Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The History of Buddhist Thought c22: Chapter XIV. The Lotus of the True Doctrine

The History of Buddhist Thought c22

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XIV. The Lotus of the True Doctrine

c22.2

THE problems of the composition of the Mahāyāna Scriptures are much more complex than what we find in the eighteen schools. These schools had a body of Scripture which was essentially the same for all. Even the avadānas of the Sarvāstivādins were not an attempt to compile new suttas to be added to the original collection. But the Mahāyānists deliberately composed new discourses on the model of the old. These works begin with the same phraseology, “ thus have I heard ” (the words which Ānanda is held to have used when reciting the suttas at the first Council), and they continue with the statement that Buddha was dwelling at a certain place. Then follows a discourse very different from the matter of the old suttas. What view the authors held about historical facts is not clear. It may be that the structure of the discourse was considered a mere convention, and that enthusiasm for the truth of the doctrines expounded produced the conviction that it must have been the primitive teaching.

c22.3

These works, which teach the “ great career ” (mahāyāna), are opposed to the “ hearer’s ” or disciple’s career (śrāvaka-yāna) and the pratyekabuddha’s career. This last is not important except as being one of the possible means of winning enlightenment recognized by the older teaching. The disciple’s career is that which aims at attaining arahatship and winning Nirvāṇa as in all the older schools, and these are usually grouped together and referred to as Hīnayāna. This is a term which has become popularized as the translation of a phrase used by the Chinese pilgrims, who seem to have known it as a convenient name for all schools which were not Mahāyāna. But this is not the way the term is used in the Sanskrit texts. The texts when referring to definite schools always speak of śrāvaka-yāna and pratyekabuddha-yāna, but hīnayāna, which very rarely occurs, is used generally for “ low or base career ”.¹ “Career” is *yāna*. This was first pointed out by Dr. Dasgupta.¹ There is no reason to translate it “vehicle”, merely because Burnouf did so nearly a century ago. The three careers happen to be mentioned in a simile of three chariots in chapter 3 of the *Lotus*, but as vehicles they are not called *yāna* but *ratha*, chariots.

c22.4

¹ The material has been collected by S. C. Vidyābhūṣaṇa, JRAS., 1900, 29.

c22.5

¹ *Hist. Indian Philos.*, i, 125; see also J. Rahder, *Daśabhūmika-sūtra*, pref., p. xx.

c22.6

The doctrine taught in the Mahāyāna discourses varies according to the different schools, and even in the same school according to the aspect prominent in the mind of the compiler. In the *Lotus* it is the omniscience of the Buddhas, and the doctrine that all beings may attain the state of Buddha. This state is obtained by becoming a bodhisattva, and the bodhisattvas come to be the chief objects of religious enthusiasm. They are individualized as half-mythical beings who undertake to save the world, and then the advantages of worshipping and winning the favour of these great beings is extolled rather than the gigantic labour of becoming such a saviour. The Buddhas and bodhisattvas are conceived as mighty beneficent beings rivalling the gods of the surrounding Hinduism. They may not have been conceived as gods in the sense of the ultimate reality of things, but popular thought was not concerned with such problems. It sought objects of worship, and it found them in the Buddhas and bodhisattvas who became little else than the gods of the old polytheism under other names. The element of devotion (*bhakti*) was thus introduced into Buddhism. “Several scholars,” says La Vallée Poussin, “regard the origin of the devotion to the Buddhas as a real puzzle (Max Müller) and believe that it is to be found in the influence of the ‘barbarians’, notably the Mazdaeans—an influence which was exercised especially in Northern India, the Panjab, and Kashmir, where religious statuary reached such high development.”² There is no doubt about Persian influence in India, but religious devotion is a psychical phenomenon. It is a natural tendency of the soul to seek an object of religious love and worship, and it appears in any state of society when a suitable object for its exercise appears or is conceived. To imagine that the Buddhists were not devotional until Mazdaean influence penetrated India seems to be superfluous. They were surrounded by religions of devotional enthusiasm, and all that was needed was a transference of Kṛṣṇa-worship or Śiva-worship to these new deities, the bodhisattvas. What Mazdeism may conceivably have done was to introduce a knowledge of some of these beings. But even in the case of Amitābha, the Buddha of “infinite light”, who is sometimes supposed to be of Persian origin, there is no proof of borrowing. “The whole ‘theology’ of the religion of Amitābha is Indian.” The question of borrowing in fact only concerns details of archæology.

