Legend of the Diamond Valley 17 



tion is hardly convincing. It presupposes that the legend originated 

 in India, but this postulate is not proved. That the later Arabic authors 

 and Marco Polo place the locality in India, means nothing. Epiphanius 

 lays the plot in Scythia; the Chinese version is laid in Fu-lin, and that 



the Noble Path, with the jewel treasures of the Arhats. The Milindapafiha may 

 be dated with a fair degree of certainty: Milinda, who holds conversations with a 

 Buddhist sage, is the Greek King Menandros, who ruled approximately between 

 125 and 95 B.C. in the north-west of India; and the dialogues attributed to him may 

 have been composed in the beginning of our era (M. Winternitz, Geschichte der 

 indischen Litteratur, Vol. II, p. 140; V. A. Smith, Early History of India, p. 225). 

 It is therefore quite sufficient to believe that the diamond became known in India 

 during the Buddhist epoch in the first centuries B.C., say, roughly, from the sixth to 

 the fourth century. The precious stones mentioned in Milindapafiha are enumerated 

 by L. Finot (Lapidaires indiens, p. xix). The earliest descriptions of the diamond 

 on the part of the Indians are by Varahamihira (a.d. 505-587; see H. Kern, Ver- 

 spreide Geschriften, Vol. II, p. 97) and by Buddhabhafta, who wrote prior to the 

 sixth century a.d. Since the word vajra designates both Indra's thunderbolt 

 and the diamond, it is in many cases difficult to decide which of the two is meant 

 (A. Foucher, Etudes sur l'iconographie bouddhique de l'lnde, Vol. II, p. 15, left 

 the point undecided, rendering vajrasana by "siege de diamant ou du foudre"); 

 and the same obstacle turns up again in Chinese-Buddhist literature, where the 

 term kin-kang as the translation of Sanskrit vajra covers the two notions; so that, 

 for instance, Pelliot (Bull, de VEcole francaise, Vol. II, p. 146) raises the question, 

 "Quel est le sens precis de kin-kang?" Whether the title of the Sutra Vajracchedikd, 

 for instance, is correctly translated by "diamond-cutter," as has been done, is much 

 open to doubt. If it should mean "sharply cutting, like a diamond" (Winternitz, 

 /. c, p. 249), why could it not mean as well "sharply cutting, like a thunderbolt"? 

 The thunderbolt, generally described as metallic, is also sharp; and Indra whets it 

 like a knife, or as a bull its horns. Though a Chinese commentator of that work 

 observes that, as the diamond excels all other precious gems in brilliance and in- 

 destructibility, so also the wisdom of this work transcends and shall outlive all other 

 knowledge known to philosophy (W. Gemmell, The Diamond Sutra, p. 47), it is but 

 a late afterthought, and proves nothing as to the original Indian concept. The most 

 curious misconceptions have arisen about the so-called " Diamond-Seat " ( Vajrasana). 

 This is the name of the throne or seat on which Cakyamuni, the founder of Buddhism, 

 reached perfect enlightenment under the sacred fig-tree at Gaya. The Chinese 

 pilgrim Huan Tsang, who visited the place during his memorable journey in India, 

 remarks that it was made from diamond (Ta T*ang si yii ki, Ch. 8, p. 14, ed. of Shou 

 shan ko ts'ung shu; Julien, Memoires sur les contrees occidentales, Vol. I, p. 460; 

 Waiters, On Yuan Chwang's Travels, Vol. II, p. 114); but this is incredible, if for 

 no other reason, because he proceeds to say that this throne measured over a hundred 

 paces in circuit. While this may be solely the outcome of a popular tradition growing 

 out of an interpretation of the name, Huan Tsang himself explains well how this 

 name arose. It is derived, according to him, from the circumstance that here the 

 thousand Buddhas of this eon (kalpa) enter the vajrasamddhi ("diamond ecstasy"), 

 the designation for a certain degree of contemplative ecstasy. Moreover, in the 

 Biography of Huan Tsang (Julien, Histoire de la vie de Hiouen-Thsang, p. 139) 

 it is more explicitly stated that the employment of the word "diamond" in the 

 term "Diamond-Seat" signifies that this throne is firm, solid, indestructible, and 

 capable of resisting all shocks of the world. In other words, it is used metaphorically ; 

 Buddha's own firmness and determination in the long struggle for obtaining enlight- 

 enment and salvation, his fortitude in overcoming the hostile forces of Mara, 

 the Evil One, being transferred to the seat which he occupied immovably during 



