by Hsuan Hua
An intellectual understanding of emptiness can be extended into a method of practice and a way of life that empties our experience in every moment. To “empty our experience” means, first, to remove “me” and “mine” from every thought that arises in our consciousness. Sustained contemplation of the emptiness of the self can extricate us from ego-centered experience and liberate us from the prison of selfishness. We learn to see ourselves and our concerns, our desires and fears, as empty — like a mirage or a dream, as ephemeral as a bubble or a flash of lightning. The Diamond Sūtra says,
As stars, a fault of vision, as a lamp,
A mock show, dew-drops, or a bubble,
A dream, a lightning-flash or cloud,
So should one view what is conditioned.63
Emptying ourselves opens us up to the fullness of the world.
Emptying experience also entails eliminating the boundaries that we have drawn to cope with the world — the walls we erect to protect ourselves, the turf we stake out to rule, and the fantasies of future conquests that we map in our minds. Emptying ourselves must lead to the emptying of the “other,” the “no-self,” so that self and other are no longer two. When the line that divides them is erased, then there is no conflict, no longer anything to fear or to gain.
With enlightenment comes the realization that true emptiness is identical to the fullness of wondrous existence. It can be reached through the hard work of becoming aware of every single thought and emptying them one by one.
The Five Aggregates
The word “aggregate” renders the Sanskirt word “skandha,” which means “heap,” “pile,” or “aggregation.” (The Buddha once illustrated his teaching about the aggregates with five small piles of different grains.)
The five aggregates — form, sense-perception, cognition, mental formations, and consciousness — are general categories that together include everything that we experience in the psycho-physical world. Thus they can be an effective tool for understanding the teaching of no-self. If one analyzes all aspects of what one feels to be one’s self, one finds that all fall within the scope of the five aggregates.
More specifically, the aggregate of form comprises what we perceive as our bodies and the rest of the physical world. The aggregate of sense-perception comprises the first five faculties of perception — eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and body — and their intake of the five corresponding categories of sense-data — visible objects, sounds, odors, flavors, and tactile objects. We respond to these perceptions as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral.
The aggregate of cognition includes the function of identifying sense-data and making distinctions concerning the data. It also involves differentiating between mental contents; thus it includes the higher perceptual functions and thinking processes, for example the use of language.
The aggregate of mental formations refers to both conscious and non-conscious volitional forces, including conscious intentions or acts of will; innate predispositions resulting from karma created during previous lives; and unconscious forces having to do with basic life functions, nourishment, and growth.
The aggregate of consciousness is the subtle basis of the aggregates of sense-perception, cognition, and mental formations. It consists of a subtle distinction-making awareness that distinguishes awareness from the objects of awareness.
The Eighteen Constituents
The eighteen constituents are the six faculties, the six kinds of perceived objects, and the six consciousnesses. The six faculties are the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind. The six kinds of perceived objects are visible objects, sounds, odors, flavors, tactile objects, and objects of cognition. The six faculties and the six kinds of perceived objects are together known as the “twelve sites.” They are the sites for the coming into being of the six consciousnesses. That is, contact between the faculties and their objects is a necessary condition for the coming into being of eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind-consciousness (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, tactile sensation, and cognition).
Like the five aggregates, the eighteen constituents provide an analysis of the entire psycho-physical world and an aid to breaking attachments to that world. Everything that we experience can also be subsumed within the eighteen constituents. The first five groups of perceived objects — visible objects, sounds, odors, flavors, and tactile objects — together with the first five faculties that perceive these objects comprise the entire physical world. The faculty of cognition and objects of cognition in the mind, together with the six consciousnesses, comprise the world of mind. All mental experience and the entire physical world lie within these eighteen; therefore, no notion of a permanent soul or self is needed to describe and account for any experience.
Seven Primary Elements
The seven primary elements are earth, which represents solidity; water, which represents what is liquid; fire, which represents warmth; wind, which represents motion; space; visual awareness; and consciousness. These primary elements are the qualities of matter-energy as they are distinguished in the mind. It may be helpful to think about the primary elements on three different levels: first, their identity with the Matrix of the Thus-Come One, which is the enlightened mind and the primary elements’ true nature; second, their pure and essential qualities, which we do not usually experience directly; and third, the primary elements as we experience them in their state of mixture with each other in various proportions in our bodies and in the world.
12. Notes on This Translation
We have already mentioned64 some of the challenges involved in undertaking to translate into modern English the formal eighth-century Chinese of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra. Perhaps the most difficult challenge came from the constraints the Chinese translators imposed upon themselves in choosing the pattern of four-character phrases in which the greater part of the Chinese translation is written. Not infrequently, in order to preserve the four-character meter, the translators found it necessary to omit one or more characters even though the characters to be omitted were essential to the meaning. An example that the reader of the Chinese text frequently encounters involves the list of the six faculties of perception, or the list of their six objects. Although in each case all six are clearly meant, two are routinely omitted so that the remaining four fit the four-character meter. (A further complication is that the same two are not always omitted.) In general, wherever such terseness might inhibit understanding, we have either added clarifying words, included an explanatory excerpt from the commentary of the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua, or identified the missing meanings in a footnote.