c22.7

² *Mahāyāna* in *ERE*.

c22.8

All this concerns the doctrine as apprehended by the layman, but there are also sūtras of a more philosophical character. They teach the doctrine of the Void, a theory of the nature of ultimate reality. It appears to have no connection with the religious teaching about bodhisattvas, but we find it taken for granted in the most devotional type of sūtras. It was a development of the ancient teaching which analysed the supposed reality of the self into separate elements, and it is represented by two chief schools, the Mādhyamika and the Vijñānavāda.

c22.9

It was, however, the conception of Buddhism as a religion, a career in which the destiny of the individual could be realized, that formed the moving spirit of the new conceptions. It will be more profitable, instead of stating these doctrines in the abstract, to begin by analysing one of the most important of the Mahāyāna sūtras, the Lotus of the true Doctrine (Saddharmapuṇḍarīka). It shows us an early stage, in which the teaching is still defending itself in opposition to the older schools. It also shows the bodhisattva doctrine as subordinate to the teaching about the nature of a Buddha. It has been said to display Mahāyāna Buddhism with all its characteristic traits and all its excellences and defects, but that is saying too much. It presents only the popular side of the bodhisattva doctrine, and it has nothing to tell about the revolution in metaphysical thought achieved by the new movement. Though it mentions and takes for granted the doctrine of the Void, it is devoted to expounding the new doctrine of the nature of a Buddha, and in explaining away the pratyekabuddha and the career of a disciple or arhatship as errors or mere temporary expedients.

c22.10

As in the case of many other Mahāyāna sūtras there are peculiar problems connected with its composition. It consists largely of verse, but these passages are embedded in prose, which often repeats the matter of the verses. Evidently it does not now exist in its earliest form. Winternitz puts it in its primitive state at about A.D. 200. But the Mahāyāna movement was much earlier than this. The *Lotus*, however, is one of the earliest extant sūtras which deal with the bodhisattva doctrine and the new mythology of Buddha belief.

c22.11

The sūtra begins by stating in exactly the same phraseology as the oldest discourses that the Lord was staying at Vulture hill with twelve hundred arhats. But instead of the two or three who are usually mentioned, the names of nearly thirty are given. They are the most famous personages in the older legend, and the first five are the five disciples. Here is already a great difference from the Pāli suttas, for in these the five never appear as hearers. What we have here is a deliberate use of legend. The fact that the names are never so used in the Pāli suttas implies that in these suttas there was a real tradition. They did not deliberately manufacture history. If there had been a tendency to invention, the five would have been the first to be introduced.

c22.12

But here the list of hearers continues for several pages. There is Buddha’s foster-mother at the head of six thousand nuns, among whom is his wife Yaśodharā. Then follows what is the most important item in these sūtras, a group of 80,000 bodhisattvas, twenty-five of whom are named, and among them the two famous ones, Mañjuśrī and Avalokiteśvara. Enormous numbers of gods appear, those led by Śakra and Brahmā, hundreds of thousands of myriads of ten millions of nāgas, kinnaras, gandharvas, asuras, and garuḍas. The Lord is said to have just given a great exposition, and he enters a state of concentration. A ray of light bursts from the circle of hair between his eyes ¹ and illuminates 18,000 other Buddha-fields, and there is an earthquake. Mañjuśrī at great length explains to Maitreya (the future Buddha, who is here as a bodhisattva) that the Lord is going to begin a discourse (ch. 1).

c22.13

¹ This circle is one of the thirty-two marks of a Buddha.

c22.14

The Lord tells Śāriputra that only Buddhas ² can explain things. His knowledge surpasses that of all other beings, and he declares that he addresses all the disciples and pratyekabuddhas, all those who have been established in Nirvāṇa and have been released from the series of pains. This is a direct challenge to the older teaching, and the arhats present are puzzled. Śāriputra asks the Lord to explain himself, and the proud arhats get up and leave the assembly. It is the kind of thing that might quite well have happened at a Mahāyāna meeting in which there were some Sarvāstivādins present. Buddha declares that the meeting has been cleared of rubbish and that it is well that the proud ones are gone. The sole aim why a perfect Buddha appears in the world is to show to all beings the Tathāgata-knowledge. “By means of only one career I teach beings the doctrine, namely, the Buddha-career. No second or third career exists.” But the Buddhas are skilful in devices, and at the decay of a cycle, when the roots of goodness are small they expound the Buddha-career by teaching it as being threefold. They show Nirvāṇa to those of low dispositions, but this is a device to save those who might not believe if they were told that they will become Buddhas (ch. 2).

