The Surangama Sutra

by Hsuan Hua

  The Fourfold Negation (Tetralemma)

  In the logic of ancient India, statements could be affirmed, negated, neither affirmed nor negated, and both affirmed and negated. The founder of the Emptiness (Mādhyamaka) school of Buddhism, the Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna, popularized the logical negation of these four possibilities as a way of showing the emptiness of anything that might be construed as a real, permanent self or phenomenon or as an attribute of a real, permanent self or phenomenon. In this fourfold negation, sometimes called the “tetralemma,” (catuṣkoṭi), a proposition is asserted to be neither true, nor not true, nor both true and not true, nor neither true nor not true. This formula can serve as a reminder in our practice that all we perceive is empty of any attribute, and so nothing definitive can be asserted about the world and the contents of the mind. There are numerous instances of the tetralemma in this Sutra.

  9. Aids to Reading

  The Commentarial Tradition

  In Asian wisdom traditions, sacred texts have generally been studied with the aid of commentaries that were either written or spoken by esteemed spiritual teachers. The usual pattern has been that each passage of text is followed by interpretive comment, sometimes quite lengthy. The Buddhist sutras are no exception. Around the Śūraṅgama Sūtra in particular, a rich commentarial tradition has flourished. As mentioned above,39 one search found reference to 127 Chinese commentaries on this Sutra, including fifty-nine in the Ming dynasty (1368–1644) alone, when the Sutra was especially popular.

  For serious students of this Sutra, the commentarial exegeses are essential. The present translators have closely consulted two recent commentaries in particular: that by the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua and that by the Venerable Master Yuanying (1877–1953).40 In addition, the translators also made use of the Ming dynasty commentary by Venerable Master Jiaoguang Zhenjian (fl. 1600)41 and occasionally the commentaries by the celebrated Ming dynasty Chan Master Hanshan Deqing (1546–1623)42 and the Qing dynasty Venerable Master Xufa.43

  Engagement with Sutras as Spiritual Practice

  In the Buddhist tradition, sutras are understood to contain the teachings of the Buddhas and greatly enlightened masters. They function as guidebooks to the Path to awakening. For those reasons, they are treated with reverence. It is customary to keep sutras in a clean place, either above or apart from secular works; to handle them with respect; and to read them only while one is sitting upright or standing — never while one is lying down or in a slouching position.

  Sutras — like sacred texts in other religious traditions — can themselves be the focus of a spiritual practice. Some practitioners read a particular text, such as the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, for a certain period of time each day. Others commit a text to memory and recite it. Yet another practice is to bow in reverence to it; one bows to each word or character in turn until one has bowed through the entire text. Such practices can develop faith, loosen the ties to self, and lead to personal transformation and spiritual growth.

  The Sutras as Practical Guides

  The Buddha should not be understood as a philosopher who was trying to develop a systematic philosophical system, complete with its own epistemology, metaphysics, and cosmology. Nor was he engaging in early scientific thinking. His teachings do not speculate about the nature of what seems to us to be the external world. Rather, his goal was to teach beings to understand their experience in such a way that they would be able to eliminate suffering and the fundamentally unsatisfactory quality of their lives. When we read in the sutras statements that seem to be abstract philosophical claims or excursions into neuroscience or cognitive psychology, we should realize that the purpose and meaning of these statements is to be understood and evaluated in light of their utility in advancing spiritual practice.

  In a celebrated passage from the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, the Buddha compared himself and his teachings to a surgeon who removes a poisoned arrow from a man’s body in order to save his life. The surgeon instructs the man how to care for his wound so that it will heal quickly, but he gives him no extraneous medical information that would not be germane to his healing.

