The Platform Sutra: Introduction (p53-62)

[Kokuu]

[My apologies, this thread was wiped by the data loss so I am sorry that we lost all of the insightful comments that had already been posted]

Dear all

Thank you for joining me for this read-along of The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch translated by Red Pine (Bill Porter).

Rather than reading through the book from front to back, we will be looking at each part of the sutra and its respective commentary together over the course of the next eight months, taking us up to Ango. However, if at any point you wish to read the whole sutra yourself (p1-51) that would very much be a good thing. Also if you wish to refer to the translation by Philip Yampolsky that would be great, but is not necessary.

So, for this week, we will just be reading the Introduction (pages 53-62) before getting into the sutra itself.

In this part of the book, Red Pine gives the history of the different versions of the sutra that we know of, with the earliest parts of the Dunhuang manuscript dating back to around 780 CE. As he notes in the introduction, a second copy of the manuscript was later discovered in the Dunhuang collection, which was of superior quality in terms of the calligraphy, and this is the copy he has used for his translation.

You may wish to read a little about the Dunhuang caves and Dunhuang manuscripts in terms of their importance in modern explorations of Buddhist history.

The only question to reflect on this week, and to post a comment on if you would like, is whether we can know whether the sutra accurately reflects the words of the sixth patriarch or are instead those of one of his successors, and does it matter if we do or not?

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[Hosai]

You mean the one about someone writing Jundo's posts for him?

_/\_
sat/ah
matt

[Kokuu]

You mean the one about someone writing Jundo's posts for him?

_/\_
sat/ah
matt

I don't normally like to say, but that was clearly the best!

[Chikyou]

I really enjoyed reading this introduction and have gained a real appreciation for the platform sutra.

I don’t think it’s important whether or not the one we have is “original”. Even if it’s not, having been venerated by generations of Dharma ancestors, it has gained tremendous importance.

Gassho,
SatLah
Chikyō

[Shigeru]

I very much enjoyed reading this introduction. I have actually not deeply engaged with the platform sutra or its history before, so I found this to be a very interesting read into an area of Buddhism I am rather unfamiliar with.

I think Red Pine brings up a very important point when saying: “We know that if this book does not contain the words of Hui-neng, it at least contains the words of someone who was his equal as a teacher of Zen.”. This is the case for a lot of ancient literature. Does it truly matter if a work is pseudepigraphic, if it contains the same wisdom the attributed author likely would expound? Especially in a religious context, does the person matter as much as the teaching (which is supposed to be, in some sense, universal or universally discoverable)? To my very limited understanding at least, it does not matter very much to my own practice and benefit. Authenticity perhaps becomes relevant when making claims of legitimacy or lineage, but does not seem very consequential to everyday practice. At least that is my perspective

Gassho
Will
SatLah

[Hokuu]

To add to what I wrote in the lost thread, I'm rereading now the Lord of the Rings for 8th time, I think (I lost the count, frankly). The epic's heroes didn't exist, and the events didn't happen but still the story formed billions of people’s understanding of what it means to be human, to make necessary and often difficult decisions, etc.

Some stories have transformative power, what does it matter if the events never happened but the stories inspire us to be better humans?

Gassho
Paul
satlah

[Choujou]

Excellent Introduction... I love that he gives us a little bit of history on the text and how it was discovered, but cuts it off at one point saying he'd rather garden or have tea than discuss the debate about the textual authenticity. Bravo sir... let's have tea! I agree with Chikyou and Shigeru, I don't think it's important to know if it's authentic. In a way, it's much like construction of a building. Some of it is made by the original builder, some bits are done by his workers or people under him...other renovations and projects are done by later owners and other people who didn't even know the original builder, yet the house remains. Changed over time, yes, but still retaining the original essence. If the Dharma rings true through the words of the Platform Sutra, then that is what matters.

I'm also just personally excited for the study as Hui-Neng was an instant favorite of mine during my Zen study many years ago. The story of how he became the Sixth Patriarch is wild! It was a different world back then...

Gassho,
Jay

sat/lah today

[Kaitan]

I wrote previously that I read that even Dogen said the platform sutra was apocryphal, but he still kept referring to it several times in his writings, so what says to me is that you can know it is not authentic and at the same time find valuable lessons in it. I haven't read the sutra, but Red PIne already says that what teaches is beyond concepts, therefore, trying to have the primordial/original concepts from Huineng misses the point; it's better to judge its fruits. I also relate to this issue with my command of English, I know I make a lot of grammar mistakes, but sending the message and being understood is what matters.



Gassho

stlah, Kaitan

[Myo-jin]

The thing I got from the Sutra, whether or not it is largely or even in part apocryphal, is that it expresses certain timeless truths in a comparatively accessible way. A bit like reading the Gospels, in. Way it doesn’t matter if it’s historically true or not, the lessons it contains have their own life and meaning beyond literal veracity.

just my two cents

Sattlah
Gassho
M

[Naiko]

Thank you, Kokuu.