c22.15

² The word is *tathāgata*, and is here generally used when referring to buddhas in general.

c22.16

Śāriputra, who has already reached Nirvāṇa, is astonished at the teaching, and fears that it may be Māra speaking, but soon recognizes that he will become a Buddha. The Lord revives in him the knowledge that he once made the vow of a bodhisattva, and promises its fulfilment. Śāriputra wishes the error of his own disciples to be removed, but the Lord says that he uses different devices according to different temperaments. Just as a man, if his children were in a burning house, might tempt them to come out by offering them different kinds of toys, bullock-chariots, goat-chariots, and deer-chariots, but when he has enticed them out he gives all of them splendid bullock-chariots; so Buddha offers the three careers with the degrees of concentration and release, and other methods of the disciples, but they are all superseded by the Buddha-career. Those who despise the teaching of this sūtra will be reborn in hell and other places of suffering. The sūtra is not to be recited to foolish people, but only to those who are striving for complete enlightenment (ch. 3). It is thus useless for the disciples of the older teaching to protest and say that the Nirvāṇa ideal was taught by Buddha. Their opponents admit that it was, but only to people too foolish to understand the higher doctrine.

c22.17

Three other disciples come and express their astonishment on finding that after having attained Nirvāṇa they are destined to complete enlightenment. They say they are like a son who leaves his father’s house and returns after many years. He goes and works for pay in his father’s house, not knowing that his father has secretly recognized him. Even when his father falls sick and offers him his wealth he refuses it, and continues as a servant. His father at his death acknowledges his son, and leaves him all his wealth. Even so are these disciples the sons of Buddha who have received Nirvāṇa as pay, though the jewel of omniscience is their inheritance (ch. 4).

c22.18

Buddha tells them that although the rain is the same that falls on all plants, yet according to their dispositions they respond differently. So there is only one career, but there are beings who act differently. The attitude of disciples is explained by a parable. A man who is born blind thinks that there are no visible objects. He is like beings living in the world of ignorance. A great physician (Buddha) cures his blindness, and he thinks he can use his eyesight properly until he is taught better by certain sages. He is like the disciples who think they know everything until they are taught the true way of enlightenment by the bodhisattvas (ch. 5). The Lord then prophesies the careers of his hearers as future Buddhas, but they will still have to pay reverence first to many millions of Buddhas (ch. 6). He tells them of an ancient Buddha whom he remembers whose life was 5,400,000 myriads of ten millions of cycles. This is one example of the figures frequent in these sūtras. The life of this Buddha with some other exaggerations is based on that of the historical Buddha. After winning enlightenment he recited this *Lotus of the true doctrine* for eight thousand cycles. His sixteen sons, who all became Buddhas, continued to repeat it, and the last was Śākyamuni, who is repeating it now. It is when a Buddha is going to attain final Nirvāṇa that he explains that there is only one career. He is like a guide leading a company of men to Ratnadvīpa (jewel-island), who on the way become wearied and want to turn back. He creates a magic city, where they rest, and are then willing to go on to their true destination. So Buddha draws beings on with the illusory idea of Nirvāṇa, and then shows them the true goal of omniscience (ch. 7).

c22.19

The sūtra continues to make havoc of the older doctrine by telling of the conversion to the Buddha-career of all the other great disciples who are present, Pūrṇa, the chief of preachers of the doctrine, Kauṇḍinya, the first of the five disciples, Ānanda, Buddha’s attendant, his son Rāhula, and the rest of the arhats (chs. 8, 9). Then turning to the bodhisattvas present, he tells the great value of this sūtra for their career. Those who hear only a single verse are sure of complete enlightenment. To utter a single harsh word against it is a worse sin than speaking evil in the face of the Tathāgata. A bodhisattva who preaches it should enter the abode of the Tathāgata, wear his robe, and sit on the seat of the doctrine. The abode is the abiding in friendliness to all beings, the robe is great patience and meekness, and the seat is entrance into the voidness of all things. Here the reference to the Void is one of the few cases which show that a philosophical doctrine was in existence at the time (ch. 10).

