A Note on Platform Sutra by Dr Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya

The Platform Sutra opens with an address by Bhagavan Hui Neng. It
opens with a description of the audience that consisted of brilliant
men  and women from different walks of life.There were gopvernment
officials Confucian scholars Taoists bhikkhus and bhikkhunis and
others.This reminds of the openings of the Mahayana sutras where
Buddha addresses an audience consisting of Buddhas and bodhisattvas
and seers and bhikkhus and bhikkhunis of different levels of
attainment and kings and princes.

Bhagavan  in order to dwell on the essence of Buddhism at the outset
tells us how he realised the same in his own life.Indeed Buddhism is
not being taught here as a discipline meant for Philosophy Honours
students or for students of Comparative Philosophy.Bhagavan is about
to teach Buddhism so that it transforms our body and mind, so that it
transforms our whole beings so that we could be Buddhas ourselves. And
the best way teach how one could be a Buddhists and enlightened one
had better recount how one became enlightened. This is where
bigraphies and auto biographies are essential..Biographies and auto
biographies give us case studies of men who crossed the Grand Canyon
of ignorance and reached the bower of bliss.

So the Platform Sutra now flows into an autobigraphical note where the
speaker Bhagavan Hui Neng tells his own story. 

Click here to Reply

Bhagavan Hui Neng recounts his story. His father was a government
official . But as ill luck would have it , he died when Hui Neng was a
mere child. So his mother had a hard time.Hui Neng used to collect
firewood and sell the same in the market in Canton. One day he heard
someone recite the Diamond Sutra. At once he attained enlightenment.He
went to the man who was reciting the sutra and learnt that it was Hung
Yen who had taught him to recite the sutra. Both laymen and those who
are initiated in the lore of Buddhism had better recite the sutra.
Because that is how  one could directly become a Buddha.

Although Sakyasinha of Kapilavastu and many other Buddhas were born
with a silver spoon  Bhagavan Hui Neng had a different past. Very
early in his life he lost his father . So he had lot of hardship.But
listening to the Diamond sutra enlightened him. This speaks of sudden
enlightenment. Whether enlightenment could take place  all of a sudden
or not is always debated.But we feel that whenever enlightenment takes
place it takes place all of a sudden. The reason is
simple.Enlightenment gives one a vision of life and existence that is
qualitatively different from the ordinary man’s perception of the
universe. There might be numerous planes of enlightenment and
perception . Higher and higher the person might excelsior from one
plane of enlightenment to another. And every leap is characterised by
suddenness. Sakyasinha Buddha saw myriads of his former births and
death as if in a flash during the hour of his enlightenment. It
happened with suddenness.In fact no one can be one fourth Buddha and
half Buddha and so on.Realisation implies phase shift. It is something
like water turning into vapour. At a time quantum the water all of a
sudden turns into vapour.  But this suddenness is also apparent.
People who toiled hard through numerous lives all of a sudden attains
enlightenment.True that Hui Neng was not initiated in the Buddhist
lore. But in his earlier lives he must have had journeyed along the
tao. The fruition came to him all of a sudden in his life when he was
a firewoodseller in Canton. The man who was reciting the Diamond Sutra
told Hui Neng that one could be directly a Buddha according the
patriarch Hung Yen 

Hui neng was a poor firewood seller . He was not educated. While at
the Canton bazaar busy getting and spending he chanced upon the chant
of Diamond Suta. And at once he was enlightened. He went to the person
and heard of Bhagavan Hung yen. Bhagavan Hung Yen told the person that
chanting of the Diamond Sutra can manifest Buddha nature in the
mendicants as well as the laity. Hui Neng at the advice of his
neighbours made up his mind to go and meet Bhagavan Hung Yen.Hung Yen
lived in a place roughly thirty days’ walk away from Canton. One of
the acquaintances of Hui Neng helped Hui Neng settle things for his
mother so that she does not starve during his absence.Hui Neng now set
out for Hung Yen and reached his place in less than thirty days. He
paid his obeisance to the Fifth patriarch of the Chan school and told
him that he had come a long way to pay the patriarch his respects. He
told the patriarch that he wanted to be a Buddha. Hung Yen said that
Hui Neng had come from  Ling Nan and hence a barbarian. Humg Yen
wondered whether a barbarian could be a Buddha or not. Hui Neng came
from South China and people of South China were barbarians. But
enlightenment had already opened itself before Hui Neng. So he had no
hesitation to speak the truth. He said in the contingent one might
belong to the South or to the North, one may be a barbarian or not.
But Buddha nature is everywhere the same. Buddhanature in every one is
the same. So discriminating people as barbarian or civilized does not
conform to the Buddha nature.

Once upon a time, there was a very beautiful young man whose name was Mon Pa. When it was dusk, he used to sit in a cloister and meditated on the  transitoriness  of the world of eye and ear. Right then, an angel used to appear before him and nestle close to him. The young man used to enjoy his company. But as soon as the night set in, the angel would vanish. The young man did not know the whereabouts of the angel. One day he hit upon a plan. He softly tied a thread with the belt of the angel. One end of the thread however remained with the young man. When the angel vanished, where he went could be now easily detected. The young man followed the thread and went to a forlorn grotto where the angel lived. But that is not our point. We want to illustrate hereby how a thread could lead one from the known to the unknown. Or else, how a thread could unravel a mystery. Buddhist literature is loaded with Suttas or Sutras. The Pali word Sutta may have been derived from the Sanskrit Sukta or Su  Ukta meaning well said or a noble speech. The Buddhist Suttas should be deemed as noble speeches. Most of them were delivered by Lord Buddha himself. But Sutra could be also understood as a thread that might lead one to unravel some mystery not decoded here- to- before. The freaks of history and the logic of affairs spread the message of Buddha far and wide past the Himalayas and past the Taklamakan desert. And Hui Neng from South China got at the heart of Buddhist way of life and became a Buddha or an Enlightened One himself. 

There were many religions and philosophical systems prevalent in China during Huineng’s time. There were the Confucians. There were the followers of Lao Tse. Also there were the followers of Lord Buddha. Many of them were government officials. They were keen to learn what truth is and how should one reach the truth. At their instance, Bhagvan Hui Neng delivered a speech in a stoa or a lecture hall. His speech stands out as a monument in course of the endless discourse of man on truth. It is known as the Platform Sutra. It is no doubt a well spoken speech which is time and again. It is often aphoristic loaded with signs. Reticence and economy of words characterize the speech. Thus the Platform Sutra being a Sutra  seems to give us the thread following which we might reach the mysterium tremendum that baffles all inferences and languages. We propose hereby to read  the first chapter of the Platform Sutra from the standpoint of the Close Reading School with high hopes to reach some treasure island.  The Close Reading School focuses on the text without taking into account any extratextual context whatever.The text for us is the Palatform Sutra as translated by Christian Humphreys and Wong Mou Lam. Close Reading School focuses on the text without taking into account any extratextual context whateve.Therefore we are not joining in the debate as to whether the speech of Master Hui Neng has been put down in the extant Platform Sutra ad verbatim or not or whether Hui neng was really christened as the sixth patriarch of the Zen community or not .Whatever context has been referred to in the text only---or the cotext  wiil be used in course of our close reading

The Platform Sutra opens with an autobiographical note. Bhagvan Hui Neng recounts his childhood. His father was a government officer. But may be he could not please his boss and hence he was dismissed from his post and banished to be a  commoner in Xin Zhou in Guangdong  As ill luck would have it he passed away when Master Hui Neng was a mere child. The mother and the little Hui Neng now  moved to Canton. He did not get any school education. He did not know how to read or write even. The cup of life was dealt to Hui Neng in a different way. Since his childhood he used to go to the forest and fell trees. He took wood there from and went to the city market for selling them. One day, when he reached the market with wood for sell, he heard someone chanting the Vajrachhedika Sutra and at once he was enlightened. 

