- The Dharma Jewel of the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, and this title represents the deepest truth of this sutra. It is called The Platform Sutra because it was given at the same platform where the Sixth Patriarch in his later years received the Precepts—these Precepts which help.
- The 'Platform Sutra' records the teachings of Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch, who is revered as one of the two great figures in the founding of Ch'an (Zen) Buddhism. This translation is the definitive English version of the eighth-century Ch'an classic.
The Platform Sutra the Lankiivatsra Stra, together with a picture in commemoration of the Fifth Patriarch transmitting the robe and Dharma,26 in order to disseminate them to later generations and preserve a record of them. The artist, Lu Chen,27 had examined. The Platform Sutra occupies a central place in Zen (Ch'an) Buddhist instruction for students and spiritual seekers worldwide. It is often linked with The Heart Sutra and The Diamond Sutra to form a trio of texts that have been revered and studied for centuries.
“Know your mind and see your nature.
For those who are aware, there is basically no separation.”
The Platform Sutra
According to Red Pine, whose translation of the Platform Sutra is the most popular among today’s Zen practitioners, this eight-century text “has been the most studied, the most quoted, the most influential of all the texts that teach that branch of Mahayana Buddhism known as Zen.”
Even though Bodhidharma has been regarded as “he who had brought Zen from the West,” little is known of his teaching. In fact, of the four texts attributed to him, only one – the “Outline of Practice” – is regarded by most scholars as his work. This text, which is less than 3 pages long, lists “four all-inclusive practices”: ”suffering injustice, adapting to conditions, seeking nothing, and practicing the Dharma,” and hardly mentions the mind. The other three texts are much longer, and do focus on the mind, but they appear to have been written by contemporaries of Hui-neng belonging to the Oxhead School or the Northern School.
It is in the Platform Sutra that practitioners and scholars have looked for the origins of the radically new teachings of the Ch’an/Zen schools. The text is presented as a sermon on the MahaprajnaparamitaSutra given by Master Hui-neng in the lecture hall of Tafan Temple. Hui-neng (638-713) is speaking to an audience including ten thousand monks, nuns, lay people, and magistrates, as well as thirty officials and thirty scholars, and, as was traditional at the time, he is standing on a raised platform. Hence the name of the Sutra.
The Platform Sutra starts with an account of Hui-neng’s early life, and the well-known narrative of his becoming the Sixth Patriarch of the Zen school after winning a verse contest (which I present in the preceding text – “Zen – Pointing directly to one’s mind”), before presenting the teachings on “sudden enlightenment” put forward by the Southern School.
Tradition says that the text was compiled by Fa-Hai, a direct disciple of Hui-neng, soon after his death. According to modern scholarship, however, the text was reworked over several decades, with contributions by the Oxhead school and Shen-hui (684-758), also a direct disciple of Hui-neng, keen to promote his own teacher against Shen-hsiu, the precept instructor who is said to have lost the verse contest. Shen-hsiu had become Hong-jen’s official successor in what Shen-hui called the Northern School of “gradual enlightenment.” Some scholars believe that Shen-hui not only invented the story of the verse contest and transmission of the robe, but also the association of the Northern School with the doctrine of “gradual enlightenment.” We may never know, because what we know about the Northern School is what the victorious Southern School has told us about it. As things stand, Hui-neng could well have been a rather obscure figure, and it would be from Shen-hui that Zen has received its foundational teachings.
The text Red Pine selected for his translation is a manuscript recovered from the “Library Cave” in Dunhuang, which had been sealed since the 11th century, and was rediscovered at the beginning of last century. This text is older than the Tsung-Pao edition that has been read by millions of Buddhists over the centuries. In places where the two texts diverge, Red Pine has tried to assess which of the texts seemed to be the most reliable.
Buddha-nature
Red Pine tells us that, by Hui-neng’s day, the teaching that we all possess the buddha-nature, i.e., the inherent ability to become enlightened, had become “common knowledge among Buddhists.” And that teaching, he adds, is the foundation of Hui-neng’s teachings in the Platform Sutra. Though Hui-neng says little about the Fifth Patriarch, from whom he had received the Dharma transmission, he does mention that Hong-jen had been lecturing on the Nirvana Sutra (3rd century), where this notion first appeared. The concept of “buddha-nature” had been further developed by the Tathagatagarbha school, where the buddha-nature is referred to as a “seed” or a “womb,” interpreted either as a mere potential for buddhahood that had to be “grown” by serious practice, or, especially in China, as an inherently enlightened nature – i.e., prajna – merely concealed by the veil of our delusions, and just waiting to be uncovered.