c22.20

The discourse now becomes fantastic, but it is important in showing what the popular conception of a Buddha had become. A stupa of jewels appears, and a voice comes from it praising Buddha for uttering this sūtra. It is the stupa containing the body of the past Buddha Prabhūtaratna, which this Buddha wished to be present whenever the Lotus was being recited, and the Tathāgatas from other Buddha-fields are to be present as well. Buddha, therefore, darts a ray which makes millions of worlds visible in all directions with Buddhas preaching the Doctrine in each. They arrive in numbers like the sands of the Ganges, so that there is no room for any gods, and ask Buddha to open the stupa. He does so, Prabhūtaratna is seen sitting cross-legged within, and Buddha sits down by him on half the seat. The rest of the sūtra is a eulogy on its merits.

c22.21

Buddha tells how when he was a king he passed a thousand years as servant to a monk in order to learn the Lotus. This monk was Devadatta, and it was in his service that Buddha acquired the Perfections. Therefore, some day Devadatta will become a Buddha. Mañjuśrī comes from the ocean, where he has been converting numberless beings. A nāga girl of eight years appears, she is ready for enlightenment, but cannot attain it because of her sex. Then she presents a jewel to Buddha, her sex changes, she becomes a bodhisattva, and goes away to the south to preach (ch. 11).

c22.22

Innumerable bodhisattvas come and offer to preach the sūtra and Maitreya in astonishment asks how Buddha could have taught so many beings in the forty years that have passed since his enlightenment (ch. 12–14). The answer shows the Mahāyāna position both with regard to Buddha doctrine and metaphysics. Buddha indeed began to teach forty years ago, but that was a device; in reality he is eternal. If people should think he was always here, they would become careless. As he explains:

c22.23

The Tathāgata, who was so long ago enlightened, is of unlimited length of life, and has always existed. Without having attained Nirvāṇa he makes a show of attaining Nirvāṇa for the sake of those who have to be trained. And not even to-day is my ancient course as bodhisattva completed, nor is the length of my life fulfilled, but even to-day twice as many ten million myriads of hundreds of thousands of cycles will be required for completing my length of life. Now again, though not attaining Nirvāṇa, I announce my attaining of Nirvāṇa. And why? In this way I ripen beings, lest if I were to stay for a very long time, and through being often seen, beings with imperfect roots of goodness . . . if they saw that the Tathāgata stays, would get the idea that it is mere sport . . . they would not exercise energy to escape from the threefold world, and they would not get the idea that Tathāgatas are hard to obtain. Hence the Tathāgata through his skill in devices has said to those beings, “hard to obtain, O monks, is the appearing of a Tathāgata.” ¹

c22.24

¹ *Lotus*, p. 319.

c22.25

All that the disciples of the older doctrine maintain about the historical Buddha is thus admitted, and yet the truth is quite otherwise.

c22.26

For the threefold world is seen by the Tathāgata as it really is: it is not born, it dies not, it passes not away, it arises not, it transmigrates not, it attains not Nirvāṇa. It is not real, not unreal, not existent, not non-existent, not thus, not otherwise, not false, not unfalse, not otherwise, not thus.

c22.27

This is a bare statement of the fundamental doctrine of the Void. Its significance will be seen below in the light of the Perfection of Wisdom. Yet in the popular mode of expression the Tathāgata does manifest himself. He does so “when men have become unbelieving, unwise, ignorant, careless, fond of sensual pleasures”. In the same way the god Krishna in the *Bhagavadgītā* (iv, 7, 8) says, “whenever there is a decay of righteousness and a rising of unrighteousness, then I emanate myself. In order to save the good and to destroy evil doers, to establish righteousness I am born from age to age.” The actual historical relations between Buddhism and Krishnaism or Vaishnavism are not known, but here we have popular Mahāyāna Buddhism conforming exactly to the beliefs of contemporary Hinduism. The metaphysical basis of Buddhism, however, remains quite independent (ch. 15).

c22.28

The following chapters extol the merits of preaching and hearing the sūtra (ch. 16–20), and tell of the great devotion shown by a number of bodhisattvas in worshipping it and preaching it (ch. 21–6). Before restoring the stupa to its place the two Buddhas, Śākyamuni and Prabhūtaratna, for 100,000 years put out their tongues, which reach to the world of Brahmā.¹

c22.29

¹ Kern, who explained the imagery of the sūtra astronomically, said that Śākyamuni was the sun and Prabhūtaratna the moon in eclipse. The attendant bodhisattvas were the stars, and the Buddhas’ tongues the sun’s rays.

