Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra opens on the mythical island of Laṅkā, ruled by Rāvaṇa, king of the rākṣasas. There, Gautama Buddha turns to a bodhisattva named Mahāmati, whose name means Great Wisdom. Indian philosophers such as Chandrakirti and Shantideva would later quote and paraphrase the teaching that follows.

  The scholar Takasaki Jikido described the resulting text bluntly. It is, he wrote, "merely a mosaic collection of small parts put at random within the frame of a sutra." That verdict raises a question. How did a text so disorganized become central to Chan and Zen Buddhism, quoted for its teaching on sudden enlightenment?

  The sutra claims that one short list of teachings contains "all of the Mahayana." That list names the Five Dharmas, the Three Inherent Natures, the Eight Consciousnesses, and the Two forms of Selflessness. What could justify such a claim? And what does the sutra mean when it insists that every object in the world is, in truth, nothing but a manifestation of the mind?

• 2. Mind Only

  ›

  "What is seen as something external is nothing but one's own mind," the sutra states in the phrase svacitta-drsya-mātram. Gishin Tokiwa argues this does not deny that other beings exist in a conventional sense. Instead, he writes, real insight moves past the entire division between internal and external. Tokiwa considers this teaching, called svacittamātra, the central message of the whole sutra.

  The whole world, the sutra states, "is nothing but a complex manifestation of one's mental activities." Because of this, the sutra treats every phenomenon as empty of self, or anatman, and illusory, or maya. It describes these phenomena as forms "seen in a vision and a dream, empty of substance, unborn and without self-nature."

  Tokiwa writes that the Laṅkāvatāra was closely influenced by Prajñaparamita thought, which tempers its idealism. Even the concept of mind, or citta, is said to fall short of ultimate reality, which the sutra calls beyond being and non-being, or bhāvābhāva. Some passages describe a mind-only world, yet other passages state that Suchness surpasses mind, thought, discrimination, and subjectivity itself.

  Because every experience is only a reflection of a deluded mind, the sutra reasons, no single characteristic can be called fixed or true. Different beings perceive the same world in different ways, described as vaicitryam, and each perception counts as mistaken, or bhranti, in its own way. Yet the emptiness underlying these mistaken views does not itself change. The sutra calls this unchanging ground the dharmakaya, free from arising, persisting, or ceasing, even as it grounds the world's illusory appearance.

  Even so, the sutra frames mind-only insight as a necessary stage toward liberation. The sutra states this directly: "Through attaining the reality as nothing but our own mind, which is the Self free from manifestation, we return to abiding in the final attainment of prajña." Treating the world as something existing outside the mind is a serious error, the sutra warns, one that breeds delusion and suffering. It singles out Samkhya philosophy's dualistic view for direct criticism.

• 3. The Five Dharmas

  ›

  Nimitta comes first among the five. It names the images and appearances that carry form, or rupa, along with shape and distinctive features, what the sutra terms ākāra. Nāma follows, the naming process, the ideas or saṃjñā that get attached to those appearances. Third comes discrimination, called samkalpa or vikalpa, the distinctions and connections a mind draws between different names and ideas.

  Samyagjñāna, right knowledge, is fourth. It is the knowledge bodhisattvas gain once they grasp the true nature of things, called Suchness. That knowledge lets them move past the discriminations that occupy worldly minds. Tathatā, Suchness, completes the list, the truth and ultimate reality that lies beyond all words, images, and discrimination, beyond duality and plurality altogether.

  The Lanka closely ties this five-part scheme to Yogacara's theory of three inherent natures. Image, naming, and discrimination correspond to the parikalpita-svabhāva, the fully conceptualized nature, and to the paratantra-svabhāva, the dependent nature. Right knowledge and Suchness, by contrast, correspond to the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva, the fully accomplished nature, a distinction that resurfaces once the sutra turns to buddha-nature.

• 4. Buddha Nature And Emptiness

  ›

  "Just like a gem of great value wrapped in a stained cloth," the sutra says, buddha-nature lies hidden within the bodies of all sentient beings. It calls this nature tathāgatagarbha, also known as buddhagotra or tathagatagotra. The sutra describes it as the purity of natural luminosity, primordially pure, and endowed with the thirty-two major marks. Though wrapped in the skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas, and tainted by desire, hatred, ignorance, and false imagination, this nature stays untouched. The sutra insists it remains permanent, eternal, peaceful, and everlasting.