One wonders whether it is at all possible to become enlightened all of a sudden hearing a particular chant. It is commonly assumed that one has to peruse lot of scriptures. One has to undergo lot of penance and meditation. Thereafter if one is fortunate enough , one might get a glimpse of the beatitude larking behind the show of the world. But on the surface Master Hui Neng  did not have to journey along such a rough road. The enlightenment was sudden. Apparently, he did not seek the truth or strive for it. Modern  physics, however speaks of the Butterfly Effect. If a butterfly flaps its wings in Calcutta , there might be a Tsunami in California. The cause might be mild but the effect could be tremendous and great.  A mere hearing of a chant of a Sutra might bring about a revolution in the perception of a man. A  peripeti or a sudden reversal of events took place in his life. The person who was chanting the Vajrachhedika or the Diamond Sutra told Master Hui Neng that he had visited the monastery of Master Hung Zen in North China. It was there that he learned the Sutra. The young Hui Neng felt that he must meet  His Holiness Master Hung Zen. Go he must. But how could he let alone his widow mother flung into the fire of chill penury and starvation. But another accident on the surface took place. The very man who was reciting the Vajrachhhedika Sutra  gave him a vast amount of money. With that , the widow mother could live through years to come amidst plenty even if she had not worked for her livelihood. Master Hui Neng settled things for his mother and then set out for the monastery of Hung Zen. This was the Abhiniskraman of Master Hui Neng.

It was a tiresome journey. Master Hui Neng walked for some thirty days . Finally he reached the monastery of Master Hung Zen. The first interview of Master Hui Neng with Master Hung Zen is time and again. Master Hui Neng said that  although  he was a very ordinary guy he wanted to be a Buddha or an enlightened one. To that end, he wanted to be initiated by Master Hung Zen. But the latter smiled on the other side of the face and exclaimed that the people from South China were barbarians. And it goes without saying Master Hui Neng hailed from South China only. But Master Hui Neng was not at all dismayed. He readily answered that when one understands what enlightenment is ,one does not know how to distinguish north from the south or east from the west.  This is not all Master Hui Neng further observed that may be in the contimgent he was a barbarian  while His Holiness Hung Zen was not , but   Buddha nature doesnot admit of any such distinction .Master Hui Neng’s answer clearly shows that his perceptions were different from those of the common run of men. Besides Master Hui Neng did not hesitate to express what he felt in front of the great preceptor Master Hung Zen although he prayed for initiation from the latter. The conversation drew attention of many a inmates of the monastery . Master Hung Zen summarily ended the conversation asking Master Hui Neng to go to the backyard of the monastery and work. 

As soon as Master Hui Neng reached the backyard of the monastery, someone ordered him to draw water and pound rice and hew wood for the kitchen. Master Hui Neng obeyed him. He never went to the lecture hall to listen to the sermons. He never went to the front side of the monastery to meet Master Hung Zen. In fact Hui Neng toiled like Prince Ferdinand in the household of Prospero. Hui Neng’s object of love was enlightenment or Buddhahood. After a long passage of time,  Master Hung Zen secretly visited Master Hui Neng and told him that he was positioned in the kitchen at the backyard of the monastery only with a purpose. Hung Zen said that Master Hui Neng must have understood the purport of his orders. Hui Neng said yes to his Master. 

This is a unique event. Love between the preceptor and his disciple must be very big. But there might be no display of the same. Even conversations between the two through verbal language is also not always necessary. 

One day, Master Hung Zen told an assembly of his disciples in the lecture hall that he was keen to choose his successor whom he would  hand over the begging  bowl and  the robe that he inherited from his preceptor. It was Bodhidharma who first preached Zen Buddhism in China. He was the Twenty-eighth in the line of the preceptors from Bhagvan Siddhartha Buddha himself. Bhagvan Bodhidharma was the first Zen patriarch in China. Hung Zen was the fifth patriarch in the line of Zen preceptors in China. The begging  bowl  and the robe  were inherited by Bodhidharma from his preceptor and it was handed down by Bhagvan Bodhidharma to his successor. In due course, Master Hung Zen being the fifth patriarch of the Zen community inherited it from his preceptor. And he is keen on handing it over to his successor if any. 

The narrative gradually thus seems to attain the heights of heroic poetry. In heroic poetry as such , a sword or a horse or a chariot seems to have  a personality of its own. Think of Gandiva –the bow of Arjuna in the Mahabharata. Think of the shield of Achilles in Homer . Here the begging  bowl and the robe become a person. 

In order that Hung Zen might choose his successor from his disciples , Master Hung Zen asked his disciples to write a poem on what they felt as wisdom. Thus, wisdom was the point in question.

Master Hung Zens exhortation to his disciples in this context is very important.He observed that performing good work or good conduct does not do away with the taints sticking to a person. Good work or good conduct only replaces bad taints with good ones. To take a parallel imagery from our daily life we could say that when we soap our body and then smear powder on it what we really do is to replace one kind of dust with another kind only. Hung Zen observed that morality has its limitation. Instead of being obsessed with morality Hung Zen observed one had better look into ones mind for wisdom and write. It must not be a labored one. One must write the way one understands wisdom—what wisdom is like.

Hung Zen’s announcement  fell flat on his disciples. There was one Shen Xiu who was deemed to be a very learned disciple of Master Hung Zen. Everybody thought Shen Xiu would compose the poem  and consequently he would be the next patriarch. And they would only obey Shen Xiu and follow him. 

This is no doubt an interesting episode.People donot commonly think on their own. Because they are satisfied having mugged the precepts of others. But to undertake a spiritual journey one must be a lamp unto himself.This was Bhagavan Buddhas  last sermon addressed to Master Ananda—attadipo bhava.Indeed we  men are reluctant to think on their own. This is why we fail even in the mundane world. Democracy ,for example, can only succeed when every one of us thinks on his own.

Shen Xiu  himself was however in a fix. To write or not to write the poem was his question. Maybe , he did not understand the reality. Why should he betray his ignorance? Everyone respected him . Why should he stake his popularity? But at the same time he wanted to know whether his understanding of the reality was right or not. Besides he asked himself whether he was keen on attaining the patriarchate. If that were the case he must not join in the competition. Because ambition stands in the way of spiritual development.   This vacillation humanizes the character of Shen Xiu. Finally he decided to write a stanza only to know whether his knowledge was superficial or deep according  to his master Master Hung Zen

 Hence, he pasted a poem on the wall of the monastery in secret. No one saw him to paste the poem. He did not put his name on the poem as its author. The poem was thus anonymous or written by an unknown author on the surface. 

The poem reads –

The body is the bodhi tree

The mind is the mirror bright

And one must see

No dust thereon alight

Master Hung Zen chanced upon the lines and at once he ordered his disciples to burn incense before them.

Later, Shen Xiu  visited the Master at the Masters bidding. The Master told   Shen Xiu  that Shen did not understand what the reality is. 

Master Hung Zen told Shen Xiu that one must know that there is a mind which is neither created nor annihilated. One who is always aware of it knows the  world as it is .

Shen Xiu  was very  dejected.

Thus the Zen masters behave in an unorthodox fashion. When a Zen master praises someone, the latter must be doubly cautious. May be one is praised by a Zen master only because one is in the wrong. 

The poem by Shen Xiu  was however widely popular among the inmates of the monastery . This was not surprising. Firstly Shen Xiu  was a senior inmate of the monastery. Secondly he was universally acknowledged as the learned man. Thirdly,patriarch Hung Zen outwardly showed respect to what Shen Xiu  had written. 

One day, Hui Neng heard an inmate of the monastery  recite the poem written by Shen Xiu  Hui Neng asked what it was. The former took pity on Hui Neng because Hui Neng did not know how to read or write . He helped Hui Neng to recite the poem. Later, Hui Neng went where the poem by Shen Xiu  was pasted upon the wall. When somebody read it out to him Hui Neng asked him to paste another poem on the wall. Hui Neng could not write, he dictated the poem. The poem was an instance of oral literature. The poem was pasted on the wall. Thus there were two poems vying with each other. 

So it reminds one of a tourney.There was Shen Xiu  alone flourishing at the tournament. There was no one to challenge him. After some time, a young man unknown and unsung came forward with his poem. The poem reads- 

There is no Bodhi tree

There is no mirror

Everything is void

And dust cannot alight anywhere

The event raised a stir among the inmates of the monastery. The patriarch Hung Zen saw the poem and read it. He then doffed his shoes and simply  erased Hui Nengs poem from the wall with his shoes. 

During the third watch of the night, Hung Zen went to Hui Neng secretly and stamped his staff in front of Hui Neng thrice and retired. Later during the third watch of the night, Hui Neng met Hung Zen in the latter’s chamber . There Hung Zen expounded the Diamond Sutra before Hui Neng and focused on the thought that said that one should use his mind as if it were free from attachment. At once Hui Neng was fully enlightened.

