Fulfilment of the Way
Her English
The original
It was spoken:1
lines 1-01
The Cowherd was staying at Calvary.2 There he sat in the centre of the square courtyard, surrounded by his congregation of monks and nuns, and addressed young Benedict3 “May you be inspired, Benedict, to preach to those who seek awakening, wishing to benefit all beings. Share our teachings with them, and surely they will find the Way they seek.”
lines 1-01–1-04
Irenaeus, who sat on the side listening4, wondered to himself “Will Benedict be speaking his own truths?5 Or will the Cowherd really be speaking through him?”
lines 1-04–1-05
Benedict, predicting Irenaeus’ thought, spoke aloud “When any of his students speak truthfully, they are vessels for his word.
lines 1-05–1-07
When we practice the teachings as our Cowherd taught us, we come to experience their true nature directly; and once we’ve become one with that true nature, all of our words flow directly from it.
lines 1-07–1-08
We do not contradict that true nature. That is what it means to follow the Cowherd.”
lines 1-08–1-09
Then Benedict, drawing upon the truth the Cowherd granted him, addressed him directly “Cowherd, you have beckoned me to teach the Way to the Saints, ‘Saint this, Saint that,’ but what does Saint refer to?6 What teachings do these Saints possess?
lines 1-09–1-11
I would not know where to find a Saint, nor their teachings, nor the Way — so tell me Cowherd — how is it that I may teach anyone the Way, let alone a Saint? What Saint shall I teach, and in which Way?
lines 1-11–1-14
Yet… when I give the teachings you have asked me to… if a Saint does not flinch, does not submit, does not lose faith, does not cower or turn away… this is their instruction in the Way, their experience of it.
lines 1-14–1-16
If a Saint remains devout following the Way, let them not become proud of their mind’s progression, for that Somethingness, is in truth Emptiness7 — the natural state of the mind is awoken.”
lines 1-16–1-18
Irenaeus’ curiosity was piqued, and he asked Benedict “If Somethingness is Emptiness, can such a Something even exist?
lines 1-18–1-19
Benedict replied “In this state of Emptiness, can we speak of Somethingness or Nothingness, can either be observed?”
lines 1-19–1-20
“No, wise Benedict, we cannot.”
lines 1-20
Left out, as a repetition
lines 1-20–1-21
“If in this state of Emptiness, neither can be observed, then why even wonder whether Somethingness exists that is Emptiness?”
lines 1-21–1-22
“Then what is this state of Emptiness you speak of?”
“Emptiness, dear Irenaeus, is unchanging and free from abstract thought8.”
lines 1-22–1-23
Irenaeus smiled at this, and praised Benedict “Excellently spoken Benedict! In those words one can recognise the true Saint, who shall not turn their back on Awakening.
lines 1-23–1-25
It would do well for any Saint-to-be to ponder them. Those who wish to follow the Way should study them; let them be remembered, learned, and practiced, for you have carefully harmonised its detail.”
lines 1-25–1-26
Wise Benedict sat ponderously for a moment, and then addressed the Cowherd again “Cowherd, I cannot find this thing you call ‘Saint,’ nor this thing you call ‘the Way,’ I cannot find or observe Something, I cannot use a mere name like ‘Saint?’
lines 1-26–1-29
Even that name has no ground to stand on, yet it is not groundless either… That name has never manifested, so it cannot be said to exist or not exist...
lines 1-29–1-30
There is something I understand now: When a Saint hears such teachings and does not cower or turn away, then this Saint is Awoken — a Saint such as that is inseparable from the Way, following it firmly through pious practice —
lines 1-30–1-31
They know they must not take their stand on their senses, nor on their abstraction, rationale, or cognition; for if one takes their stand on things one is moving in the realm of mere constructed things, and if one takes their stand on cognition than they are moving in the realm of mere constructed cognition. It is not possible to follow the Way while reliant upon these manifestations; no one who is driven by things or by thoughts is able to grasp the Way.”
lines 1-31–1-34
Wise Irenaeus asked Benedict what he meant by grasping the Way, and Benedict replied “When we practice the Way, dear Irenaeus, and let go of things and of thoughts, we must even let go of the Way itself. That is the noble manner that the great Saint’s practice the Way, not even daring to grasp Truth itself! For no word or philosophy can approach it.
lines 1-34–1-39
If Truth could be grasped, then countless Saints would have found it with no need of faith. But it was faith in the Awakening they experienced, and its wisdom, that the Saints found understanding... They did not react to that understanding with pleasure or joy, they did not see it within things or without things or separate from things, nor did they see it through their thoughts. It was not seen as within Somethingness, or outside of Somethingness, or separate from Somethingness. All phenomena were let go of, and there was no phenomena to be grasped. Even Nothingness was let go of… Only through complete surrender of these could the Saints find conviction through their faith…
Lokakṣema’s Chinese, 179 CE
Cowherd, this is the Way of the Saint.