The definition of Zen as “a transmission beyond words and scriptures, directly pointing to one’s mind” is a direct reference to the claim that, as the Platform Sutra states, we “already possess the prajna wisdom of enlightenment.” “But because our minds are deluded,” we cannot understand it by ourselves. We need “a truly good friend” to show us “the way to see our nature” (Ch. 12). Though we still need a teacher to show us the way, since “our nature,” which is the buddha-nature, is already enlightened, it will eventually be possible for us to see it directly, with our mind. The contrast between “sudden enlightenment” and “gradual enlightenment” may be better grasped as a contrast between “direct” and “indirect” enlightenment. Later in the text, we read: “Although there is only one kind of Dharma, understanding can be fast or slow. When understanding is slow, we say it’s “indirect.” And when understanding is fast, we say it’s “direct.” The Dharma isn’t direct or indirect, it’s people who are sharp or dull” (Ch. 39).
Red Pine comments that the words “prajna wisdom” are meant to differentiate prajna, usually translated as wisdom, from both mundane (practical) wisdom, and wisdom as understood in Theravada. “Prajna means ‘before knowledge’, and knowledge, (that is, the conceptual, dualistic knowledge elaborated by the intellect), according to Mahayana, is just another name for delusion. Hence, prajna is our original mind, our mind before we know anything, before there is a person who knows or something known. This non-dual nature is our original nature, our buddha nature.”
At this point, anyone who is used to the language of Theravada Buddhism is bound to feel increasingly frustrated when, one after the other, notions that had been submitted to an endless process of differentiation in order to tease out an ever more precise grasp of the truth, are now said to be … the same. The reason is that, in Theravada, the teachings are formulated in the language of dualism, which is that of the novice practitioner. It expresses the path from the standpoint of the unenlightened mind. In ancient China, and East Asia in general, though dualistic thinking was also used, an understanding and practice of intuitive thinking was still familiar. When asked to sum up their understanding of the most important matter of life and death, the monks in Hong-jen’s monastery were expected to write a poem, not a dissertation. Intuitive thought collapses opposites into an embrace of the oneness the opposites are pointing to.
So here, prajna is said to be “our original mind,” the non-dual mind, which is also what is referred to as buddha-nature, our original non-dual nature. When Hui-neng talks about what he has received from the Fifth Patriarch, he says: “I didn’t receive any instructions. The only thing he talked about was seeing our nature. He didn’t talk about meditation or liberation … Because these two teachings are not the teaching of buddhas. The teaching of buddhas is a teaching beyond duality” (Ch. 11). This is not to say that “meditation” is not to be practiced, but it is not a particular sitting practice – what Zen is often equated with. Meditation has a much wider meaning than that of a mere technique.
Non-duality
“Good friends, this Dharma teaching of mine is based on meditation and wisdom. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that meditation and wisdom are separate … Meditation is the body of wisdom, and wisdom is the function of meditation. And wherever you find meditation, you find wisdom .… What this means is that meditation and wisdom are the same … Don’t think that meditation comes first and then gives rise to wisdom or that wisdom or that wisdom comes first and then gives rise to meditation …” (Ch. 13).
Once again, do not forget that what is translated here as “wisdom” is not what we almost automatically imagine to be a “text” of some sort, but prajna, which is our original, non-dual, buddha-nature. It could be described as an intuition from the standpoint of our buddha-nature. “Meditation” is a translation of the Sanskrit dhyana, and the Pali jhana. As understood by Huineng, it is not a particular type of meditation, but merely an indication that practice must focus on the mind. The Buddha had said that desires and fears lead us to attachments and a reification of “things” into entities endowed with independent existence (in order to, temporarily, reassure ourselves). So practice had to start with a curb on desires and fears so that attachments could be cut off. With the new assumption that we have within us a pure, non-dual, buddha-nature, which is our original nature/mind, and as such prajna, Hui-neng, and Zen after him, could focus straightaway on the “conceptual traces” left by karma on the mind, thereby “pointing directly to one’s mind,” as it “lets one see into one’s own true nature and thus attain Buddhahood.“
“Meditation is the body of wisdom, and wisdom is the function of meditation.” “Meditation” is at the same time what allows us to see our original prajna nature, and prajna’s own activity. As it is said about the organ and its function – the function creates the organ as much as the organ creates the function – meditation and prajna are really the same thing, structurally inseparable from each other.