This is an interesting event. Earlier simply hearing the chant of the Diamond Sutra Hui Neng was enlightened.Despite that he went to Master Hung Zen because he being enlightened knew that he was not enlightened.Hung  Zen asked them write a stanza on mind off hand. Shen Xiu did not write off hand.He deliberated a lot before he pasted his poem . But unlettered though ,Hui Neng wrote that the void is all in all and void cannot be defiled. This came spontaneously from him. It was an instance of unpremeditated art.Here the source of knowledge was intuition. This episode shoots a sharp shaft of satire at modern education system. Literacy campaign among the masses only pays on the mundane level. Supramundane knowledge which sublates within it the mundane knowledge really comes from intuition. The mind must not be obsessed with secondary or derivative knowledge. True that Hui Neng wrote what came to him spontaneously. But he knew that he was yet to understand the mind.When Hung Zen visited Hui Neng while the latter was busy pounding rice Hung Zen asked==Is the rice ready? Hui Neng said---The rice needs to be sieved. Now during the third watch of the night at the instance of Bhagavan Hung Zen Hui Neng was fully enlightened. He knew the essence of the mind which alone is and which cannot be defiled. In short the rice was sieved.

The Zen masters do not trust language as the medium through which one could communicate wisdom. Wittgenstein , the philosopher of language had to admit that language could not give the whole truth. Hence he spoke of silence. And Zen teachers also made use of non verbal signs to direct the seekers to see the world as it is or the reality. 

One wonders why should Hui Neng meet his master Hung Zen during   the third watch of the night! Of course Hui Neng wanted to have conversation with Hui Neng in camera so that no  details of the same could transpire. But on another level the third watch reminds us of the third watch of the night when Lord Siddhartha Buddha understood how mind becomes attached and through attachment how men suffer.He also understood the possibility of deconditioning the attachment  and thereby attaining freedom

Lord Buddhas biography is heroic withal. True he did not conquer any mortal army on the battlefield.But he conquered Mara and his followers in battle array. Hung Zen in course of his conversation with Hui Neng observed that one who knows the mind is the hero , a Buudha.

Hung Zen gave away the begging  bowl an d the robe to Hui Neng and asked him to flee presently lest the supporters of Shen Xiu tortured him. Hui Neng said that he was from the South. He did not know the mountain roads in the area where the monastery was situated. Hung Zen himself led him along the roads in the locality. Finally they boarded on a boat. Hui Neng said that he would row . But Hung Zen said nay to his disciple. He himself rowed and steered the boat. This reminds one, of the preceptor as the ferryman who helps his disciple to cross the river of ignorance.

The preceptor left Hui Neng .  At the time of his parting Hung Zen said that Hui Neng must toil hard to liberate all sentient beings. But Hung Zen further added that the  practice of handing over the bowl and the robe to the successor should  be stopped henceforth. In other words Hui Neng was the last in the line of the Zen patriarchs to receive the bowl and the robe.

The relation between the preceptor Hung Zen and the disciple Hung Zen is curious. Here the transmission of the knowledge was from heart to heart. Hung Zen observed in his parting advice to Hui Neng that the enlightenment of the self could never reach its consummation unless one worked enlightenment for others. This implies bondless karuna or compassion for all things both great and small on the part of an enlightened being

  Hui Neng now left alone marched on .Southward ho!  He walked for two months and reached a hill. There he found hundreds of men had come to chase him.They wanted to rob him of the begging bowl and the robe. Among them there was one   Ming by name. Earlier he was an army general. He was very rough in his manners. Ming was about to overtake Hui  Neng . Hui Neng now saw that it was no use trying to escape from their approaching clutch. So what he did was to keep the robe and the begging bowl on a rock. He then told Ming that the robe and the begging bowl were just symbols . What use taking them by force?   Ming however proceeded to the rock just to lift up the robe and the begging bowl But lo! He could not lift them up. How come that they were too heavy for him. We guess he tried over and over again. But alas ! He could not move them an inch. In a moment there was a change in his attitude and character .He cried that he had come to His Holiness  Hui Neng not to rob him of his robe but to take lessons from him. Hui Neng now squatted before Ming and first thing that he exhorted was that Ming must not repent for his any activity whatever. Hui Neng asked Ming to refrain from any kind of thought whatever. Let the mind be blank. Ming performed that for a time.Hui Neng said that when the mind is really bereft of thought it is the self or the original face. At once Ming was enlightened

The episode is singularly important. How is that the robe and the begging bowl were too heavy for Ming? True that they were mere symbols. And yet they were too heavy for Ming. Does it not necessarily mean that symbols are not always mere symbols. They literally often point at the mysterium tremendum. In the language of semiology they are often indices. The robe and the begging bowl being too heavy for Ming pointed at the mysterium tremendum before which he was awestruck.He bowed before His Holiness Hui Neng and asked for instruction. And the only instruction that Hui Neng gave was to look into the mind as it is where there should be no thought,no repentance for the past no foreboding of the future. Any thought whatever is generated from forces acting upon the mind from without. Once these accidental qualities of mind are got rid of one is face to face with a vacuum in oneself.To know this is to be enlightened. Indeed the Dhammapada opens with

             Manopubbangamaa dhammaa

Ming took orders from Hui Neng and went away. One is at this point apt to think why Hung Zen asked Hui Neng to flee unnoticed from the monastery. On the surface it was out of fear that Hui Neng  should flee lest he was harmed by any one of the monastery jealous of Hui Neng. But on another level one wonders whether Hung Zen wanted that Hui Neng become a teacher on his own. Hung Zen said earlier that one must help oneself to get liberated. Similarly no one appoints one to be a teacher. A competent teacher can prove himself to be a teacher

Now that Ming went away Hui Neng resumed his journey. He found that he was still being pursued by evildoers. And now he joined hunter gatherers and lived with them for fifteen years incognito.Why did the enlightened one live with the huntergatherers for long fifteen years? This is a one lakh dollar question particularly in the modern context. There are hunter gatherers still in the world today. Some of them know the art of cultivation.But laugh at doing so. They point out that since Nature has enough to give to the hungry why should they cultivate. Anthropologists observe that they work for twelve hours or nineteen hours only a week to gather their fruits and they have as much calories as people from advanced countries do get. In a world overloaded with pollution we must go back to Nature and invoke Green Economics. We must live in Nature and live in harmony with Nature instead of compelling to adjust with our demands. So Master Hui Neng, it seems to us, lived with those men who lived on the bounty of Nature.

But after fifteen years he  came out of his seclusion impelled by his urge for teaching. One wonders why those huntergatherers who lived in Nature were not fit for the Masters prechings. Roland Barthes points out that there  are two kinds of texts. One is the  readerly text and the other is the writerly text. Like all great classics The Platform Sutra is a writerly text. There are gaps inwrought in a writerly text that provoke the readers to think on their own and fill up the gaps. May be the huntergatherers were not civilized enough to know what is good or bad. Those who know what is good or what is bad must be led out from the encircling delusion.

Hui Neng hence was about to enter a monastery . At the entrance itself two bhikkhus were deliberating on a flag that was fluttering. One of the bhikkhus said that it was the wind that moved the flag. The other said it was the flag that was moving on its own. The debate must not be taken lightly. We human beings do not know whether whatever we do or think  is our doing or thinking. Because everyone of us the product of the society. Our thoughts and manners are not our own , but impelled by our socialization. Because we are preys to circumstances. So the question whether the flag moves on its own or impelled by the wind  is a riddle still . Master Hui Neng however tells them that neither  the flag moves nor the wind moves. It is the mind that moves . Thus Master Hui Neng  decodes the riddle of the existence in terms of the mind. It naturally follows that there is a cosmic mind . And its motion or restlessness is behind the show of things that are ever in flux.

Master Hui Neng met the abbott of the monastery. The latter was impressed by his wisdom that transcended book learning.He guessed that it was Master Hui Neng the sixth patriarch of the Zen school. Master Hui Neng admitted that it was he. He told the abbott that Lord Buddhas teachings did not admit of more than  one way to liberation. The only way to liberation is to be aware of the essence of mind. Mind is neither eternal nor transitory . Hence it  is. Buddha Nature is. It is there in the heart of good men and badmen as well. Whoever looks into his own mind can discover the Buddha Nature for himself and be liberated . Even ichhantikas or the heretics can also discover Buddha Nature lurking in their hearts and get liberated.

Thus  Master Hui Neng gave all clarion call to everyone Buddhists or non Buddhists, good or evil , learned or illiterate , rich or poor to look into their hearts and find out the truths of the existence on their own. Every one must find the truth on his or her own.