  Suppose that a man were wounded by an arrow thickly smeared with poison, and his friends and companions, his kinsmen and relatives, brought a surgeon. The surgeon would cut around the open wound with a knife, then he would probe for the arrow with a probe, then he would pull out the arrow and would expel the poisonous humour without leaving a trace of it behind. Knowing that no trace was left behind, he would say: “Good man, the arrow has been pulled out from you; the poisonous humour has been expelled with no trace left behind, and it is incapable of harming you. Eat only suitable food; do not eat unsuitable food or else the wound may suppurate. From time to time wash the wound and from time to time anoint its opening, so that pus and blood do not cover the opening of the wound. Do not walk around in the wind and sun or else dust and dirt may infect the opening of the wound. Take care of your wound, good man, and see to it that the wound heals.”

  The man would think: “The arrow has been pulled out from me; the poisonous humour has been expelled with no trace left behind, and it is incapable of harming me.” He would eat only suitable food, and the wound would not suppurate. From time to time he would wash the wound and from time to time he would anoint its opening, and pus and blood would not cover the opening of the wound. He would not walk around in the wind and sun, and dust and dirt would not infect the opening of the wound. He would take care of the wound and would see to it that the wound heals. Then, both because he does what is suitable and because the foul poisonous humour has been expelled with no trace left behind, the wound would heal, and because it had healed and was covered with skin, he would not incur death or deadly suffering.

  So, too, Sunakkhatta, it is possible that some bhikkhus44 here might think thus: “Craving has been called an arrow by the Recluse; the poisonous humour of ignorance is spread about by desire, lust, and ill will. That arrow of craving has been pulled out from me; the poisonous humour of ignorance has ben expelled. I am one who is completely intent on Nibbāna.” Being one who really is intent on Nibbāna, he would not pursue those things unsuitable for one completely intent on Nibbāna. He would not pursue the sight of unsuitable forms with the eye, he would not pursue unsuitable sounds with the ear, unsuitable odours with the nose, unsuitable flavours with the tongue, unsuitable tangibles with the body, or unsuitable mind-objects with the mind. Because he does not pursue the sight of unsuitable forms with the eye... unsuitable mind-objects with the mind, lust does not invade his mind. Because his mind is not invaded by lust, he would not incur death or deadly suffering.

  Sunakkhatta, I have given this simile in order to convey a meaning. This is the meaning here: “Wound” is a term for the six internal bases.45 “Poisonous humour” is a term for ignorance. “Arrow” is a term for craving. “Probe” is a term for mindfulness. “Knife” is a term for noble wisdom. “Surgeon” is a term for the Tathagāta, the Accomplished One, the Fully Enlightened One.46

  In his teachings, the Buddha starts from the worldviews and beliefs of the people he is teaching. He only leads them to question their views and beliefs to the extent necessary for his teaching and to the degree necessary for their liberation.

  10. The Early History of the Sutra and the Issue of Authenticity

  The Śūraṅgama Sūtra in India

  The period in India just prior to the Sutra’s transmission to China at the beginning of the eighth century was one of social upheaval, political fragmentation, and severe social strain. The country was divided into many feudal kingdoms, with a good share of extremely violent rulers and a resurgence of tribal influence. Buddhism was in danger of losing its traditional social supports and was facing new challenges from the Hindu Śaivite tantrism that was spreading from south India. This was the context of the initial flourishing of Indian esoteric Buddhism along with its siddha traditions. Moral challenges and confusion arose both in secular society and within Buddhist communi
ties. Powerful sorcerers — tribal, Śaivite, and self-described Buddhist — flaunted their psychic powers and tried to overturn the fundamental precepts of the monastic life.47 Given this atmosphere, it must have been quite plain at the time that the teachings of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra directly addressed the problems that Indian society was experiencing. Perhaps that was why, according to the traditional accounts, the Sutra was considered a state treasure.