Red Pine says that “Our mind is the body, our nature is its function. The Chinese character for ‘nature’ shows the mind giving birth. Thus, our mind is the source of all things, all dharmas, all thoughts. Our nature is the mind in action. Meanwhile, our mind is who we really are, our real body.”
Note that even though, with Hui-neng and Zen, the mind moves centre stage, there remains a need to behave ethically, as “unless you put an end to right and wrong, you will give rise to self-existent dharmas, you will never be free of the Four States (origination, duration, differentiation, and cessation)” (Ch. 13). Zen is not ethically amoral, it only emphasises a focus on the mind over an ascetic discipline of the body.
One Practice Samadhi
“Meditation,” then, is not a specific practice. It is not even, as most would have expected, a sitting practice.
Deluded people think that “sitting motionless, eliminating delusions, and not thinking thoughts are One Practice Samadhi. But if that were true, a dharma like that would be the same as lifelessness and would constitute an obstruction of the Way instead. The Way has to flow freely. Why block it up? The Way flows freely when the mind doesn’t dwell on any dharma. Once it dwells on something, it becomes bound” (Ch. 14).
This notion of a practice that has to flow freely in the context of our everyday lives is closer to the Daoist notion of a dynamic flow of energy going through all things than to the motionless trance depicted in the iconic Indian Buddha seated in the lotus position. “One Practice Samadhi means at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down, always practicing with a straightforward [honest, sincere] mind” (Ch. 14).
Red Pine explains that Samadhi is “a Sanskrit term that refers to the concentration of the mind on a single object to the point where the separation of the object from the subject disappears.” Hui-neng retains the traditional meaning of a unity between the mind and all things, but rejects an approach that entails a deliberate meditation that separates the meditator from the object (s)he concentrates on, artificially creating a tension followed by a release wherein union is achieved. “For Hui-neng, it is the practice to be engaged in at all times in all places, namely the state of straightforward mind, which is no state at all.”
Meditation is not contemplation
True meditation “at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down,” is what 13th century Japanese Master Dogen, co-founder of the Soto Zen School, meant to establish in the daily routine of his monasteries. Whether eating, or sweeping up the yard, or washing, or even going to the toilet, monks performed all activities as an uninterrupted “meditation.” Soto Zen monks may also sit, but that sitting is understood more as a training for the uninterrupted day-long meditation than as a practice directly aiming at a dramatic event of [sudden] awakening. The Soto Zen school is in fact known for its practice of shikantaza, which means, “just sitting.” It is a practice that was developed in the Soto lineage in China before Dogen brought it to Japan and reworked it on the basis of his own experience. Shikantaza is specifically defined as not being a contemplation. When Hui-neng in the Platform Sutra, says: “In this school of the Dharma, when we practice Zen, we don’t contemplate the mind, and we don’t contemplate purity, and we don’t talk about being dispassionate”(Ch. 18), he was calling for that sort of practice. Shohaku Okumura describes this “just sitting” practice as follows: “Just as the function of a thyroid gland is to secrete hormones, the function of a brain is to secrete thoughts, so thoughts well up in the mind moment by moment. Yet our practice in zazen is to refrain from doing anything with these thoughts; we just let everything come up freely and we let everything go freely. We don’t grasp anything; we don’t try to control anything. We just sit” (Realizing Genjokoan, The Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo). Contemplating the thoughts coming and going would turn then into objects, and set up a separation between them and us. What is being practiced in “just sitting” is “goallessness” rather than mindfulness.
Just as influential in the Zen tradition, however, is the very different practice found in the Rinzai school, which Hakuin (1686-1769) revived after a period of stagnation. Bret W. Davis tells us that “the Rinzai school, with its use of koans, teaches a more dramatic route through an intense state of meditative concentration …in order to cultivate the “great ball of doubt.” Koans are apparently irrational statements or stories presented as short exchanges between master and disciple, meant to shock the mind into “glimpses” (kensho) wherein the non-dual nature of the mind is directly intuited. Instead of being encouraged to relax into a state of “goallessness,” Rinzai practitioners are required “to break through all dualistic oppositions, of subject/object, inner/outer, pure/defiled, being/nothingness, speech/silence, etc … The entire world of relativities in which we live must be transcended … before it can be reaffirmed … The relation between emptiness and form must itself be understood non-dually … Even the duality between duality and non-duality must be let go of. To attempt to do this by means of analytical reason, however, only produces yet further dualities. This Gordon knot cannot be teased apart with the fingers of the intellect; it must be cut directly and holistically with the sword of intuitive wisdom” (Bret W. Davis – “Forms of Emptiness in Zen”).