The abbott of the monastery became a disciple of Master Hui Neng and Master Hui Neng henceforth appeared on the scene as a world teacher.

And he said at the end of the first chapter of his discourse that he was there at the lecture hall deliberating on truth and the path to liberation

The narrative as delineated in the first chapter of the Platform Sutra
thus comes full circle. It opened with Hui Neng  delivering a sermon.
It dwelled on how from a woodseller he became a patriarch giving
sermons.

The matrix of the society that functions as the background is
realistic. It is hierarchy ridden. The people of the South are looked
upon as barbarians. The illiterate are looked down upon.The educated
pity them. The illiterate are as it were meant for manual labour.They
cannot participate in  any higher conversation. But Buddha Nature
doesnot admit of any hierarchy. Buddha Nature is something that is
omnipresent and deathless. . Buddha Nature is all in all.
Enlightenment leaps from Buddha Nature only that lurks in every human
heart. Hence to attain enlightenment neither lot of studies of the
scriptures nor lot of penance is of any avail. Since Buddha Nature is
in every human heart every one can attain be he an icchantika or a
devoted Buddhist.

What is Buddha Nature? This  is a queer world  or samsara where we
live in . Here we sit by each other and hear each others groan. If
nirvana is  understood as the  opposite of the same, if It is bliss
only in relation with the samsara which is a vale of tears then
neither samsara is true nor nirvana.  Neither not-samsara is true nor
not-nirvana is true.Neither not not samsara is true nor not not
nirvana. Truth is neither not-samsara nor not nirvana. Buddha nature
is the truth. It is neither eternal nor not eternal..Hence it is the
void  which cannot be defiled and whence samsara and its antonym bliss
leaps forth.,One who knows the void or Buddha nature attains naiva
sanjnaa naasanjnaa..Enlightenment means neither consciousness nor not
consciousness, neither not not consciousness nor not not not
consciousness.

Tsen Xiu felt that Buddha Nature lurking in human heart must be kept
clean . Once Buddha Nature in man is befogged with dust he is plunged
into ignorance. But Hui Neng observed that Buddha Nature cannot be
defiled.Hence there is no point in becoming vigilant to keep Buddha
Nature free from pollution if any.Once one realizes Buddha Nature in
him one remains ever in the light of wisdom and enlightenment. 

           

A Note on Diamond Sutra by Dr Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya

Let us first dwell on what is sutra. The Sanskrit word sutra literally means a thread. The Gita speaks of gems woven with threads in the phrase Sutre manigna iva. The English word “suture” seems to have been  derived from Sanskrit sutra.

In the ancient Sanskrit lore, sutra is a distinct type of literary composition or genre where the statements are aphoristic. It uses various technical terms and brevity and precision are its life

The Vayu purana  defines sutra as alpaksaram asandigdhan/ saravad viswasto mukham/ astobhyam anavadyam/ ca sutram sutravidoviduh.

The sutra employs minimum syllables. Its meaning should be unambiguous. It should be the essence of what one wants to say. It should be reliable. It should be nonredundant , unique and flawless. One who knows what sutra is knows it to be thus.

But as   Monier   Williams observes, with the Buddhists and Pasupatas etc the term sutra is applied to original text books as opposed to explanatory works. With the Jainas, they form the part of Dristivada.

Let us probe into the connotation of the word ‘sutra’ with a little more attention. The Tripitaka /Tipitaka or the three baskets of wisdom has in it the Sutrapitaka/Suttapitaka which is a treasure house of   wonderful tales told by the lord Buddha himself. They have sutras in the Sanskrit sense in them hiding that could unravel the deeper mysteries of life. But they are not sutras in the sense the Srauta sutra, Kalpa sutra, Brahma sutra or the sutras in Panini grammar are. The sutras in the latter are explanatory. That is their only objective. They are not texts in that sense. They do not have a literary merit on the surface. On the other hand the sutras in the sutrapitaka  are texts. They are something like the dialogues of Plato or parables told by Jesus  The suttas of Pali are spoken by the Lord Buddha and they are suktas or well said   as well.. Buddhist suttas are in the main suktas or oral teachings of the Lord Buddha. When the Lord passed into nibbana, his teaching remained to fill the void by the absence of the lord’s nirmanakaya or the illusory self in the world of ours.

Sutras in the Buddhist context are Buddhavacana a literal record of what lord Buddha said in the form of discourses in the large.

These sutras could be  long one like the  mahaparinbbanasutta or the Brahmajala sutra The majjhima nikaya has medium length sutras or discourses. Samyutta nikaya has 2800 sutras. They are short ones. But they make a pattern being connected with one another (Samyutta) . And then there are 2300 sutras in Anguttara Nikaya which is ekottara agama. That is the chapter or nipatas in this agama are The Book of ones, The Book of Twos and so on.

The Mahayana sutras are apparently of later date. But  the followers of the Mahayana believe that they are authentic –that is they enshrine the direct teachings of Lord Buddha. For example in the Diamond Sutta there is a discourse where Lord Buddha and Subhuti are the protagonists. The followers of the Mahayana, believe that the conversation between the Lord Buddha and Subhuti  as enshrined in Diamond sutra did really take place.

Why were the sutras then revealed at the later stage long after the Lord’s demise? The Mahayanas say that the sutras were kept in hiding for five hundred years and were jealously guarded by the nagas. Because till then competent readers were not found. The Mahayanas acknowledge  the earlier sutras of the Tripitaka as authentic. But with them the Mahayana Sutras are of deeper import and hence they do not pay much attention to much of the Tripitaka.

Ananta Nirdesha Suttra, Lankavatara sutra, Lotus sutra, Prajnaparamita sutras are some of the Mahayana sutras.

The sandhimocana sutra, a Mahayana one divides the teaching of Lord Buddha in terms of the turnings.  of the dharmachakra The Tripitaka is the first turning. The Prajnaparamita and likely  other sutras are the second turning  of Lord Buddha’s teaching whereas the sandhimocana sutra claims itself as  the third and final turning of the Dharmachakra.

But sutras are not always spoken by Buddha himself. Chinese and Japanese Zen Budddhists have great veneration for the Platform Sutra  which embodies  the teachings of  the sixth Patriarch of  Zen Buddhism.

Platform Sutra clearly points out that thoughtlessness does not mean suppression of thoughts. Rather one should let one’s thought come and go as they list. The sutra further observes that a lay man, cultivating the thought of Buddha is superior to a monk who does not practice the teachings of the Buddha.  

Hui Neng also comments on the Pure Land of the West, The pure land sects are very popular in Eastern Asia.  They almost form a sub-set of Mahayanas Buddhism. The Pure Land doctrine points that these days dharma is on the wane. And it is impossible now a days to attain nibbana. The only alternative  left for us therefore  is  to chant the name of Amida or Amitabha Buddha. If anyone chants the name of Amida only ten times he will surely be reborn in the Pure Land  of the West. And there from he might be elevated to the state of nibbana.

Hui neng observes in the Platform Sutra in the context of the notion of the Pure land of the West that physical location of one’s self  does not matter; what matters is his mental state.

Hui Neng recounts the story of Bodhidharma.

The Platform Sutra however opens with an autobiographical narration. He dwells on how he was drawn to the teachings of Buddha.

Hui Neng was but a lad when his father died. He used to gather firewood and sell them in the market. He provided for his mother and himself this way. One day while at the market, he heard a line “let your mind flow freely without dwelling on anything.”  His mind was at once alight with the quest of  Truth. He arranged some money for his widow mother to survive. He gave up his business activity and set out in search of his teacher in the North China. It was a long trek, which compassed 500 miles.

The line that suddenly struck Hui Neng and effected a great change in his career was a quote from Diamond Cutter sutra or Vajra- chhedika Prajnaparomita Sutra.

The Diamond Sutra opens with Lord Buddha sitting in his retreat surrounded by the Bhikkhus and Bodhisattvas. There the Shubhuti a venerable follower of the Lord asks how one could seek incomparable enlightenment.

Well the Buddha observes that a Bodhisattva must take a vow of liberating every speck of life and yet when everyone is liberated no one will be liberated              

That is a paradox. But Buddha posits---who will liberate another.? That needs an a priori notion of self. Is there any self at all? The answer is simply -No. What we call self is a flow and fire ignited by tanha or desire which is illusory. If there are no self and the other ,who liberates whom?

The Bodhisattvas must have compassion and charity. But he must practice charity without attachments. The merits of charity without attachment.-- The merits of charity and compassion are incalculable. And yet no such merit is accrued.