  Concerns about the Sutra’s Authenticity

  The authenticity of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra has been challenged by some modern scholars on the grounds that, since no Indic original is extant, the text must be no translation at all but rather an original composition in the Chinese. The date of the translation has been questioned, and textual anomalies that might suggest the interpolation of purely Chinese cultural elements have been identified. There are strong reasons to believe, however, that the original text can only be Indian.48 It is true, for example, that during Buddhism’s earliest centuries in China, spurious or corrupted Buddhist texts were circulated; but by 705 C.E., when the translation of the Sutra was completed, Chinese monastic scholars had become sufficiently skilled to recognize inauthentic texts.49

  Further, while some details in the text do seem to arise from a Chinese context, these could merely represent choices made by the translators to substitute Chinese equivalents or analogues for unfamiliar Indian elements that were present in the original.50 A prime example is the appearance of ascetic masters in Part IX, among the lists of categories of beings. The Chinese uses the character “xian” 仙 for these ascetic masters. This “xian,” often translated as “Immortal,” is the Chinese character for the long-lived spiritual masters of the Chinese Daoist tradition. The appearance of such a clearly Daoist word has led some scholars to suggest that the passage is evidence that the Śūraṅgama Sūtra was composed in China. A much more plausible explanation is also the simpler one: that the Indic original was “ṛṣi,” which referred to the ascetic Hindu saints.51 The Chinese translators sensibly chose to render “ṛṣi” as “xian,” supposing the two kinds of ascetics to be, if not precisely equivalent, then at least occupants of similar spiritual niches in their respective societies.

  The presence of two indisputably Indian elements that play leading roles in the text also point to an Indian origin. One of these, already mentioned here, is the presence of Indian Buddhist logic in the many syllogisms and the use of the fourfold negation. The other is the Śūraṅgama Mantra, which the Chinese text leaves untranslated and which lies at the heart of the Sutra’s instructions for spiritual practice.

  Having considered the authenticity of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra from the point of view of the historical criticism of religious texts, it is important to consider it as well from the point of view of the Sutra’s own tradition. Whatever the historical origin and provenance of this text may ultimately be shown to be — if indeed the questions about it can ever be definitively answered — one fact is not in dispute: the Śūraṅgama Sūtra has been widely accepted in China as canonical for well over a thousand years. Such acceptance reflects the view that a religious text’s authoritativeness must be measured by its effectiveness as a guide to moral and spiritual practice. From this pragmatic and orthopraxic point of view, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra may be correctly deemed to be authentic simply because generations of advanced practitioners and their students and disciples have revered this text, have followed its instructions, and have explained it to others as a trustworthy prescription for moral purification and spiritual advancement towards enlightenment.52 In the minds of its many admirers, then, the Sutra’s validity and importance do not depend on whether the text actually represents a verbatim record of words spoken by the Buddha Śākyamuni in the Magadhan dialect of Sanskrit in what is now Uttar Pradesh sometime in the fifth century B.C.E. From this point of view, uncertainty about the Sutra’s textual history is not a cause for any uncertainty about its ethical and spiritual truth.

  The Traditional Account of Its Transmission to China

  The Venerable Master Hsüan Hua has summarized the traditional account of the transmission of the Sutra from India to China as follows:

  The king of one of the regions of India had proclaimed the Śūraṅgama Sūtra to be a national treasure because it was one of the Sutras that the Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna had brought back from the Dragon (nāga) Palace.53 After the proclamation, no one was permitted to take the Sutra out of the country. At that time, Bhikṣu Paramiti was intent upon getting the Sutra out of India into other countries, especially China. He set out for China carrying a copy of the Sutra, only to be stopped by customs officials who would not permit him to carry the Sutra across the border. He returned home and tried to think of a way to get the Sutra out of the country. Finally, he thought of a way. He wrote out the Sutra in minute characters on extremely fine silk, rolled it up, and sealed it with wax. Then he cut open his arm and placed the small scroll inside his flesh. Next he applied medicines to the wound and waited for it to heal. (Some people say he put the Sutra in his leg, but I think that since it would not have been respectful to place the text below the waist, he probably chose some fleshy place on the upper part of his body and put the Sutra there.) When the wound healed, he again set out for China and passed the border guards without incident. Eventually, he arrived in Guangdong, where he happened to meet the court official Fang Yong, who invited him to reside at a temple in Guangdong while he translated the Sutra.54

  11. A Brief Explanation of Some Important Technical Terms

  For those who are new to Buddhist teachings, we offer here brief explanations of important terms and concepts mentioned in the Sutra.