  Buddha-nature is also equated with the wisdom of noble beings and with "the attainment of the realization of suchness," or tathata. That matches it to the perfected nature, pariniṣpanna. The sutra frames it positively too, as the naturally luminous mind, or prabhāsvaracitta. It equates this with a "true self," realized by those whose minds are not distracted by emptiness.

  Yet the same text states buddha-nature is not a self, calling it selfless, or nairātmya, and empty of self-nature. It explains this teaching as merely a skillful means, upaya, offered to non-buddhists, or tīrthikas, who cling to belief in a self. "Mahāmati, my instruction on the tathāgatagarbha is not similar to the doctrine of the self of the tīrthikas," the sutra states, addressing the bodhisattva directly. The teaching exists, it explains, so that naive beings will not fear the idea of having no self. It also exists to draw tīrthikas who cling to selfhood toward the possibility of awakening.

  Karl Brunnhölzl notes that across many passages, the Lanka works to unify these positive buddha-nature teachings with its more austere emptiness teachings. It treats them, he writes, as equivalent and non-contradictory, each an aspect of the other. The sutra even states that "all sūtras of all buddhas teach is nothing but emptiness, nonarising, nonduality, and the lack of nature." Elsewhere, Brunnhölzl notes, the text pushes the identification further, equating this same buddha-nature with something more paradoxical still: the storehouse consciousness itself.

• 5. The Storehouse Consciousness

  ›

  As Karl Brunnhölzl observes, this storehouse consciousness contains both contaminated and uncontaminated latent tendencies at once, called anusaya. It is described as momentary and not momentary in the same breath. It is called the cause of virtue and of non-virtue, and the cause of every existence within saṃsāra. Because of this, it is something that must be purified.

  Yet the same buddha-nature is also called indestructible, free from a self, naturally pure, and free from the flaw of impermanence. The sutra compares it to a dancer performing many different roles, and also to pure gold or a diamond that is never tarnished or changed. This buddha-nature storehouse-consciousness, the sutra adds, cannot be fully understood by anyone who is not already a Buddha.

  The sutra puts this paradox in words addressed to Mahāmati: "Being impregnated by all kinds of beginningless latent tendencies of the impregnations of negative tendencies of discursiveness, it is called 'ālaya-consciousness.'" Its workings, joined to the seven consciousnesses that arise from ignorance, never stop, the text says, "just like a great ocean and its waves." The fundamental mind is described as neither separate from nor joined to these defiled tendencies. The sutra compares it to "a white piece of clothing that remains white underneath but can be dirtied by dust."

  In some passages the sutra splits this storehouse consciousness into two: "the ultimate ālaya-consciousness and the ālaya of cognizance," or vijñapti. Elsewhere it uses different names, "the true nature of the mind," which stays pure, against "the mind that arises from mistakenness." D.T. Suzuki describes this as two aspects of one Ālaya. One is the Ālaya as it is in itself, called pāramālaya-vijñāna, and the other is the Ālaya as mental representation, vijñaptir ālaya.

  The fluctuating aspect, pravṛitti, gets caught up in the discrimination and craving of the manas consciousness, while the primitively pure aspect, prakṛitipuriśuddhi, does not. Suzuki lists several common terms for this pure, ultimate reality. Among them are Tathatā, or suchness, Satyatā, the state of being true, and Bhūtatā, the state of being real. Others include Dharmadhātu, the realm of truth, along with Nirvana, the Permanent, Sameness, the One, Cessation, the Formless, and Emptiness.

  In another passage, the Lanka speaks of nine forms of consciousness rather than the classic eight of Yogacara philosophy. This passage may be the source for Paramārtha's later doctrine of a ninth consciousness, which he called the amalavijñāna, or pure consciousness. The distinction suggests buddha-nature is not simply identical to the storehouse consciousness. It is instead the pure nature of mind that remains once every adventitious stain, āgantukamala, has been purified away.

• 6. From Error To Awakening

  ›

  Suffering and ignorance, the sutra explains, begin when consciousness engages in discrimination, representation, and conceptualization. This error produces the egoic consciousness, called manas, which treats phenomena as real and permanent and so gives rise to craving and attachment. At the root of this error is a single mistake: treating any phenomenon as something other than mind.

  Liberation and awakening, or bodhi, arrive when this discrimination ends through a non-conceptual, intuitive knowledge, jñana, of suchness, or tathata. The sutra frames awakening as the cessation of specific activities of consciousness. These include the discrimination carried out by the manas and the latent tendencies stored in the storehouse consciousness. Gishin Tokiwa writes that awakening happens once the discriminating storehouse consciousness "ceases to be the ground and object of the seven vijñanas," leaving only pure buddha-nature.

