Vajrakkhedika (Diamond Cutter) · 7 of 19 · tr. E.B. Cowell, F. Max Müller, and J. Kakakusu
Section 1g
Therefore he is called an Anâgâmin.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, does an Arhat think in this wise: The fruit of an Arhat has been obtained by me?' Subhûti said: 'Not indeed, O Bhagavat, an Arhat does not think in this wise: The fruit of an Arhat has been obtained by me.
And why?
Because he is not an individual being, who is called an Arhat.
Therefore he is called an Arhat.
And if, O Bhagavat, an Arhat were to think in this wise: The state of an Arhat has been obtained by me, he would believe in a self, he would believe in a being, he would believe in a living being, he would believe in a person.
'And why?
I have been pointed out, O Bhagavat, by the holy and fully enlightened Tathâgata, as the foremost of those who dwell in virtue.
[1.
Ara n âvihârin.
Ra n a is strife, then sin, therefore ara n a might be peace and virtue, only the a would be short.
Probably ara n avihârin was formed with reference to âra n ya-vihârin, living in the forest, retired from the world, and in peace, just as arhan, worthy, was changed into arahan, the destroyer of sin.
Beal translates, 'one who delights in the mortification of an Ara n yaka (forest devotee).' De Harlez: 'chey de ceux qui ne sont plus attachés à la jouissance.'] I, O Bhagavat, am an Arhat, freed from passion.
And yet, O Bhagavat, I do not think in this wise: I am an Arhat, I am freed from passion.
If, O Bhagavat, I should think in this wise, that the state of an Arhat has been obtained by me, then the Tathâgata would not have truly prophesied of me, saying: "Subhûti, the son of a good family, the foremost of those dwelling in virtue, does not dwell anywhere, and therefore he is called a dweller in virtue, a dweller in virtue indeed!"' (9) X.
Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, is there anything (dharma) which the Tathâgata has adopted from the Tathâgata Dîpankara, the holy and fully enlightened?' Subhûti said: 'Not indeed, O Bhagavat; there is not anything which the Tathâgata has adopted from the Tathâgata Dîpankara, the holy and fully enlightened.' Bhagavat said: 'If, O Subhûti, a Bodhisattva should say: "I shall create numbers of worlds," he would say what is untrue.
And why?
Because, O Subhûti, when the Tathâgata preached: Numbers of worlds, numbers of worlds indeed!
they were preached by him as no-numbers.
Therefore they are called numbers of worlds.
'Therefore, O Subhûti, a noble-minded Bodhisattva should in this wise frame an independent [1.
A former Buddha.] mind, which is to be framed as a mind not believing in anything, not believing in form, not believing in sound, smell, taste, and anything that can be touched.
Now, for instance, O Subhûti, a man might have a body and a large body, so that his size should be as large as the king of mountains, Sumeru.
§ Ask Guru about this passage →Themes
Apophatic Theologytheology
Describing the divine only by negation—God transcends all positive categories and concepts; the via negativa.
[auto] The Tathagata and Arhat states are described entirely through negation of attributes and conceptualization.
All passages →Detachment Gelassenheitpraxis
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.
Subhuti emphasizes non-grasping of spiritual attainments, aligning with radical letting-go of will and image.
All passages →Opposites Transcendedanthropology
The dissolution of binary oppositions (male/female, inner/outer, above/below) as a mark of spiritual completion.
The passage transcends the binary of existence versus non-existence regarding spiritual states by negating the belief in a 'being' who obtains them.
All passages →Paradox As Teachingethics
Using apparent contradiction, reversal, or riddle to destabilise ordinary understanding and induce insight.
The text uses the paradox that one is named an Arhat precisely because they do not conceive themselves as such.
All passages →Poverty Of Spiritanthropology
Eckhart's radical reading of Matthew 5:3 — the saint as one who wants nothing, knows nothing, and has nothing, having emptied even the will and the self with which to receive God; distinct from renunciation_of_wealth (material poverty).
The Arhat claims no possession of the state, reflecting a spiritual poverty of wanting or knowing nothing.
All passages →Sunyata Emptinesssoteriology
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 explicitly defines enlightenment states by the absence of inherent self-nature or individual being.
All passages →Related passages · 9 parallels
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1l
“Need is there to understand that in proper truth we do but use the elements and syllables and phrases and written terms and words as an aid to our senses; inasmuch as when our soul is moved by spiritual energies unto spiritual things, our s…”
Shared concept: Apophatic Theology — Describing the divine only by negation—God transcends all positive categories and concepts; the via negativa. (derived)
christian_mysticism|Meister Eckhart's Sermons (Field translation)|IV-b
“No, they are certainly not; for the work of the angels is the will of God, and the will of God is the work of the angels; their service to us does not hinder their joy nor their working.