  No-Self

  The teaching of no-self55 is fundamental to Buddhism. The Buddha did not teach that we do not exist, but he did teach that suffering is caused by our clinging to a self, an individuality that is illusory and does not exist. What “self” is it that does not exist? It is not merely the personality, or ego, that identifies itself in terms of social roles and interactions. Buddhism denies the existence of a basic self that is identified with our physical being, including our gender, and also the existence of what is called the “soul” and other levels of spiritual self. The existence of a self of cosmic consciousness that is identified with the universe is also denied. All these “selves” are constructed, conventional designations that only contribute to our attachment to illusion. The true reality that does exist, and that is who we really are, lies beyond our attachment to a duality of self and other and a duality of existence and nonexistence.

  Enlightenment or Awakening

  In this volume we use the English terms “enlightenment” and “awakening” as synonyms. In Buddhism, when these terms are used in a formal sense, they do not connote a temporary experience but rather a complete and irreversible transformation of one’s fundamental way of being in the world. Only the enlightenment of a Buddha is perfect and complete. Bodhisattvas, Solitary Sages,56 and Arhats57 have awakened but have not perfected their awakening. All enlightened beings have three accomplishments in common: they have seen through the illusion of self; they have achieved permanent release from the cycle of death and rebirth; and as a byproduct of their enlightenment, they possess spiritual powers. The Sanskrit word “bodhi,” which we have translated as “full awakening,” refers in this text to the awakening or enlightenment of a Buddha.

  Dharma and Dharmas

  In Buddhism, “Dharma” no longer has its Hindu meaning of religious duty according to one’s class. In Buddhist usage the word has several meanings, as follows:

  It is a general term for the Buddha’s teachings as a whole (the Dharma, or the Buddha’s Dharma), and it also may designate a particular teaching, usually a method of practice leading to enlightenment.

  It signifies the reality that one realizes upon one’s enlightenment — that is, the fundamental reality that is immanent in the entire universe (the Dharma-Realm58).

  It is a term for the individual components of
a teaching, often as an item in a list. Among them are the lists of the various divisions of the mental and physical world. We sometimes translate “dharmas” in this sense as “phenomena.”

  It is also a term both for the sense-data that enter our minds through our faculties of perception and for the thoughts and emotions that arise in our minds and are identified by the faculty of cognition. We translate “dharmas” in this sense as “mental objects” or “objects of cognition.”59

  Samādhi

  Samādhi is “a concentrated, self-collected, intent state of mind and meditation, which, concomitant with right living, is a necessary condition to the attainment of higher wisdom and emancipation.”60

  There are four distinct senses in which the word “samādhi” is used. First, it designates the correct mental focus or concentration that is a necessary preliminary to the deeper meditative states. Second, samādhi indicates those deeper levels of mental concentration and stability which may be reached through correct practice. These levels include the four dhyānas, which correspond to the states of mind of the gods in the heavens of the realm of form, and the four samāpattis, which correspond to the states of mind of gods who abide on the planes of formlessness. Third, there are even more profound levels of samādhi that are experienced by enlightened beings. Fourth, “samādhi” may also refer specifically to the Śūraṅgama (Indestructible) Samādhi, which is the state of mind of all Buddhas and which is discussed at length in this Sutra.

  Emptiness

  There are at least three ways in which the idea of emptiness can be understood: on the intellectual level, in practice, and as a description of enlightenment.

  On the intellectual level, it can be said that emptiness61 means that all dharmas — all phenomena, mental and physical — lack an independent existence of their own and exist only through reliance on other phenomena. All dharmas lack real, permanent, essential attributes that distinguish them from all other phenomena. In other words, everything in the world, both physical and mental, is interdependent. Nothing exists entirely on its own, separate, and with no causal relation to anything else. Thus all dharmas are empty of any individual, inherent being.62