Convention says that the Tathagata is always accompanied with 32 marks of greatness. True and not true. The Tathagatas can not  be recognized by any material characteristic. Because the knower and the object of  knowledge are illusory. One who knows that Tathagatas can not be recognized knows Tathagatas.

Who is a Tathagata? One who has gone to suchness or reality as it is or arrived at suchness is a Tathagata.  

Subhuti asks the Lord whether there will be always men who will truly believe after coming to hear these teachings. The Lord replies that there will be such men always and they will be nourished by countless Buddhas. Still the belief is never absolute. The teaching of Buddhas are merely a raft that reaches one across the ever changing and illusory samsara or the world. Once one crosses the vast ocean of illusion, the raft will become of no use. Every faith is relative. To have faith means to have ego. It is the ego that has faith. So to lift up one self one must not believe in the teachings of the Buddhas even.

Being asked by the Buddha whether there is any enlightenment  at all and whether  Tathagata has a teaching to enunciate, Subhuti answers that there could be no perfect enlightenment  and Tathagata has nothing to teach. Because Truth is not limited and truth baffles expression.  Truth is neither is nor is not.

Hence we could infer, despite the fact  that there are countless sutras told by Tathagatas . a  Tathagata did not utter a single  word.

Buddha points out that  meritorious deeds in the contingent world are very good. And  still merits are no merits.

Subhuti observes that merit always partakes of the character of no merits.

This puts in ours mind the notions put by the Post Moderns. Any word in the language has its antonym. For example, light implies darkness. Truth implies falsehood.

Derrida the French philosopher observes-- the western thought since Plato has been logo centric. It  has emphasized certain notions as light, truth etc as the centre. But since light could not be there with-out darkness, the centre of light must be darkness. Again Darkness could not be there without light. If there were no periphery there could be no centre. So the periphery is the centre of the centre. Again the periphery has a centre. Hence the Truth is neither light nor darkness. Neither not light nor not darkness. Neither not not light nor not not darkness.

This is why Hui neng exhorts to his disciples “ whenever a question is put to you, answer it in the negative. if it is an affirmative one and vice versa. If you are asked about an ordinary man tell the question of a sage and vice versa. From the correlation and the interdependence of the two opposites, the doctrine of the Middle way may be grasped.”

Indeed the doctrine of the Middle Way of the Buddhism does not  ask one to walk along the middle of a street so that one is over run by the vehicles. The middle way implies an understanding of the fact that there is neither truth nor untruth, neither not truth, nor not untruth, neither not not truth, nor not not untruth. Truth is beyond grasp. One who  knows it knows.

Thus in the context of the Lord Buddha’s teachings as embodied in the Diamond sutra one might argue that the notion of Post modernism though emergent in the West are as old as Lord Buddha and Buddhism has played a large role in changing the gamut of thought of the world today. It dissipates fundamentalism and dissolves essentialism. If any four lines of the Diamond Sutra were realized by the world our world would be different from what it is today. Why do people fight amongst themselves? Why do nations war  among themselves. Because of their fundamentalist approach. But the most fundamental truth about the existence is that there is nothing fundamental.

The Nasadiya sukta—the 129th hymn of the 10th mandala of the Rig Veda opens in the self same note when it says

Na asat asit  na u sat asit tadanim

That which exists is sat. That which does not exist is asat.

The sukta says

In the beginning neither there was existence

Nor there was non-existence.

The first six sections of the Diamond cutter sutta, thus unravel the suchness of the existence.    They   seem  to strike the keynote of the Post-modern thought that rocks the world today and shows the path to serenity.

The eighth section of the Diamond Sutra   vouchsafes that the recitation of the only four lines  of the sutra  has great merits . It outdoes the merit of the highest merit of compassion and charity. Because the understanding the Lord, points out is the fountain head where from the Buddhas emerged. May we hence take the liberty to call the philosophy enshrined in the Diamond Sutra as Tathagata garbha or the womb wherefrom Tathagatas turn up?The Tathagata Garbha doctrine of  the Mahayana Philosophy points that everyone has Buddha nature in him. I do not use the Tathagata garbha in that sense. Still, however much narrow minded we are, do we not all of us sometimes  realise that there is no absolute truth in the existence and every assertion is as good as every other kind of assertion?

Lord Buddha asks whether there is anything called stream entrant or srot apanna once-to- be - reborn or sakridagami  or never to be born or anagami. Besides is there anything called perfect Enlightenment. The answer is always No.The stream entrant is only a name.    The stream entrant never enters any stream be it that of touch or smell or sound etc.  Since  there is no  going away and no coming to existence, there can be no one to be born once or to be never born. Perfect Enlightenment  is a myth. Because if anyone says he is perfectly enlightened he assumes the existence of his self and the other and hence he is not enlightened. And  there can be no Buddhaland set up by any Bodhisattva. Indeed there can not be the categories of the sacred and profane. Because the sacred partakes of the profane and vice versa. If there is anything called the Buddha land, be it the pure land of the West or of the pure land of the East tjere must be profane land or the world. And Buddha land must partake of it.But Buddha land would not be Buddha land then. Because by definition Buddha land should have nothing profane in it. Buddha observes that if any four lines of this discourse is repeated or taught anywhere it become the holiest of the holy places /even venerated by gods.

Shubhuti asks what should be the name of the present discourse?

Buddha replies that   the name should be Vajra Chheddika Prajna Paramita sutra.      

The word Vajra implies the diamond with which gems are bored. Compare Kalidasa    

Kritte Vajra-samutkirne

Sutrasyevasti me gati

Or else Vajra could be lightning or thunderbolt. With the diamond cutter or the lightning what could be pierced  or probed into? Well the inscrutable existence that baffles all interpretation should be pierced or decoded with this sutra.

The Vajra-chheddika is prajna paramita or the metaphor of perfection  in transcendental wisdom.

But the Lord at once adds that there could be no perfection of wisdom. Thus prajna paramita is a name only. It has no meaning. Buddha further adds that the molecules are not molecules. They are only called molecules. The world is not world. it is called only world.

Thus the Lord knows that the names are not things. There is no organic relation between the signifier and the signified. And the world we perceive is a vast ocean of signifiers. And signifiers are there as signifiers and they signify nothing.

Subhuti understands the import of the Lord’s saying.   He is in tears. He exclaims that he did not ever hear such a discourse and one who hears the discourse will learn the fundamental reality even though fundamental reality is not any distinctive idea. And fundamental reality is only a name.

Since any signifier is a signifier only without a signified, the distinctions with the aid of which we separate one person from another, one individual from another, are hollow sham. Shubhuti acknowledges this and further asserts that those who have left phenomenal distinction behind are Buddhas all.    

Buddha adds that the  perfection or paramitas are mere names only. The first perfection is the perfection in charity or Dana Paramita. But that is only a name. The perfection in patience is also only a name.

Buddha falls back upon his earlier birth. He remembers how he patiently stood the mutilation of his body by the king of Kalinga. This seems to be referred to in Khantibadi Jataka. But he points out that it is not an exercise in patience. Because the Bodhisattva knew that he had no self. Buddha notes that if he were bound by the notion of the self and the other, he would be ignited with such emotions as hatred and anger. Buddha says that he went through numerous lives and deaths exercising in patience. But a Bodhisattva does not distinguish the self from the other and no questions of tolerating others arise.    

Bodhisattvas practise charity in this way. They take the vow of liberating every living being. But with them living beings are not living beings.

Buddha observes that the truth in which Tathagatas are plunged is neither real nor unreal.

The Buddha further points out that this is the supreme Way or the tao for the benefit of the initiate. Those who hold on to limited doctrines that involve a notion of an ego entity. And a personality and like can not comprehend the present sutra.

Thus the Lord clearly discards reductionism where one expression is replaced by finitely stable definitions whereby the indefinitely possible realizations of the previously mentioned expression are shut out. The Lord clearly discards essentialism. Essentialism is a metaphysical theory that objects have essences and there is a distinction between its essence and accidental attribute. But  lord  But the Lord Buddha will not admit of any distinction between this or that and the fundamentalists, reductionists  and essentialists can not comprehend the present sutra which has indefinite possibilities of meaning. No limit could be set to its meaning. As we have already posited that since signifiers and signified are not organically connected signifiers have no real meaning. But when the signifier has infinite possible meanings or none, the case is different. That is what the Lord is about. Buddha however reminds Subhuti that those who receive the present discourse might be hounded by misfortunes. But they are but the fruitions of action performed in the past and they will be worked out paving the way to consummation of peerless Enlightenment.