lines 1-39–1-40
Let them examine it, let them ask ‘What is this Way? For whom is this Way? Is it the Way if I cannot find it?’ If they ask these unanswerable questions and do not cower or turn away, then that Saint is truly inseparable from the Way.”
lines 1-40–1-42
Left out
lines 1-42–1-43
Left out
lines 1-43–1-44
Left out, as a repetition
lines 1-44–1-45
Left out, as a repetition
lines 1-45–1-46
Left out
lines 1-46–1-47
Left out
lines 1-47–1-48
Left out
lines 1-48–1-50
Irenaeus, inspired, spoke in turn “I now understand the many pitfalls. To practice in things or in thoughts is to practice in mere form, mere grasping.
lines 1-50–1-54
Any name we would give to the true Saint’s Way would not be a true name!
lines 1-54–1-56
Left out
lines 1-56
Instead a true Saint must move beyond seeing and practicing, even beyond the concepts of seeing and practicing. They must not rely upon any particular practice, instead treading the Way without sight. Because no phenomena come from anywhere or hold anything, because all names cannot truly be given, the state of Emptiness is boundless and without limit. The state where a Saint discovers Awakening.”
Lokakṣema’s Chinese, 179 CE
Benedict spoke again through the Cowherd’s influence “All Saints received a prediction from the Saints who came before them ‘You will reach Awakening.’ Although they dwell in Emptiness they do not grasp at it, they do not think about it or make claims about it, they do not say “I am in this state,” or “I am sitting in meditation.” By treading the Way, one loses all doubts about it.”
Lokakṣema’s Chinese, 179 CE
Iraenaeus asked “Can anyone point to or perceive this Emptiness where a Saint dwells?”
Lokakṣema’s Chinese, 179 CE
Benedict replied “No, it cannot be shown or seen dear Iraenaeus. Even a Saint cannot know or understand it directly.”
Lokakṣema’s Chinese, 179 CE
Thus was it spoken, heard, and received.
The Gāndhārī is the oldest Perfection of Wisdom yet found: chapter 1 on a birch-bark scroll of the Split Collection, written in Kharoṣṭhī in the first century CE, as transcribed in the Corpus of Gāndhārī Texts by Stefan Baums and Andrew Glass, after the edition of Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima. It is given here as a reading text: lighter letters are restored by the editors, … marks a gap in the bark, and each line ends at one of the scribe's own pauses. The scroll does not carry one passage of the chapter and breaks off at line 1-56; there the original is Lokakṣema's Chinese translation of the same sūtra, made in 179 CE. Source
Notes
By the editor.
- The text is the Gāndhārī Perfection of Wisdom, written in Kharoṣṭhī on a fragmentary birchbark scroll of the Split collection. Radiocarbon tests give a probable date between 47 and 147 CE, among the earliest Mahāyāna witnesses. It was published by Falk and Karashima in 2012 and 2013 without translation. Lokakṣema's Chinese version of 179 CE is the nearest relative. ↩
- Her Cowherd stands for the Lord, the Buddha, and Calvary for Vulture Peak at Rājagṛha, where the sutra's opening places him with a great assembly of monks, 1,250 in the Sanskrit tradition. Her renaming sets the Gospel hill in the place of the Indian one. Read with The Flower Sermon, where the Buddha also teaches on that mountain. ↩
- Benedict is Subhūti. In the older tradition he is the disciple "foremost in dwelling in peace," and in the Perfection of Wisdom he is the Buddha's chosen speaker. The Buddha asks him to reveal how a bodhisattva becomes skilled in the perfection of wisdom, and her address "preach to those who seek awakening" is that request. ↩
- Irenaeus is Śāriputra, called in the mainstream sutras "foremost of those of great wisdom." Salomon notes that in the Perfection of Wisdom he turns into the straight man, who must keep asking Subhūti to explain. His role reverses the old order, and the reader learns through his questions. ↩
- Śāriputra wonders whether Subhūti will speak by his own ability or through the Buddha's power. Subhūti knows what he is thinking and answers that whatever a disciple says is the Tathāgata's doing. This frame story opens the sutra, as Salomon points out, and it is what her Benedict does here. ↩
- "Saint" is bodhisattva, a being bound for awakening. Subhūti says he cannot find any object to which the word refers, and asks how he could teach one. A name with no referent is the sutra's first move, and it is the root of everything after. See What Does It Mean to Kill Buddha? for the same loosening of names. ↩
- This is śūnyatā, emptiness, the Perfection of Wisdom's teaching that things have no essence of their own. In the Gāndhārī text, Subhūti tells Śāriputra that form is without the essence of form, and likewise feeling and consciousness. The Heart Sūtra, a later compression, says "form is emptiness." She uses Somethingness and Emptiness in Ungrasped and in Women. ↩
- Buddhist philosophy calls the conceptual fabric vikalpa, and emptiness is its absence. Salomon points to a Gāndhārī line on thought and no-thought that differs from the Sanskrit and from Lokakṣema's Chinese, showing how the sutra grew. Her closing questions about showing and seeing carry the same turn. ↩