If God told an angel to go to a tree and pluck cater…”
Shared concept: Poverty Of Spirit — Eckhart's radical reading of Matthew 5:3 — the saint as one who wants nothing, knows nothing, and has nothing, having emptied even the will and the self with which to receive God; distinct from renunciation_of_wealth (material poverty). (derived)
christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 10 (part 9)
“"All sacrificing without faith and divine desire is an p.
219 abomination before God, and does not reach the gate of divine glory; but if man enters therein with the power of faith, he surrenders to it his free will, and desires by that me…”
Shared concept: Poverty Of Spirit — Eckhart's radical reading of Matthew 5:3 — the saint as one who wants nothing, knows nothing, and has nothing, having emptied even the will and the self with which to receive God; distinct from renunciation_of_wealth (material poverty). (derived)
theosophy|The Secret Doctrine|Page 5 (part 6)
“(See Weber, Max Muller, etc.) We labour under the impression that Colebrooke, "the highest authority" in such matters, had long ago settled the question by showing, that "the Hindus were in this instance the teachers, not the learners." [[V…”
Shared concept: Sunyata Emptiness — 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. (derived)
christian_mysticism|Meister Eckhart's Sermons (Field translation)|PREFACE-a
““ Meister Eckhart ,” who has been called the “Father of German thought,” was a Dominican monk, and one of the most profound thinkers of the Middle Ages.
He was born about 1260 A.D.
in Thuringia, and died at Cologne 1327 A.D.
In 1295 he w…”
Shared concept: Detachment Gelassenheit — 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. (derived)
hinduism|Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, Book IV|Sutra 16
“Nor do material objects defend upon a single mind, for how could they remain objective to others, if that mind ceased to think of them? This is but a further development of the thought of the preceding Sutra, carrying on the thought that, w…”
Shared concept: Detachment Gelassenheit — 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. (derived)
neoplatonism|Iamblichus: On the Mysteries|Chapter II
“The hostile opposition, therefore, in the things that are now proposed, may be easily dissolved by demonstrating the dignity of wholes with 226 respect to parts, and by recalling to your recollection the exempt transcendency of the Gods abo…”
Shared concept: Opposites Transcended — The dissolution of binary oppositions (male/female, inner/outer, above/below) as a mark of spiritual completion. (derived)
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 11, Section 1c
“And the perfect Peace guards each several individuality unalloyed by Its providential gift of peace, keeping all things without internal or mutual discord or confusion, and establishing all things, in the power of unswerving stability, so a…”
Shared concept: Paradox As Teaching — Using apparent contradiction, reversal, or riddle to destabilise ordinary understanding and induce insight. (derived)
western_esoteric|The Book of Ceremonial Magic (A.E. Waite)|Page 6 (part 1)
“PART I THE LITERATURE OF CEREMONIAL MAGIC Click to view THE SERPENT OF THE GARDEN OF THE HESPERIDES.
From a Greek Vase Painting.
CHAPTER I The antiquity of Magical Rituals § 1.
The Importance of Ceremonial Magic THE ordinary fields of ps…”
Shared concept: Paradox As Teaching — Using apparent contradiction, reversal, or riddle to destabilise ordinary understanding and induce insight. (derived)
Contrasts · where traditions diverge
christian_mysticism|The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme|Chapter 4 (part 2)
“91 "Christ never said, 'I, in my human selfhood, am the voice of God, I am speaking as God, in or with God,' &c.; but He said, 'The words which I speak are the Father's, who lives in me '—that is to say, who lives in my human or natural sel…”
The passages contrast in their views on the nature of enlightenment and the divine. Passage A emphasizes the non-individual nature of enlightenment and the rejection of a permanent self, while Passage B emphasizes a personal, individual God and the divine nature of Christ.
hinduism|The Bhagavad Gita|Chapter XIII, Section 1a
“CHAPTER XIII.
The Deity said: This body, O son of Kuntî!
is called Kshetra , and the learned call him who knows it the Kshetra g ña.
.
And know me also, O descendant of Bharata!
to be the Kshetra g ña in all Kshetras.
The knowledge of…”
Both passages explore the nature of the self and the ultimate reality, emphasizing the transcendence of individual identity and the interconnectedness of all things. The Bhagavad Gita discusses the concept of Kshetra and Kshetra-gña, while the Diamond Sutra talks about the non-existence of a fixed self in the context of an Arhat.