And Buddha asserts that there is no perfect enlightenment. No one attains perfect transcendental wisdom. And there is no formula for the attainment of enlightenment.

When Dipankar Buddha foresaw the Buddha of the present discourse the Sakyasinha would attain enlightenment, he foresaw it only because there is no formula that can reach one to enlightenment. True that Bodhisattvas must take the vow to liberate all the living creatures and yet Bodhisattva can not take such vows because Bodhisattvas are sans egos.

And Buddha asserts that the Tathagata can see into every mind though there are different kinds of mind.

This is because all modes of mind are in fact Only Mind.

Nothing is like charity. The greatest possible charity is however merit less. Or else Tathagata does not have merit. In other words achievements do not count. Or else Tathgata does not have merit. Tathgata’s merit does not have any foundation. Because the phenomenal distinctions are unreal.

Thus the Lord’s utterances out-rightly denies foundationalism .

Foundationalism views that knowledge and epistemic justification have a two tier structure. Some instances of knowledge and justification are based on experience and foundational. Others are derived from inference and non- foudational. The Lord denies their distinction .

The Lord  affirms that language can not express truth and Tathagatas have not therefore thought anything. Consummation of Knowledge does not attain any knowledge and hence it is consummation of knowledge. The Buddha says that  through his attainment he has not acquired anything.

There can not be  knowledge and ignorance perfection and imperfection . So the Lord says that if Consummation of enlightenment is at all there then it is everywhere. Thus, the theory of Tathgatagarbha that posits that the Tathagata is in every being and thing is  upheld. The Buddha says that true that one should cultivate goodness to attain this state and yet there is nothing called good.

No one should say that Tathagata liberates living beings. Tathagata does not. Because he has no individual self or ego. There is no difference between ego and non-ego. There is no difference between a Tathagata and the common man. The common man is not common.

Thus, the Lord affirms love and regards for all things both great and small. Ours is the society where hierarchies rule and differences dominate. Tathagata gives us a vision of  a world  where functional hierarchies and differences could exist; but they will be always known as functional and not real.

The Tathagata they say have marks that distinguishes him from the common run of men. Yet these distinguishing marks does not refer to Tathagata and hence whoever sees Tathagata in form, whoever hears his words does not see him or hear him. A seeker of this kind is far away from the road or tao.

Tathagata further observes that though it is said that everything is impermanent, the reality is neither permanence nor impermanence; neither not permanence nor not impermanence. Consequently nibbana does not mean extinction of the awareness of things. It is neither awareness nor non- awareness; neither not awareness nor not non- awareness.---naivasanjna naasanjna.

And when they say that Tathagata is thus gone or thus come, they are in the wrong, because Tathagata has nowhere to go whence he comes.

Neither the cosmos  nor the minutest particle is what it seems. That is the suchness of the things. People with ego view the reality in different ways. Because everybody reads his or her own mind in the text of the reality. And the reality is in the hiding, its different aspects are only manifest. To know the suchness of things one must be sans ego.

The Diamond Sutra thus does make the in road into delusions of appearance and unravels the suchness.

The appearance will then look like

a star at dawn

a dew—a bubble

a lightening or dream

Or else a  cloud.

Subhuti , the Bodhisattva and the gods who surrounded the Lord were full of delight when the conversation came to its omega; they dispersed and went their way. Did they go their way to liberation although the way is not the way and liberation is not liberation?  

                                     

   

                         

                   

                                       

Heart Sutra Reconsidered by Dr Ramesh Chandra Mukhopadhyaya

POST REPLY

Actions

1 of 17

My groups

Home

Starred

Favourites

Recently viewed

Recent searches

Recently posted to

sefirah

Privacy - Terms of Service

Heart Sutra Reconsidered

10/03/2009

Heart Sutra Reconsidered

Rameshchandra Mukhopadhyaya


We propose hereby to read the Heart Sutra from fresh standpoint. Let
us at the outset explain why we are drawn to a study of the Heart
Sutra. To answer that, we shall refer to Edward Conze who avows that
the judgement of thirty generations of Buddhists in China, Japan,
Tibet and Mongolia have singled out the Diamond Sutra and the Heart
Sutra as the holiest of holy; both perhaps of the fourth century of
our era , as Conze observes. In view of the fact that the Heart Sutra
which has been deemed as one of the holiest of holy for thirty
generations by Buddhists of different nations , we had better read it
once again to see what wealth the Sutra brings to us.
Why say that the Heart Sutra could be read from fresh standpoint?
Well, there are commentaries of the same by such masterminds like
Asanga, Vasuvandhu and Kamalasila and no less a scholar than Edward
Conze have composed commentary of high watermark of the same sutra.
Still, just as anyone must find out or make his own road to
enlightenment, similarly everyone must read a text in his own way to
find the Tao or the road. A text cannot have one and only one meaning.
Or else why should there be so many interpretations of the text? The
very text of the Heart Sutra avows that form is emptiness and the very
emptiness is form. On one level at least every form has emptiness in
it. Emptiness speaks of something which is beyond the ken of
perceptions trammelled by time and space. And surely interpretations
through words which are bound by time and space cannot exhaust the
meaning of a text, albeit no interpretation of a text could be wide
off the mark of the meaning of a text. Since words cannot exhaust the
meaning of emptiness, emptiness could have meaning on numerous levels.
Modern linguistics and philosophy of language point out that language
cannot have one definite meaning. Any text whatever is, capable of
meaning on more than one level. This is very much true of a text which
is being read through the generations and is a classic. Every
generation has its own unique point of view and aspirations. The text
which satisfies the different aspirations of different generations
must be capable of meaning on different levels. Where is the text?
There could be no text without its reader apprehending some meaning.
And surely there are as many texts embedded as there are readers.
Because every reader decodes the text from his own standpoint. Hence
the proposal to read the Heart Sutra afresh. And we propose to read
the Heart Sutra on more than one level. And to that end we invoke the
skill of close reading and explicatio de texte. Beardsley recommends
that explicatio be used as a name for the critic’s effort to disclose
implicit meanings at the lexical level of a poem such as the
connotations of a word, the implications of a complex or ambiguous
syntax, or possible meaning of a metaphor or other tropes (Princeton
Encyclopaedia of Poetics, pg 395, Princeton University Press,
Princeton). Close reading method is very akin to explication. It
focuses on the text itself and does not give importance to any extra-
textual context.
The title of the Sutra is known as the Heart Sutra. Does the Sutra
reach us to the heart of the things or to the heart of the scriptures?
Or did the Sutra itself spring from the heart? Or else the Sutra
though explicit in the text is implicit in every heart?
The Sutra opens with the invocation
Om namo bhagavatya
Aarya- prajnaa paramitayai
Prajna means wisdom. Prajnaparamita means perfection of wisdom or else
it might mean wisdom and its beyond. Since gender in Sanskrit is
grammatical and not natural, Bhagavati Prajnaparamita might mean the
deity of the spirit of wisdom. It is not necessary to attribute any
natural gender to it. Paramita might be a god or goddess or both or
none. Be that as it may the addresser in the poem pays his / her
homage to Arya Prajnaparamita. Conze tells us that Arya stands for
both noble and holy.
Wisdom has been deified and hence to distinguish it/ him/ her, in the
contingent world the addresser attributes it / him/ her as noble and
holy.
Why does the addresser pay his or her homage to Wisdom? Perhaps
because s/he seeks to disclose some truth hidden from the eye and
which needs wisdom to encode.
Aarya Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva
Gambhiram prajnapaaramitaacharyaam charamaano
Vyvalokayati sma panchaskandhaascha
Svabhaavasunyaat pasyati sma
The word Arya could be derived from verb Ri and could mean moving or
dynamic as well. So the Arya Avalokitesvara is one who moves from
falsehood to truth. Iswara is Lord. Avalokitesvara is the Lord of
Avalokana or seeing; he sees into the life of things. At the same time
he is also being seen. He is Bodhisattva. In other words his essence
is awareness or enlightenment. Be that as it may, according to
Buddhist mythology a Bodhisattva is one who strives to become a Buddha
or the Enlightened one. This is not all.  According to the Mahayana
school of Buddhism, Bodhisattva is one who does not seek his own
emancipation. On the contrary, a Bodhisattva seeks to emancipate
everything of the world. According to Buddhist mythology,
Avalokitesvara is an ideal Bodhisattva, because he refused
enlightenment or emancipation. As long as the smallest particle of the
existence is not emancipated, Avalokitesvara will not embrace eternal
bliss or nirvana. This Arya Avalokiteswara Bodhisattva was seriously
plunged in the practice of wisdom that takes one beyond the perceived
and the nonperceived. In this state he looked about and found the
pancaskandhas. And he found that pancaskandhas were by nature or
svabhava empty. The wide wonderful world with such abundant variety
was looked upon by the seer Bodhisattva as merely made of five
constituents and by nature they are empty or svabhava – sunya. On the
surface whatever Avalokitesvara sees is empty by nature. If everything
were empty then the speaker alone pervades the existence. But the self
is also made of pancaskandha and empty. So Avalokitesvara is not there
and nothing is there. When neither the object nor the subject is
there, there is neither the speaker nor the listener nor the speech.
Here is the aesthetics of silence eloquent about suchness. This is why
it has been said that despite the Tripitaka Buddha did not utter a
single word. In the light of Avalokitesvara whatever is not –
Avalokitesvara can see into the thingness of things, finds that all
things and beings are mere appearances before a myopic eye. They exist
and yet by nature they do not exist. They are like castles in the air.
The word ‘sunya’ however has its antonym in purna. A thing or being
could be really empty when they appear otherwise. Or else emptiness or
sunya would have no meaning. ‘As a technical meaning it denotes in
Buddhism the absence of self’ (Conze). The next section explicates his
proposition
Iha Saariputra rupam sunyataa
Sunyataiva rupam rupanna prithak sunyataa
Sunyataayaa na prithag rupam
Evam eva vedanna- sanjnaa-samskaara vijnam
On the surface it implies that one’s own- being and marks of the
skandhas, elements and sense- fields are imagined. Since they are
devoid of self – a mere agglomeration or heaps closely tied to their
root cause, ignorance, karma and craving , proceeding from mutual
conditioning inactive- therefore the Skandhas are also without the
special and general marks. The variety of such marks is the result of
fancy and they are distinguished from one another by fools and not by
saints.
But, no. What Avalokiteswara says does not point that all appearance
is illusion. He does not claim that all appearance vanish like bubbles
in the air before a discerning eye. On the contrary he posits that
appearance and emptiness are identical. Appearance means emptiness and
emptiness means appearance. In other words, the world of appearance
neither is, nor is not. And existence is at bottom unreal. And yet it
is not unreal. Avalokiteswara observes that emptiness does not differ
from form. But we mortals are never focussed on the opposites
simultaneously. Heisenberg’s Theory of Indeterminacy has proved that
we cannot have total knowledge in this contingent world. Because if we
want to measure the speed of an electron, we shall not know its
location. Again if we want the location of an electron, we shall not
know its speed. But Avalokitesvara’s eye can know both at the same
time. He can be focussed on the opposites at the same time. Form is
one of the five skandhas or five constituents that create all things
in the multiverse. The other four are feelings, perceptions, impulses
and consciousness. Earlier Avalokitesvara saw everything and every
being of the existence made up of these five constituents. Now
Avalokitesvara points that forms as well as other constituents are
identical with emptiness and emptiness is identical with form.  In
other words, both appearance and reality are taken into account. The
addressee of this Heart Sutra, as it has been revealed here is Sari
Putta. This is very significant because this distinguishes the Heart
Sutra from any other sutra. Any speech is determined by its addressee.
Sari Putta as we know was predestined to be a Buddha. Hence his
perceptions of the world and things are quite different from that of
the ordinary run of men. As Conze observes, Sari Putta mastered
Abhidhamma pitaka.  And one wonders whether Avalokitesvara teaches him
some thing which beyonds the Abhidhamma.
Avalokitesvara affirms that emptiness is form and form is emptiness.
This puts in one’s mind the benediction of the Isopanisada-
Purnamadah Purnamidam
Purnaat Purnamudachyate
Purnasya Purnamaadaaya
Purnamevaavasishyate