Second, the Chinese text often proceeds in patterned paragraphs, and the resulting repetition sometimes tempted the Chinese translators to enliven the repeated text with a variety of synonyms. The opposite is also true: the Chinese translators often used one character to indicate quite different meanings — sometimes in the same sentence or even in the same four-character phrase. In both cases we have chosen clarity over literary flourish. Several characters that mean the same thing we have generally rendered with one English word, and single characters with multiple meanings we have generally translated into several English words.
Third, the abundance of Sanskrit terms, represented in the text by specialized transliteration characters, is one of the features that most challenges the reader of the Chinese text. We chose not to pass on this difficulty to readers of the English version. We have, in general, left in the Sanskrit only those words that are already familiar to English readers (such words as “Dharma,” “karma,” “nirvana,” and “Bodhisattva”) or those words that we expect will become English words as Buddhist texts become more and more familiar to Westerners. When we have translated Sanskrit terms that the Chinese text merely transliterates, we have noted the Sanskrit original in the footnotes.
Fourth, although the original Sanskrit text is no longer extant, almost all of the many technical Buddhist terms and con
cepts appearing in this Sutra also appear in other sutras, including many of the sutras that survive in the Sanskrit. Thus, for these terms and concepts, the Sanskrit originals are well known. In all such cases, in translating the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, where we could confidently identify the Sanskrit words or phrases that lay behind the Chinese renderings, we have relied on the Sanskrit to determine a correct translation into English.
In preparing the present volume it was necessary for the translators to decide whether to include a commentary, in the manner that is traditional in Asia. Most Western translations of sacred texts, unless the texts are short, have not included traditional commentaries. The Buddhist Text Translation Society has been an exception, having issued numerous texts with the full commentaries given by the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua. The length of these commentaries has meant that the translations of the longer sutras, with commentary, have run into multiple volumes — nine for the Buddhist Text Translation Society’s 2000–05 edition of this Sutra. One of the primary intents of this new translation has been to present the Śūraṅgama to an audience literate in English in the convenient and accessible form of a single volume. Still, to the translators it seemed unacceptable to omit commentary altogether given the difficulty of the text. It was decided, therefore, to preserve the traditional format of interlinear exegesis and to draw excerpts from the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua’s commentary when passages of text clearly called for elucidation.
The Venerable Master Hsüan Hua’s commentary to the Sutra was given in the form of lectures delivered over a period of four months in the summer and fall of 1968 at the Buddhist Lecture Hall in San Francisco. The lectures were later transcribed and edited, and they have been published in full as part of the Buddhist Text Translation Society’s nine-volume edition of this Sutra. Besides explaining the Sutra text itself, the lectures were the occasion of many lessons in personal conduct, spiritual practice, monastic discipline, and general Buddhist doctrine. These lessons, often given in the form of stories, are of very great value to anyone who undertakes a spiritual practice or who simply wishes for a better life. We include some of these instructions in the present volume. For the most part, however, and with some reluctance, we quote in this single-volume translation only those passages of the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua’s commentary which directly present explanations of the Sutra text itself. Thus, the commentary excerpted for this translation is by no means a substitute for the full commentary and is only partly representative of the commentary’s scope and depth. Fortunately, the complete record of these lectures remains easily available in the Buddhist Text Translation Society’s earlier translation.
A word concerning gender-neutrality of language is appropriate here. Where possible we have resorted to the gender-neutral plural pronouns “they,” “them,” and “their.” But most often this escape from the gender bias of English pronouns was not feasible. First, the bulk of the Sutra consists of dialogue between two male speakers, the Buddha Śakyamuni and his cousin Ānanda. Second, as translators we strove to avoid anachronistic language, that is, language that might weaken the Sutra’s ties to its time and place. We did not wish to portray the Buddha speaking in a way that, it seemed to us, he would not have spoken; thus we did not use words derived from modern science or technology, technical terms of European philosophy, or twenty-first-century casual speech. It was our wish to find a voice for these speakers that would be formal, precise, and natural, both time-specific and timeless. It was there that our quandary lay. English speakers have been engaged for the last quarter-century in making an overdue transition to gender-neutral speech — above all by the use of the phrase “he or she” and by the heretofore ungrammatical use of “they” forms in the singular. But in translating a document that has come down to us over many centuries, we found that repeated use of these contemporary gender-neutral usages struck a dissonant tone of anachronism that tended to distract from the naturalness and authority of the speakers’ voices. We therefore resigned ourselves to the unsatisfactory use of masculine pronouns when both genders are meant. Our decision to do so was entirely editorial, not doctrinal.