  This complete reversal of consciousness is called āśraya-parāvṛtti, the turning around of the basis. Reaching it requires the bodhisattva to purify both action and thought, through ethical discipline and meditation, while also building insight by hearing the teachings and meditating on emptiness.

  The sutra gives several names to the knowledge of ultimate truth. Among them are pratyātmāryajñānagati, the state of noble knowledge realized by oneself, and svapratyātma, inner self-realization. Another is pratyātmagati, that which is realized by oneself. Akira Suganuma calls this "inner wisdom" the very thing "that all the teachings in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra indicate to us is to realize or accomplish."

  D.T. Suzuki calls this transcendental wisdom, aryajñāna, "an intuitive understanding which, penetrating through the surface of existence, sees into that which is the reason of everything logically and ontologically." He describes it also as "a fundamental intuition into the truth of Mind-only," constituting Buddhist enlightenment itself. Suzuki notes other names for this same wisdom: pravicayabuddhi, an insight into the ultimate ground of existence, and svabuddhi, innate understanding. Other terms include nirābhāsa or anābhāsa, imagelessness, and nirvikalpa, meaning beyond discrimination or concepts. He contrasts all of these with vikalpabuddhi, discriminative understanding, a relative and conceptual kind of knowledge grounded in duality and plurality.

  An important passage addresses how this purification actually happens, stating it can unfold gradually as well as suddenly. Gradual purification, the sutra says, works "by degrees and not all at once," comparing it to "the gooseberry, which ripens by degrees." Sudden purification is described differently. "Just as a clear mirror reflects formless images all at once," the sutra says, tathagatas purify the stream of perceptions in beings' minds all at once too.

  The sutra piles on more images of instantaneous purification. It describes the sun and moon illuminating all at once, and the repository consciousness distinguishing every realm of a being's world at once. It even names a destination for those who awaken this way: practitioners are led to reside in Akanishtha Heaven. This passage on sudden purification became a foundation for the East Asian doctrine of sudden enlightenment, called dun in Chinese. The doctrine was later debated across Chan, Zen, and Seon traditions.

• 7. Beyond Words

  ›

  "As the ignorant grasps the finger-tip that points to the moon and does not cognize the moon, so those who cling to the letter do not know my truth," the sutra states. Ultimate reality, or dharmata, is eternal, free from arising and ceasing, and cannot be grasped or cognized. Because of this, the sutra insists that Buddhas "do not teach the doctrine that is dependent on letters," called akṣarapatita.

  Every teaching in the sutra, then, falls short of the ultimate, even while pointing toward it, like a finger pointing at the moon. A listener should not cling to the sutra's own words, provisional letters, or saṁvṛti, but should instead focus on the ultimate meaning, paramārtha.

  The sutra pushes this further, claiming that Buddhas have never spoken even a single letter or syllable, akṣara: "the Tathagatas neither uttered nor answered even a letter, because truths are beyond the letters." Yet it clarifies this does not mean Buddhas withhold teaching on what benefits beings. Depending on discrimination, the sutra says, Buddhas declare whatever is needed. Without that discrimination, the scriptures containing all the truths would disappear. And when the scriptures disappear, so do the Buddhas, Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas who depend on them.

  For this reason, the sutra concludes, a bodhisattva should not cling to the words or letters of a canonical text. Instead, a bodhisattva should stay in conformity with the meaning, artha-pratiśaraṇa, rather than the letter, vyañjana. According to Charles Willemen, this teaching became "the basis for Chan's famous wordless teaching," the tradition's claim to transmit its realization without words at all.

• 8. History And Commentaries

  ›

  Scholars generally date the sutra's compilation to somewhere between 350 and 400 CE, according to Asanga Tilakaratne. Many believe, though, that its introductory chapter and its final two chapters were added later. Christian Lindtner argues an early recension influenced the writings of Nagarjuna and Aryadeva in the 3rd century. He points to close allusions in early madhyamaka texts, which would push the sutra's core back even further. Lambert Schmithausen, by contrast, found the evidence tying the text to Nagarjuna insufficient. He also noted a passage that appears to quote directly from Vasubandhu's Trimsika, a work from the 4th to 5th century CE.