With Zen, the Buddhist approach has become positive
With Zen, which grew out of the concept of buddha-nature, and also incorporated the Hua-yen view of reality as an interconnected network of mutually interpenetrating phenomena, the Buddhist path turned into a positive practice. In India, the Buddhist approach had been negative, with talk of craving, ignorance and suffering. Because we had karmic defilements, we had been reborn in this life, and, unless we worked hard at cleansing these defilements, we would be reborn, and suffer again. And it would be all our fault! With the reinvention of Buddhism in East Asia, in a culture nurtured by the abundance of the Dao, humans themselves came to be seen as possessing a pure, non-dual buddha-nature, ready to help them awaken to the beauty of the phenomenal world. India had said: existence is suffering; all things are empty of own being and impermanent. East Asia replied: “true emptiness, wondrous being.”
Sources
Red Pine (Bill Porter) – The Platform Sutra – The Zen Teaching of Hui-neng (2006)
The Platform Sutra Pdf
Shohaku Okumura – Realizing Genjokoan, The Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo (2010)
Bret W. Davis – Forms of Emptiness in Zen (Research paper)
Anyone interested in a reformulation of Buddhist thought in the language of Western philosophy may have a look at my other blog, dedicated to Nishida Kitaro, Nishitani Keiji and Ueda Shizuteru:
https://thekyotoschoolofphilosophy.wordpress.com
On The Way: The Daily Zen Journal
The Platform Sutra
Daijian Huineng (638–713)
The samadhi of oneness is straightforward mind at all times, walking, staying, sitting, and lying. “Straight-forward mind is the place of practice; straight-forward mind is the Pure Land.” Only practice straight-forward mind, and in all things have no attachments whatsoever; this is called the samadhi of oneness. The deluded person clings to the characteristics of things, adheres to the samadhi of oneness, thinks that straightforward mind is sitting without moving and casting aside delusions without letting things arise in the mind.
This he, or she, considers to be the samadhi of oneness. This kind of practice is the same as insentiency and the cause of obstruction to the Tao. Tao must be something that circulates freely; why should we impede it? If the mind does not abide in things, the Tao circulates freely; if the mind abides in things, it becomes entangled. If sitting in meditation without moving is good, why did Vimalakirti scold Shariputra for sitting in meditation in the forest?
Good friends, some teach people to sit viewing the mind and viewing purity, not moving and not activating the mind, and to this they devote their efforts. Deluded people do not realize that this is wrong, cling to this doctrine, and become confused. There are many such people. Those who instruct in this way are, from the outset, greatly mistaken.
How then are meditation and wisdom alike? They are like the lamp and the light it gives forth. If there is a lamp, there is light; if there is no lamp, there is no light. The lamp is the substance of light; the light is the function of the lamp. Thus, although they have two names, in substance they are not two. Meditation and wisdom are also like this.
In the Dharma there is no sudden or gradual, but among people some are keen and others dull. The deluded recommend the gradual method, the enlightened practice the sudden teaching. To understand the original mind for yourself is to see into your own original nature. Once enlightened, there is from the outset no distinction between these two methods; those who are not enlightened will for long kalpas be caught in the cycle of transmigration.
In this teaching of mine, from ancient times up to the present, all have set up no-thought as the main doctrine, non-form as the substance, and non-abiding as the basis. Non-form is to be separated from form even when associated with form. No-thought is not to think even when involved in thought. Non-abiding is the original nature of man.
Successive thoughts do not stop; prior thoughts, present thoughts, and future thoughts follow one after the other without cessation. If one instant of thought is cut off, the Dharma body separates from the physical body, and in the midst of successive thoughts there will be no place for attachment to anything. If one instant of thought clings, then successive thoughts cling; this is known as being fettered. Therefore, non-abiding is made the basis.
Being outwardly separated from all forms, this is non-form. When you are separated from form, the substance of your nature is pure. Therefore, non-form is made the substance.
To be unstained in all environments is called no-thought. If on the basis of your own thoughts you separate from environment, then, in regard to things, thoughts are not produced. If you stop thinking of the myriad things, and cast aside all thoughts, as soon as one instant of thought is cut off, you will be reborn in another realm. Students, take care! Don’t rest in objective things and the subjective mind. If you do so, it will be bad enough that you yourself are in error, yet how much worse that you encourage others in their mistakes? The deluded person, however, does not see and slanders the teachings of the sutras. Therefore, no-thought is established as a doctrine. Because people in their delusion have thoughts in relation to their environment, heterodox ideas stemming from theses thoughts arise, and passions and false views are produced from them. Therefore this teaching has established no-thought as a doctrine.
