Vajrakkhedika (Diamond Cutter) · 15 of 19 · tr. E.B. Cowell, F. Max Müller, and J. Kakakusu
Section 1o
Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, has the Tathâgata the bodily eye?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathâgata has the bodily eye.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, has the Tathâgata the heavenly eye?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathâgata has the heavenly eye.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, has the Tathâgata the eye of knowledge?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathâgata has the eye of knowledge.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, has the Tathâgata the eye of the Law?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathâgata has the eye of the Law.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, has the Tathâgata the eye of Buddha?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, the Tathâgata has the eye of Buddha.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, as many grains of sand as there are in the great river Gangâ--were they preached by the Tathâgata as grains of sand?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, so it is, O Sugata, they were preached as grains of sand by the Tathâgata.' Bhagavat said: 'What do you think, O Subhûti, if there were as many Gangâ rivers as there are grains of sand in the great river Gangâ; and, if there were as many worlds as there are grains of sand in these, would these worlds be many?' Subhûti said: 'So it is, O Bhagavat, so it is, O Sugata, these worlds would be many.' Bhagavat said: 'As many beings as there are in all those worlds, I know the manifold trains of thought of them all.
And why?
Because what was preached as the train of thoughts, the train of thoughts indeed, O Subhûti, that was preached by the Tathâgata as no-train of thoughts, and therefore it is called the train of thoughts.
And why?
Because, O Subhûti, a past thought is not perceived, a future thought is not perceived, and the present thought is not perceived.' (18) XIX.
'What do you think, O Subhûti, if a son or a daughter of a good family should fill this sphere of a million millions of worlds with the seven treasures, and give it as a gift to holy and fully enlightened Buddhas, would that son or daughter of a good family produce on the strength of this a large stock of merit?' Subhûti said: 'Yes, a large one.' Bhagavat said: 'So it is, Subhûti, so it is; that son or daughter of a good family would produce on the strength of this a large stock of merit, immeasurable and innumerable.
And why?
Because what was preached as a stock of merit, a stock of merit indeed, O Subhûti, that was preached as no-stock of merit by the Tathâgata, and therefore it is called a stock of merit.
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 Bodhisattva is praised for believing all things are without self, reflecting a radical letting-go of grasping and ego-image.
The doctrine of the universe as boundless and without center or circumference, populated by innumerable worlds — Bruno's rejection of the closed Aristotelian sphere; the divine and the cosmos as ontologically infinite.
The dialogue uses the metaphor of innumerable grains of sand to describe a boundless multitude of worlds and beings.
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 phenomena as lacking inherent nature ('numbers of worlds... spoken of as no-numbers', 'all things are without self').