This is full, that is full.
Full springs from the full
If you take away the full from the full
Fullness alone persists

In the contingent world we do not find the truth of it. If a cup
spills its tea, there is no more tea in it. And yet the risi asserts
that emptiness in the cup is not real. There cannot be emptiness. But
fullness is a word which has its antonym in emptiness. The very notion
of fullness stands in relation to emptiness; then fullness and
emptiness are the same. And hence the rejoinder of Buddhism is that
everything is full and yet everything is empty.
What is form but a combination of our material elements in earth,
water, fire and air, five sense organs, and five sense objects.
Feelings are pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Perception is made
through six senses. Samskara is difficult to translate into English.
It could be described as the a priori impulse of every man with which
s/he is born. And finally there is vijnana. What is vijnana but
awareness of difference. Thee world of eye and ear which we half
perceive and half create exists through differences alone. The tree is
different from the stone and the stone is different from the running
waters.
The Heart Sutra asserts that these differences do exist and yet do not
exist. Impulses do exist and yet they do not exist. Perceptions do
exist and do not exist. Feelings do exist and do not exist.
What could such arguments mean? The Heart Sutra does not discard the
world of appearance. And yet the Heart Sutra does not deny that
appearance is hollow and empty.
Such deliberations might sound strange to us locked up in the world of
eye and ear. We distinguish a piece of diamond from a pale of water.
We distinguish an engineer from an ayah that looks after the presently
born baby. This is not all. We value the engineer more and do not
pause to see how much the ayah is paid for her job. This valorisation
and such hierarchy is hollow sham. Who is more important, an ayah or
an engineer? Surely an ayah is more important because she saves the
human child from death. Men are born helpless. A child left alone in a
sequestered place unlike a newly born calf or kitten cannot survive
even a day. So an ayah gives us life. Why is she ill- paid then, while
an engineer is paid enough so that s/he can live a comfortable life?
The economist will say, to produce an engineer, we have to spend a
lot. So he is highly paid. Well which is more important- a pale of
water or a piece of diamond ?  The utility of water cannot be
overemphasised. We could not live without water. Still why is diamond
so costly and water is sometimes available free of cost? The economist
will answer that to produce another pale of water incurs no cost
whereas to produce another piece of diamond one has to spend a
fortune. Fine. But who said that diamond is precious? A woman who has
not learnt the value - judgement laid down by the civilization might
find diamonds littered on her way to gathering mango fruits. But she
will not touch a single diamond. Mangoes will cater to her taste and
satisfy her hunger. It is the civilization, therefore, that has
created the hierarchy where diamond is more precious and water cheap.
The Heart Sutra points out that such hierarchies are hollow sham. This
is not all. To a sheer all things all things are at bottom the same
made of pancaskandha. It is something like the vision of a physicist
who finds both a mountain and a man as made of the same fund of
energy. Matter has vanished in the light of modern physicist. Well, if
energy is non- metal it is non – physical also. So, reductionism does
not help unless we say that difference pervades this existence or
difference through which this existence is revealed is true and yet
not true. The Heart Sutra or Buddhism embraces, being and non- being,
self and non- self as the same. Presence and absence, momentariness
and eternity, and all such dichotomies of existence dissolve at the
magic touch of Buddhism. Every assertion is therefore as true as any
other assertion in such a world.  Hence Buddhism asserts that the
existence is what it is and suchness is the truth. It cannot be
analysed or described with the help of vijnana.
The Heart Sutra further observes:

Iha Sariputra Sarvadharmaah
Sunyata- laksmanaa, anutpannaa
Aniruddhaa amalaa avimalaa
Anuunaa aparipurnaa