All this does not mean that the Śūraṅgama Sūtra holds male gender to be an advantage in spiritual practice. There is no such teaching in the Sutra. In fact, the courtesan who casts her spell upon Ānanda at the opening of the Sutra and who accompanies Ānanda and the Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī back to the Buddha’s assembly becomes enlightened during the course of the dialogue, reaching a level of awakening higher than Ānanda’s level.65 The enlightenment of Yaśodarā, who had been the Buddha Śākyamuni’s wife when he was still a prince, is also mentioned.66
Finally, a few words about our translation process. As with other texts produced by members of the Buddhist Text Translation Society, the present translation was made in four distinct steps. First, a primary translation was accomplished by a committee that included both native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of English. The second step consisted of reviews of the entire text to check for accuracy. Next came editorial polishing to ensure naturalness and consistency of English style, and finally, certification that the translation faithfully presents the Buddha’s teachings. In all this effort we relied on the pioneering work of the previous translators. Without their labors, making this translation would have been far more difficult and the result far more subject to error. Nevertheless, despite the effort of many people during a period of six and a half years, we recognize that our translation can hardly be free of mistakes, and we request that the students, scholars, practitioners, and general readers who undertake to read this translation will kindly point out any errors to us so that we may correct them in any future printing.
We join our colleagues in dedicating any merit accrued in the making of this translation to world peace and to the enlightenment of all beings.
Ron Epstein and David Rounds,
Co-Chairs, Śūraṅgama Sūtra Translation Committee,
Buddhist Text Translation Society
* * *
The Sutra (T. 945) is generally known in Chinese as the Dafoding shoulengyanjing, 大佛頂首楞嚴經, often shortened to Lengyanjing, 楞嚴經; the complete title is Dafoding rulai miyin xiuzheng liaoyi zhu pusa wanheng shoulengyan jing 大佛頂如來密因修證了義 諸菩薩萬行首楞嚴經. The Sanskrit word śūraṅgama roughly means “indestructible”; it combines the words śūram (greatly, absolutely) and gama (durable, solid). The Chinese text transliterates the two Sanskrit words as shou leng yan 首楞嚴.
This Sutra is not to be confused with the Śūraṅgamasamādhi-sūtra (T. 642), translated by Étienne Lamotte as La concentration de la marche héroïque (Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra) (Paris: Institut belge des hautes études chinoises, 1965). His French translation has been rendered into English by Sarah Boin-Webb (Richmond, UK: Curzon Press, 1998).↩
Skt. Saddharmapundarika Sūtra, Ch. Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經.↩
Ch. Huayan jing 華嚴經.↩
Ch. Da Niepan jing 大涅槃經.↩
Skt. Hṛdaya Sūtra, Ch. Xin jing 心經.↩
Skt. Vajracchedikā Sūtra, Ch. Jingang jing 金剛經.↩
Commentators have included the late–Ming dynasty master Hanshan Deqing, and more recently the Venerable Masters Xuyun, Yuanying, and Hsüan Hua (Xuanhua). At least 127 Chinese commentaries were written on the Sutra between 767 CE and 1968. A list of commentaries is available online at http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/Buddhism/Shurangama/Ron%20Epstein%20Diss%201975%20SS%20Commentary%20List.pdf.↩
See below “A Brief Explanation of Some Important Technical Terms,” p. xlv.↩
The year of the translation is recorded in the colophon as 705. A complete Tibetan translation was made of the Chinese translation during the Qing dynasty.↩
The four-character pattern is broken occasionally to accommodate proper names; and three sets of verses are spoken in the Sutra, one in seven-character lines (part 3.6 of the present translation) and two in five-character lines (parts
5.3 and 6.3).↩
Previous to the present volume, the only complete translation in English has been that by the Buddhist Text Translation Society, with the complete commentary by the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua, first published in an eight-volume edition between 1977 and 1986. A revised edition was published between 2000 and 2005 as The Shurangama Sūtra with Commentary by the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua, trans. Buddhist Text Translation Society (Burlingame, CA: Buddhist Text Translation Society, 2000–05). The first translation into English, of only the first four of the ten rolls, was made by Samuel Beal and included in A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures from the Chinese (London: Trubner, 1871), 284–369. A very small portion of the first roll of the Sutra was translated by Reverend Joseph Edkins as the first chapter of his Chinese Buddhism: A Volume of Sketches, Historical, Descriptive, and Critical, 2nd ed. (London: Trubner, 1893), 289–301. In 1938, in conjunction with Bhikshu Wai-tao, Dwight Godard included a rough translation of about a third of the Sutra in his A Buddhist Bible (New York: Dutton, 1938), 108–275. Most of the text was translated by Lu K'uan Yü (Charles Luk), together with an abridged translation of the commentary by Chan Master Hanshan Deqing, as The Śūraṅgama Sūtra (London: Rider, 1966). Regrettably, by omitting the Śūraṅgama Mantra and the section that describes the proper practice of the mantra, Luk’s volume in effect leaves out the Sutra’s heart. (This section is part 8 of the present volume.)↩
