Chapter 30
]
The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a good disciple, whether man or woman, were to take infinite worlds and ‘reduce’ them to minute particles of dust; what think you, would the aggregate of all those particles of dust be great?” Subhuti replied, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! the aggregate of all those particles of dust would be exceedingly great. And why? Because, if all those were in reality ‘minute particles of dust,’ the Lord Buddha would not have declared them to be ‘minute particles of dust.’ And why? Because, the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon ‘minute particles of dust,’ declared that in reality those are not ‘minute particles of dust,’ they are merely termed ‘minute particles of dust.’”[1]
Subhuti continuing, addressed the Lord Buddha, saying: “Honoured of the Worlds! what the Lord Buddha discoursed upon as ‘infinite worlds,’ these are not in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ they are merely termed ‘infinite worlds.’ And why? Because, if these were in reality ‘infinite worlds,’ there would of necessity be unity and eternity of matter. But the Lord Buddha, discoursing upon the ‘unity and eternity of matter,’ declared that there is neither ‘unity’ nor ‘eternity of matter,’ therefore it is merely termed ‘unity and eternity of matter.’”
The Lord Buddha thereupon declared unto Subhuti, “Belief in the unity or eternity of matter is incomprehensible;[2] and only common, worldly-minded people, for purely materialistic reasons, covet this hypothesis.”
[1] These minute particles of dust, like the great worlds which are composed of them, are deceptive forms of natural phenomena, equally unreal and evanescent. The minute particles which we observe floating in space, are carried hither and thither by atmospheric currents, and eventually pass into regions beyond our cognisance. So, also, with the immense worlds revolving in space; their ever-recurring phenomena of light and darkness, heat and cold, changing seasons, transient scenes of mountain and valley, river and plain. These things indicate that all are ephemeral, and entirely subject to irrevocable laws of change and decay.—_Chinese Annotation_.
“Because, what was preached as a mass of many atoms by the Tathagata, that was preached as no-mass of atoms by the Tathagata, and therefore it is called ‘a mass of many atoms.’”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.
“What then, if Buddha speaks of all these particles, then they are not really what they are called, it is but a mere name, World-Honoured One!”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.
[2] “Bhagavat said, and a belief in matter itself, O Subhuti, is inestimable and inexpressible; it is neither a thing nor a no-thing, and this is known by children and ignorant persons.”—_The Vagrakkhedika_. Max Müller.
“Annihilation of matter is inconceivable, but annihilation of all its forms and qualities is conceivable.” _The World as Idea and Will_. Schopenhauer.
If the worlds were real and permanent, they would always retain their original forms and primordial natures, and be subject neither to the influence of time nor the Law of change.—_Chinese Annotation_.
“Subhuti, this characteristic of the one ‘harmonious principle,’ is a thing which cannot be spoken of in words; it is only the vain philosophy of the world, which has grasped the idea of explaining this.”—_Kin-Kong-King_. Beal.
This noteworthy statement seems to militate against some opinions expressed in Europe regarding the Buddhist theory of “matter.” According to our Chinese text, it does not appear that Sakyamuni Buddha categorically denied the “presence” or “existence” of matter in the universe, but endeavoured rather to indicate the diversified and evanescent nature of its “forms” and “qualities.” Many devout Buddhists regard even the smallest particle of dust as containing a mysterious and elusive element—probably what we are disposed to term “a spiritual element,” or “principle of life”—and these are not unreasonably regarded as being altogether inscrutable, and therefore “incomprehensible.”
[