  Gishin Tokiwa suggests a different origin altogether: that the sutra was compiled in Sri Lanka between 411 and 435. That was a period when Mahayana Buddhism flourished at sites like Abhayagiri vihara, and the island welcomed Chinese pilgrims such as Faxian. Four Chinese translations were made from Sanskrit between roughly 420 CE and 704, the earliest credited to Dharmarakṣa in the 5th century. Only three of the four survive today.

  The earliest surviving version, Taishō 670, was translated by Guṇabhadra in 443 CE and divided into four fascicles. Tradition holds that this edition passed from Bodhidharma, the founder of Chan Buddhism, to his successor Dazu Huike. It lacks the first, ninth, and tenth chapters found in later versions. The second, Taishō 671, was translated by Bodhiruci in 513 CE across ten fascicles. A later imperial preface criticized it for extra words and sentences that muddied the original meaning.

  The third and final translation, Taishō 672, was completed in 704 CE by a team headed by Śikṣānanda. It was commissioned by Empress Wu Zetian and drew on five separate Sanskrit editions for accuracy. The Huayan scholar Fazang took part in this effort, but before the final edits were finished, Śikṣānanda returned to India. An Indian monk named Mitrasena, who had studied Buddhist sutras in India for 25 years and knew the Laṅkāvatāra well, arrived in China soon after. Fazang and Mitrasena were given the task of finishing the revision together.

  Alongside these Chinese versions, two Tibetan translations survive. One was made directly from Sanskrit, and the other was likely rendered from Guṇabhadra's Chinese. A Sanskrit version was also preserved separately in Nepal. Nanjo Bunyu prepared a critical edition of that Sanskrit text in 1923, drawing on four manuscripts from the Nepalese tradition. Gishin Tokiwa and Takasaki Jikido both concluded that Guṇabhadra's translation, the oldest surviving one, preserves the earliest form of the original Sanskrit text most faithfully.

  D.T. Suzuki observed that the earliest translations run notably shorter than later ones, a sign, he argued, that material was added over time. The first and last chapters tie the text to Ravana, the villain of the Ramayana, and add a dharani. Both are missing from that earliest translation entirely. Suzuki further suspected that the chapter criticizing the Theravada "thrice clean" practice around meat eating was a later addition too. He based this on its different tone and content compared to the rest of the text.

  Given the text's scattered structure, Takasaki Jikido argued the best way to study it is to divide it into small sections grouped by subject. The first to attempt this was the Japanese scholar Kokan Shiren, who split the text into 86 numbered sections in the 14th century. Each section was usually followed by a verse that recapped its prose teaching. Chandrakirti, writing earlier, insisted the text needed careful interpretation and was "not to be understood as a negation of form."

  Two Indian commentaries survive in Tibetan translation: one by Jñānaśrībhadra in the 11th century, and one by Jñānavajra in the 12th. Jñānavajra leaned on the epistemological tradition of Dharmakīrti and developed a distinctive reading he called "cognitive centrism." In East Asia, the Huayan patriarchs Zhiyan and Fazang both wrote commentaries on the text. Fazang considered the Laṅkāvatāra one of the definitive sutras teaching that consciousness is produced by buddha-nature. The text also appears in the Bodhidharma Anthology, an early Chan work containing material attributed to Bodhidharma himself. John Jorgensen notes that commentaries credited to Bodhidharma had reached Japan by the year 736.

  Centuries later, the same Kokan Shiren who first divided the sutra into sections wrote his own commentary in 1324. It was an 18-scroll work titled Treatise on the Essence of the Buddha's Words. He mostly ignored Song dynasty commentaries, citing only Zhiyan's early work, and filled the text with polemics against Tendai Buddhism and the views of Zhanran. Kokan used the sutra's teaching on the perfect nature to argue that Zen was a separate, superior transmission of the Buddha's realization. He held that this transmission stood entirely apart from all other doctrine and scripture.

  Modern readers now have several English options. Thomas Cleary translated the Sanskrit edition directly in 2012. Gishin Tokiwa published his own translation in 2003, based on Guṇabhadra's four-fascicle Chinese text and a restored Sanskrit. Red Pine's 2012 translation takes a composite approach, drawing mainly on Guṇabhadra. It borrows the Ravana chapter from the later translations of Śikṣānanda (652-710 CE) and Bodhiruchi. It leaves out the Sagāthakam verses entirely. D.T. Suzuki's translation, first published in 1932, calls itself a Sanskrit rendering. In fact, it leans on Nanjo Bunyu's 1923 Sanskrit edition alongside the Chinese versions. Even in English, no single Laṅkāvatāra has ever stood alone.