tark and Buddhist non-grasping as a practice rather than a metaphysical claim.
The passage describes a radical non-grasping of concepts and self-identity as the source of merit, aligning with the practice of letting-go.
Disciplined inward attention — sitting, focused, or open-awareness practice — as a stand-alone term that umbrellas active_contemplation, inner_silence, and dhyana-style sitting.
The text explicitly lists 'strong in meditation' as a characteristic of practitioners in the second 500-year period.
The Buddhist doctrine that all phenomena lack independent self-nature; emptiness as the positive recognition that things arise only in dependence on conditions — distinct from kenoma's mere deficiency.
[auto] The passage centrally teaches that Bodhisattvas lack ideas of self, being, person, or quality (dharma), reflecting the core Mahayana doctrine of emptiness.