O Sariputra! All the Dharmas are characterized by emptiness. Dharma is
a word, which could mean on many levels. It could mean physical laws
of science. In that light we could say that the dharma of water is
liquidity or the dharma of wind is to move to and fro. Again dharma
might mean those values which hold the mankind together. It might
refer to different religions as well. Avalokitesvara asserts that
these dharmas do exist. And yet they are marked by emptiness. The law
of dharmas were never created. They were never repressed. They were
never defiled. They were never immaculate. They were never incomplete.
They were never complete.
This clearly states that Buddhism does not pin its faith on
fundamentalism and foundationalism. There are myriads of human
communities under the sun. Each of them has its own culture or dharma
which holds its followers in a system. If Heart Sutra is properly
understood, it points out that no culture is superior and no culture
is inferior. No culture has any root into timelessness. So no culture
is to be believed. But one must treat a different culture from the
standpoint of cultural relativism.
Once Buddha while living at Kosambi (near Allahabad) addressed the
monks and told them-
This is suffering- this I have declared
This is generation of suffering- this have I declared
This is the path leading to suffering – this I have declared.
On the surface these declarations announce the possibility of our
transportation to the world of bliss from the sphere of arrow.
Buddha speaks of three types of sorrow in dukkha- dukkhata, sankhara-
dukkha dukkhata, and viparinama dukkhata.
Dukkha dukkhata is our everyday sorrow. We look before and after and
pine for what is not. This is dukkha dukkhata. Association with
unloved ones and separation from loved ones, old age, disease and
death constitute dukkha- dukkhata.
Sankhara dukkhata has philosophical import. Sankhara could be
interpreted as an innate mode of perception with which one is born. It
is because of this sankhara one cannot realize that anything under the
sun that one perceives is an aggregate of five skandhas in matter,
sensations, perceptions and mental formations and consciousness. They
are known briefly as nama-rupa – the psycho-physical entity. They
constitute a sentient being or a person. This pancaskandha are hollow
in essence. But one does not perceive that viparinama dukkha results
from the transitory nature of the world. Nothing is stable here.
Happiness, if it comes at all, soon vanishes like snow flakes in the
sun, pushing one to despair. Even the happiness attained through
mediation or jhana is also annicca or transitory. And whatever is
transitory causes sorrow,
Yadaniccam tam dukkham
And did not Buddha announce that he had shown the way out from the
sphere of sorrow?

The Heart Sutra observes that when one gets at the heart of things one
knows that the world of appearance is true and yet not true.
Avalokiteswara observes:
Tasmaad Saariputra Sunyatayaam na rupam
Na vedanna na sanjna na samskaaraah
Na vijnanam, na chatuprotra ghraana jihvaa
Kaaya manaamsi . Na rupa sabolagandha rasa- sprastavye
Dharmah, Na chadyurdhaaturyaavan na mano
Vijnanadhaatu na avidyaa na avidyaaksayo
Yavan na jaraa- maranam , na jaraa maranaksayo
Na duhkha- samudayo- nirodha- marga na jnaanam
Na praptirnaapraaptih
Therefore O Sariputra in emptiness there is no form, nor feeling, nor
perception, nor impulse, nor consciousness. No eye, ear, nose, tongue,
body, mind. No forms, sounds, smells, tastes, touchables or objects of
mind. No sight- organ element and so forth until we come to ‘No mind-
conscious element. There is no ignorance, no extinction of ignorance,
and so forth until we come to.’  There is no decay and death, no
extinction of decay and deaths. There is no way out from the
sufferings. There is no cognition, no attainment, and non-
attainment.’ (cp. Conze’s translation)
The famous French philosopher Jaques Derrida discarded the whole of
western philosophy as logo centric where a particular word such as
light, soul, God or consciousness is deemed as the centre. But a
centre cannot have a centre. If light were the centre of a discourse,
one must not forget that darkness is at the centre of light. Once we
are focussed on darkness we are decentred again being aware of the
fact that light is at the centre of darkness. Life and existence is
the text of Avalokitesvara. He interprets the same without being logo
centric. Buddha promised cessation of suffering. How is that?
Avalokitesvara observes that there is no suffering and no cessation of
suffering. There is no attainment and no non- attainment. Commonly we
understand that cessation of suffering implies the attainment of
nirvana. But Avalokitesvara explicates the same as the attainment of
the fact that there is no attainment and no non- attainment. What is
Nirvana then? It is naiva- sanjna nasanga . It is neither
consciousness nor not – consciousness. It is neither not
consciousness- nor not- not- consciousness. The awareness of such a
stage baffles description in truth, as Avalokitesvara points out that
there is neither ignorance nor wearing out of ignorance. In common
parley we posit the dichotomies like
Bondage and freedom
Ignorance and knowledge
Sorrow and happiness
We value the motifs in the right side as desirable and the motifs in
the left column as undesirable. But this is logo centric and false.
One cannot exist without the other. And yet if the antonyms are
brought together we do not get the truth. Ignorance depends upon
knowledge or cessation of ignorance. Hence neither ignorance could be
real nor cessation of ignorance could be real. Once again, neither
absence of ignorance is real. Thus the Heart Sutra is free from logo
centrism in its legitimation and could be called Post – modern in
essence.
Post- modernism is a cover–term for those avant- garde ideas that
discard fundamentalism, foundationalism, essentialism and
reductionism. They claim that there is no absolute foundation of truth
and hence there is nothing called absolute truth or universal truth.
The post- moderns claim that we are in a virtual world, which is
neither real, nor not – real.
But Avalokitesvara and the Heart Sutra seem to go further.
Tasmaachhariputra apraaptitvaad bodhisattvasya
Prajnaapaaramitaam aapritya viharati
Achitavaranah Chittaavarana- nasti
Tvaad atrasto viparyaas- atikraanto nistah
Nirvaana- praaptah

“Therefore O Sariputra, it is because of his non- attainment ness that
a Bodhisatta though having relied on perfection of wisdom dwells
without thought–coverings. In the absence of thought- covering he has
not been made to tremble he has overcome what can upset and in the end
he attains Nirvana” (translation Conze)
If one seeks the path he misses it. If one seeks knowledge, he loses
it. In other word, since nothing could be affirmed or negated in the
existence, one’s thoughts vanish. Once, thoughts vanish, the mind is
not there. Patanjali posited that yogascittavritti- nirodha. Yoga
implies the wearing out of thought. Avalokitesvara reaches our mind to
a thoughtless or no mind state. In fact thought always perceives half-
truths. It cannot see the world steadily and as a whole. Thought reads
the world in fragments and it fragments the world. Truly speaking the
world or existence is neither complete nor incomplete. Since a
Bodhisattva gets rid of thought- coverings, he has no fear. He has
overcome what could upset him. And thereby he attains nirvana. The
phrase acittavaranam might also mean devoid of coverings that shroud
the chitta or awareness when karma-avarana. Klesa-avarana and jneya-
avarana are peeled off, there is awareness withal and the world turns
into awareness of Bodhisattva or else Bodhicitta is all pervasive.
This attendant of Bodhicitta is nirvana. If there were nothing else
than Bodhicitta, Bodhicitta wouldn’t be there. And hence nirvana does
not mean any attainment of any kind.
Thus nirvana does not necessarily mean a journey to a different
sphere. Bodhisatta may tread on the very earth where we move about.
But he looks upon the earth from a different perspective that language
fails to describe and thus Bodhisatta attains nirvana.
An ontological change in the existence takes place. The next sentence
reads
Tryadhvaavyavsthitah Sarva- buddhah Prajnaapaaramitaam asritye
Anuttaram Samyate Sambodhim abhi- sambuddha
‘All those who appear as Buddha in the three periods of time, fully
awake to the utmost right and perfect enlightenment because they have
relied on the perfection of wisdom.’ (Tr. Conze).
So what Bodhisattvas learn and attain nirvana is also learnt by
Buddhas. What do they learn? They learnt that nothing is to be learnt.
That is the perfection of wisdom.
The last sentence clinches the sutra eulogising Prajnaparomita mantra
or a mantra embodying highest wisdom. The sutra ends with the chant of
that mantra
Gate Gate Paaram gate
Paarasam gate Bodhi svaaha
Conze translates the mantra as
Gone, gone, gone beyond, gone altogether beyond. O what an awakening,
all hail!
Who is gone? The self is gone and the non- self is gone. Beyond what
have they gone? They have gone beyond the world lorn with dichotomies.
Language belongs to the made up of the stuff of difference. Language
pervades the world made up of the stuff of difference. The world made
up of the stuff of difference is the vast chasm to cross. That which
has crossed the chasm cannot be described. The realm beyond the chasm
cannot be described. So one must avail oneself of the mantra which
surpasses language. Chanting of the mantra will rescue us from
thought- covering. Those who cross the chasm of dichotomy–lorn
contingent world attain the right understanding which is no
understanding at all.
Since like Buddhism, Post- Modernism also does not pin its faith on
anything as fundamental or essential in the existence, the critics of
Postmodernism often posit that such philosophies cannot have any
ethics and the human society cannot run on such nihilistic
legitimations.
One asks whether it is possible
That without serious pleasures life could be endurable
That without faith in immortality man could be moral
That without any help from an external agency man could march towards
righteousness
That without rites and rituals man could remain religious
That without beliefs and emotion man could be religious
That without having any fear in the mind man could be virtuous
Heart Sutra seems to be a fitting reply to such queries.