A student of Buddhism cannot proceed very far in his inquiry without being confronted with a tremendous contradiction. Perhaps I may be allowed here to speak from personal experience. I read Le Bouddha et sa Religion, by M. Barthélemy St.-Hilaire, and one or two well-known works; and soon learnt that annihilation (sûnyatâ) was the lot of the Saint when he had reached the Bodhi or Highest Wisdom, and freed himself from the cycle of new births. I then came across Schlagintweit's Buddhism in Tibet, which contains a sort of litany called The Buddhas of Confession. In it is the following passage:—

“I adore the Buddha Sa-la'i-rgyal-po. Once uttering this name shall purify from all sins of theft, robbery, and the like.” This puzzled me. This being was a Buddha. In consequence he had suffered, or enjoyed, complete annihilation. Why then should the pronouncing the name Sâ-la'irgyal-po purify from all sins of “theft, robbery, and the like?” Then I remembered that in old religions very holy names like I.A.O., A.U.M., etc., had often got to be thought more potent than the God himself. I mention all this to show that I am not at all surprised at people clinging to the idea that the Bodhi in the earliest Buddhism meant annihilation in spite of the strong evidence that can be brought against it. I myself for some time did the same.