c22.30

It will be seen that the chief interest of the *Lotus* is devoted to Buddhas and their qualities. The bodhisattvas are quite subordinate to them except in chapters 22 to 26. The Buddha has become an eternal being and an object of worship not differing in powers or qualities from the gods of the rival religions. The religion is no monotheism, any more than popular Hinduism was.² Not only were there Buddhas at the ten points of space (the four quarters, the intermediate quarters, zenith, and nadir), but each world system had its corresponding Buddhas and bodhisattvas. The names and numbers of these Buddhas vary greatly. The short *Sukhāvatī-vyūha* puts five or six at each point. The *Lotus* has a list of sixteen, two at each point, except that there is one at the N.E. and Śākyamuni in the centre. Two of them are otherwise famous: Akshobhya in the east and Amitābha in the west. It is easy to see how this type of Buddhism disappeared from India. As a form of worship it differed in the eyes of its devotees, who repeated charms and adorned the statues, by no more than the names of the deities. But for the ordained members of the Order, as well as for those of the laity to whom religion was more than ritual, the conception of a bodhisattva’s career had a different interest. It was a beneficent ideal far surpassing the winning of Nirvāṇa for oneself. Yet it is not this conception which is prominent in the *Lotus*. It is still the popular conception of beings who are worthy of worship and who confer benefits on their clients. Then the bodhisattvas rather than the Buddhas become the chief objects of devotion. This is the point of view of the remaining chapters of the *Lotus*.

c22.31

² Nevertheless, the logic of monotheism was applied. The *Mahāvastu* (i, 122) says that there is only one Buddha in each Buddha-field, otherwise it would imply that a Buddha was incapable of doing all his Buddha work.

Note on Spells

c22.s1.1

Chapter 21 of the *Lotus* is entitled *Spells (dhāraṇī)*. Spells form an important part of popular Buddhism, but they have nothing in themselves peculiarly characteristic of Buddhism. They are a form of sympathetic magic, which consists in asserting (along with certain ritual actions) that a certain wished for event is taking place, and by the power of the word it is supposed that if every detail is properly performed the event does happen. Spells are found in India as early as the Rig-veda, and the Atharva-veda is little more than a collection of such spells or charms. But the practice is much wider and no doubt much older than Vedism. Spells of the same type are existent in Old English, Old High German, and Keltic, to go no further.

c22.s1.2

Spells of this kind had already infected popular Buddhism, for there are several examples in the Pāli Canon. In the *Āṭānāṭiya-sutta* (Dīgha, iii, 194), the four Great Kings with their troops visit Buddha. Vessavana (*Kuvera*), Great King of the north, gives Buddha a form of “protection” (*rakkhā*) against evil-disposed non-human beings, yakshas, gandharvas, kumbhaṇḍas, and nāgas. These are the minor gods in the train of the four Kings, but many of them, says Vessavana, are well disposed to Buddha and, if monks, nuns, laymen, and lay women will repeat the spell, such beings will protect them. The spell itself is in verse and consists of homage to the seven Buddhas and to the four Great Kings. Buddha afterwards repeats it to his monks, so that it becomes part of the Buddha-word.¹ The general belief among Buddhists in such beings and their powers is apparent throughout. We are told that when Buddha goes into any village or town non-human beings do not injure men (Dīgha, i, 132).

c22.s1.3

¹ This occurs in a collection of spells chiefly from the Scriptures known as the *Pirita* (Pāli, *paritta*) “protection”, still used by the Buddhists of Ceylon and Further India. Buddhaghosa, commenting on the sutta, explains how the spell is to be performed.

c22.s1.4

The belief in the magic power of the word led to the view that the words need not be intelligible. In Old English we find lists of corrupt Keltic words, which once had a meaning, but which came to be repeated merely as words having power. This has gone much further in India, where long lists of merely invented words are repeated. In the *Lotus* (ch. 21) the bodhisattva Bhaishajyarāja and others utter spells of protection for those who preserve the sūtra. They are lists of meaningless words, and usually end with the word *svāhā* (a Vedic term used in making oblations to the gods). An example of one of the shorter ones in the *Lotus* is *aṭṭe taṭṭe naṭṭe vanaṭṭe anaḍe nāḍi kunaḍi svāhā*. All the words are in the form of feminine vocatives, and appear to be modelled on spells addressed to female divinities. Spells of exactly the same type, and sometimes the identical spells, are also found in Hinduism. Female divinities in early Hinduism are almost non-existent, and there can be no doubt that both in Hinduism and Buddhism there has been a borrowing from non-Aryan sources.