“The only question to reflect on this week, and to post a comment on if you would like, is whether we can know whether the sutra accurately reflects the words of the sixth patriarch or are instead those of one of his successors, and does it matter if we do or not?”

I don’t think we can know for sure, but I do acknowledge that itch to know the facts, the history, the authenticity of a work. Our ancestors seemingly worried little about that and created credibility by tying their work to a highly respected figure. I think of Tibet’s tradition of “hidden” works waiting to be rediscovered, or the story of the Buddha hiding The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra with the nagas for Nagarjuna to “find.” I would like to think that the Sixth Ancestor’s students wanted to honor their teacher and preserve his teachings. Certainly many practitioners thought it worthy of preserving for hundreds of years.

One question I always have when reading these texts, is can I ever know the flavor and nuance of a text when reading a translation? I only know for sure I’m reading Red Pine’s words.

Gassho,
Naiko
stlah

[Shinshi]

Well, in answer to the question I will pull two quotes from the reading. 1) "People tell different stories", and 2) the central theme of the Sutra is: " feeling people from whatever blocks the awareness of their own nature."

From reading I have done in the past, my impression is that the historical Buddhist documents, including Sutras, is that people are telling the story they want heard. The teachings we have today are most often filtered through the lens of the people creating Sutras sometime after the original teaching occurred. And those lenses often are an attempt to support a specific objective that is current to the creation of the Sutra. Kind of like the telephone game, the specifics can get a little garbled or tweaked. People tell the stories that they feel they need to tell in the moment.

But the core teachings remain. And even though this Sutra has likely been modified over time, and is likely not exactly the words that Huineng taught. I believe the core message remains. And as long as the central teaching remains, that is what matters.

In fact we know that the teachings are always the finger pointing at the moon, not the moon itself. So as long as the core is there, the finger can be a little shorter, a little longer - it doesn't really matter.

That is what I think today.

Gassho,

Shinshi

[Kokuu]

Hi all

I think you have all been spot on with your comments.

I have been spending time with Joseph Campbell's writings recently and like his saying that “A myth is something that has never happened, but is happening all the time.” This seems to be true of many Buddhist sutras and teachings. They may not be historically accurate, sometimes containing kernels of historic truth, sometimes not even that, but they teach truths that apply to life back then and to life here and now.

That said, I think that it is also beneficial to shine the light of modern scholarship on these teachings to put them in some kind of historical context, and know some of the reasons behind why they were written. This doesn't, in my opinion, change their benefit for our practice, but it allows us to see how our forebears have used teachings to claim validity for their own lineages and teachers and to view the historical information presented as the opinion of one person or one lineage rather than a fixed truth. The Zen lineage, and names of the six patriarchs have differed in different documents and only become as they aer over time as the result of both The Platform Sutra and the longevity of the lineages stemming from Huineng.

As Jundo often says on a related matter, the names on the lineage chart (kechimyaku) that we receive at Jukai are almost certainly not 100% accurate. However, it is a fact that the teachings have been transmitted from the Buddha himself up until today so there is truth in the idea of having an unbroken lineage of teachings. The names of those who were responsible may have been forgotten or left unsaid, as we say in our dedication chant, but we still owe them a debt of gratitude for the part they played in keeping the dharma as a living tradition, and the names on the chart represent them either factually or symbolically.

Whoever wrote The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, and whether the words in it are those of Huineng or some other teacher, we owe them a debt of gratitude for putting these timeless teachings to paper and also to those who have coped them, passed them on to us, and translated them into languages other than the original.

And so, next we begin with the sutra itself!

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[Heikyo]

At the end of the day the sutra is written as a teaching and not a historical record, so whether the events actually happened is not relevant for me.. As Kokuu has said, it's sometimes good to have the context that it was written in, but if we are approaching the text as a teaching rather than as historians, then it's the message that the text conveys that is important.

Gassho
Heikyo
sat today

[Zenkon]

Conflict, intrigue, mystery - Just the introduction reads like a plot for a Hollywood movie. I was struck by the quote from Margaret Mead "...we are all storytellers". The history of the sutra is certainly interesting, but for me I'm not sure it's as important as the message itself. I suppose I agree with Red Pine - "Isn't it time for tea?"

Gassho
ZenKon
sat/lah

[Tairin]

Recounting the convoluted textual arguments involved in this matter is not something I feel like doing and probably not something more than a handful of readers would want to wade throughand my apologies to all those who would. Personally, I'd rather garden. Or, isn't it time for tea?

We know that if this book does not contain the words of Hui-neng, it at least contains the words of someone who was his equal as a teacher of Zen. This has been attested by millions of practitioners who have used this book as their spiritual guide for more than a thousand years.

I am with Red Pine on this. Wisdom is wisdom. It doesn’t really matter to me if it was written by the 6th patriarch over a thousand years ago or last week by someone whose opinion I trust.

Nevertheless I did find the discussion on the origins interesting and if this intro is any indication of the quality of the commentary then I am excited to keep reading along.


Tairin
sat today and lah