People of the world, separate yourselves from views; do not activate thoughts. If there were no thinking, then no-thought would have no place to exist. “No” is the “no” of what? “Thought” means “thinking” of what? “No” is the separation from the dualism that produces the passions. “Thought” means thinking of the original nature of True Reality. True Reality is the substance of thoughts; thoughts are the function of True Reality. If you give rise to thoughts from your self-nature, then, although you see, hear, perceive, and, know, you are not stained by the manifold environments, and are always free. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: “Externally, while distinguishing well all the forms of the various dharmas, internally stand firm within the First Principle.”
In this teaching from the outset sitting in meditation does not concern the mind nor does it concern purity; we do not talk of steadfastness. If someone speaks of “viewing the mind,” then I would say that the “mind” is of itself delusion, and as delusions are just like fantasies, there is nothing to be seen. If someone speaks of “viewing purity,” then I would say that human nature is of itself pure, but because of false thoughts True Reality is obscured. If you exclude delusions, then the original nature reveals its purity.
If you activate your mind to view purity without realizing that your own nature is originally pure, delusions of purity will be produced. Since this delusion has no place to exist, then you know that whatever you see is nothing but delusion. Purity has no form, but, nonetheless, some people try to postulate the form of purity and consider this to be Chan practice. People who hold this view obstruct their own original natures and end up being bound by purity. One who practices steadfastness does not see the faults of people everywhere. This is the steadfastness of self-nature. The deluded person, however, even if he doesn’t move his own body, will talk of the good and bad of others the moment he opens his mouth, and thus, behave in opposition to the Tao. Therefore, both “viewing the mind” and “viewing purity” will cause an obstruction to Tao.
Now that we know that this is so, what is it in this teaching that we call “sitting in meditation”? In this teaching “sitting” means without any obstructions anywhere, outwardly and under all circumstances, not to activate thoughts. “Meditation” is internally to see the original nature and not become confused.
And what do we call Chan meditation? Outwardly to exclude form is Chan; inwardly to be unconfused is meditation. Even though there is form on the outside, when internally the nature is not confused, then, from the outset, you are of yourself pure and of yourself in meditation. The very contact with circumstances itself causes confusion. Separation from form on the outside is Chan; being untouched on the inside is meditation. Being Chan externally and meditation internally, is know as Chan meditation. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: “At once, suddenly, you regain the original mind.” The P’u-sa-chieh says: “From the outset your own nature is pure.”
See for yourselves the purity of your own natures, practice and accomplish for yourselves. Your own nature is the Dharmakaya, and self-practice is the practice of Buddha; by self-accomplishment you may achieve the Buddha Way for yourselves.
Daijian Huineng (638–713)
Excerpted from The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, translated by Philip Yampolsky 1967
Source:
- The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch
By: Philip Yampolsky 1967
Many of us are familiar with the first part of the Platform Sutra recounting the story of Huineng’s life and how he obtained the robe and bowl after arriving at the monastery as a commoner. Legend has it that as a child while selling firewood, he just happened to hear a man reciting the Diamond Sutra and awakened to its meaning. . At that point he asked the man where he came from and determined to go there to study with the Fifth Patriarch, Hung-jen.
The Platform Sutra Of The Sixth Patriarch Summary
This second part of the Platform Sutra is where our piece begins, a profound lecture on prajna. He prepares his listeners at the very beginning with an introduction that even today we can use to help prepare ourselves to listen and receive a teaching.
“My teaching has been handed down from the sages of the past; it is not my own personal knowledge. If you wish to hear the teachings of the sages of the past, each of you must quiet his mind and hear me to the end. Please cast aside your own delusions; then you will be no different from the sages of the past.”
Hui-neng
While there are some very deep principles in this selection, there is also the heart of simplicity helping us to cut through the sidepaths we sometimes wander down. The depth of the reading almost overwhelms us and beckons us return for new insights. However, there is an ultimate confidence communicated that shifts us closer to true understanding rather than getting caught up in stages and levels.
The Platform Sutra Of The Sixth Patriarch Pdf
“See for yourselves the purity of your own natures, practice and accomplish for yourselves. Your own nature is the Dharmakaya, and self-practice is the practice of Buddha; by self-accomplishment you may achieve the Buddha Way for yourselves.”
Steadfastly,
The Platform Sutra Summary
Elana
The Platform Sutra Of The Sixth Patriarch
Related Journals