c22.s1.5

One of the best known spells of this type is the well-known *oṃ maṇipadme hūṃ*. It has often been misunderstood, for it was first reported by travellers quite ignorant of the language.¹ This was even the case with Klaproth, who expounded it in 1831.² He did not see that *maṇi* is not a separate word, but only a stem. He thought it might be nominative or vocative, but if it were a word and vocative it would be *mane*, and if nominative *maṇiḥ*. Really *maṇipadme* is one word and a feminine vocative,³ so that with the syllables of invocation *oṃ* and *hūṃ* it means “O Maṇipadmā”. Maṇipadmā is “she who has a jewel-lotus”. F. W. Thomas thinks that she was a female counterpart of Avalokiteśvara, but in the *Kāraṇḍavyūha*, where the spell is expounded, there is no trace of such a female being.

c22.s1.6

¹ The earliest appears to be the Franciscan, Willelm de Rubruk or Rubruquis, who was sent in 1253 to Tartary by Louis IX of France. He gives it in the form *ou mani hactain*, and, as one of the priests told him, says it means “Deus tu nosti”. *Itinerarium* in *Recueil de voyages et de Mémoires publié par la Société de Géographie*, Paris, 1839.

c22.s1.7

² *JA.*, 1831, 185 ff. “Le sens de la phrase est très-claire. Lue *Om Maṇi Padma hoūm* elle signifie Oh ! précieux Lotus, Amen ; et si on lit *Om maṇi padme hoūm*, Oh ! le Joyau (est) dans le Lotus, Amen.”

c22.s1.8

³ This was pointed out by W. H. Mill in 1835, but his explanation made no impression. H. H. Wilson thought it was a locative, and hence invented the bodhisattva Manipadma. That is the only reason why this name occurs in the great St. Petersburg Lexicon. The whole matter was finally made grammatically clear by F. W. Thomas, *JRAS.*, 1906, 464, and A. H. Franke, *JRAS.*, 1915, 397 ff.

c22.s1.9

More probably it is constructed like the rest on the model of the Hindu spells.¹ Avalokiteśvara is represented with a lotus in his hand. Maṇipadma as an epithet does not appear to be applied to him, but he has epithets like *padmapāṇi* “having a lotus in his hand”, *padmadhara* “bearing a lotus”, and *śubhapadmahasta* “having a fair lotus in his hand”. It is not certain, however, that the spell was originally connected with Avalokiteśvara. The “six-syllabled spell” is mentioned in *Divyāvadāna* (613), and probably refers to this spell. But there is no mention there of Avalokiteśvara. Also in the *Lotus*, although there is much about Avalokiteśvara and spells, there is no mention of this one.

c22.s1.10

¹ Female counterparts did come to be invented, but they are not found in the *Kāraṇḍavyūha*, nor the tantric sense which became attached to *maṇi* and *padma*.

c22.s1.11

Hundreds of *dhāraṇīs* exist, and they are not all mere gibberish. They are usually embodied in a *sūtra* as in the case of the *Āṭānāṭiya-sutta*. In the *Megha-sūtra*² Buddha gives spells to the Nāgas for rain-making, which are to be uttered by the reciters of the doctrine with particular ceremonies. The *Aparimitāyurjñāna-sūtra* has been translated into Tibetan, Chinese, and North Aryan.³ It is a spell of 108 syllables for obtaining unlimited life. The great Mahāyāna sūtras, like the *Lotus* itself, come to be treated as magic objects bringing blessing to any who hear them, who read or write them, or cause them to be written. Of the *Lotus* itself it is said that “it is a saviour of all beings from all dangers, a releaser from all pains. It is like a pool for the thirsty, a fire for the cold, like a garment for the naked, a caravan leader for merchants, a mother for her children, a ship for those sailing across, a physician for the sick, a lamp for those wrapped in darkness, a jewel for the seekers of wealth, a universal king for princelets, an ocean for rivers, a torch for dispelling all darkness.” Of Chapter 22 it is said that “it will be like medicine for the sick and suffering. On him who has heard this section of the doctrine no bodily pain will come, nor old age, nor untimely death”.

c22.s1.12

² Edited by C. Bendall, *JRAS.*, 1880, 286, but he omits many of the spells as being “gibberish and mysticism”.

c22.s1.13

³ Ed. by Walleser, Heidelberg, 1916.

Linked texts (8)