Śūraṅgama Sūtra
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra is a Mahayana Buddhist Sūtra that has been influential across most forms of East Asian Buddhism, where it has traditionally been included as part of Chinese-language Tripitakas. In the modern Taisho Tripitaka, it is placed in the Esoteric Sūtra category. The sūtra's Śūraṅgama Mantra is widely recited in China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam as part of temple liturgies.
In Chinese Buddhism, it is a major subject of doctrinal study and the mantra revealed within the sūtra remains a regular part of the daily liturgy chanted in all Chinese Buddhist monasteries. It is particularly important in the Chinese Chan tradition, including both Linji and Caodong lineages, and the Chinese Pure Land Buddhist tradition. In Japanese Buddhism, the mantra revealed in the sūtra is chanted across the three main Zen traditions of Rinzai, Sōtō and Ōbaku. The doctrinal outlook of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is that of Buddha-nature, Yogacara thought, and esoteric Buddhism.
The sūtra was translated into Tibetan during the late eighth to early ninth century and other complete translations exist in Tibetan, Mongolian and Manchu languages.
Title
Śūraṅgama means "heroic valour", "heroic progress", or "heroic march" in Sanskrit. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra is not to be confused with the similarly titled Śūraṅgama ''Samadhi Sūtra'' which was translated by Kumārajīva.The complete title preserved in Chinese 大佛頂如來密因修證了義諸菩薩萬行首楞嚴經 means:
An alternate translation of the title reads:
The title in different languages
A common translation of the sūtra's name in English is the "Heroic March sūtra", or the "scripture of the Heroic Progress". The Sanskrit title preserved in the Chinese Tripitaka is Mahābuddhoṣṇīṣa-tathāgataguhyahetu-sākṣātkṛta-prasannārtha-sarvaBodhisattvacaryā-śūraṅgama-sūtra, rendered by Hsuan Hua as "Sūtra of the Foremost Shurangama at the Great Buddha's Summit Concerning the Tathagata's Secret Cause of Cultivation, His Certification to Complete Meaning and All Bodhisattva's Myriad Practices".The full title of the sūtra also appears as.
It is also known by abbreviated versions of the title such as or simply and more commonly.
Authorship
An original Sanskrit version of Śūraṅgama Sūtra is not known to be extant and the Indic provenance of the text is in question. A Sanskrit language palm leaf manuscript consisting of 226 leaves with 6 leaves missing which according to the introduction "contains the Śūraṅgama Sūtra" was discovered in a temple in China and now resides at Peng Xuefeng Memorial Museum. But scholars have not yet verified if this is the same text or some other sūtra.The first catalogue that recorded the Śūraṅgama Sūtra was Zhisheng, a monk in Tang dynasty China. Zhisheng said this book was brought back from Guangxi to Luoyang during the reign of Emperor Xuanzong of Tang|Xuanzong]. He gave two seemingly different accounts in two different books, both of which were published in 730 CE.
- According to the first account found in the Kaiyuan shijiao lu the was translated in 713 CE by a Ven. Master Huai Di and an unnamed Indian monk. An official envoy to the south then brought the sūtra to the capital of Chang'an.
- According to the second account, in his later book Xu gujin yijing tuji, the was translated in May 705 CE by Śramaṇa Pāramiti from central India, who came to China and brought the text to the province of Guangzhou. The text was then polished and edited by Empress Wu Zetian's former minister, court regulator, and state censor Fang Yong of Qingho. The translation was reviewed by Śramaṇa Meghaśikha from Oḍḍiyāna, and certified by Śramaṇa Huai-di of Nanlou Monastery on Mount Luofu. Again, an official envoy to the south brought a copy of the sūtra to Chang'an.
Jia states that the first version brought from Guangzhou to Chang'an, which was included in the Kaiyuan catalogue and is extant in the Fangshan stone canon, listed the translators as Huaidi and an Indian monk and was the source for the account provided in the Kaiyuan shijiao lu. He infers that the reason this version omitted Fang Rong’s name is because, at the time of the translation in 705, he was a disgraced and banished official in exile. The reason for this exile was that on 20 February 705, Zhang Yizhi and Zhang Changzong, two brothers who were Empress Wu’s favoured courtiers were killed in a coup, and Fang Rong was imprisoned for his close association with the Zhang brothers before being exiled to Gaozhou on 4 March. Song dynasty records by the monk Zuxiu recorded that Fang Rong arrived in Guangzhou in the fourth month and was invited by the Prefect of Guangzhou to take part in translating the Śūraṃgama-sūtra. The Tang court soon offered pardons to officials implicated in the affair involving the Zhang brothers, issuing amnesties and summoning officials back to court from the winter of 705 to the spring of 707, but Fang Rong unfortunately died in exile in Gaozhou. Jia then infers that Zhisheng’s second account was based on a second version brought from Guangzhou to Chang'an by an official envoy at later time. Jia reasons that, by then, the reason for Fang Rong’s exile had been pardoned, so there was no more taboo on signing his name on the sūtra, hence the second version lists in full the transmitter and translator of the sūtra, including Fang Rong as the transcriber and Huaidi as the verifier of the Sanskrit meanings. This version is supported by detailed accounts of the same events and attributions from a commentary of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra by the monk Weique, who was personally introduced to the sūtra by Fang Rong's family during a meal at their house. Extracts of Weique's commentary with regards to the authorship of the sūtra is cited by the Japanese monk Genei in his work, the Daijō sanron daigi shō, and the details regarding how he was introduced to the sūtra is cited by the Song dynasty monk Zanning:zh:贊寧| in his historical work, the Song gaoseng zhuan. This second version was then included in a later catalogue of Buddhist scriptures called the Zhenyuan catalogue, and is extant in various later Buddhist canons.
Traditional views
In China, Taiwan and overseas Chinese communities, the sūtra is recognized as an authentic Buddhist scripture by all traditions of Chinese Buddhism such Chan, Pure Land, Tiantai and Huayan Buddhism. Many eminent historical Chinese monastics, including the patriarchs of some traditions, have praised the sūtra's teachings, and more than one hundred commentaries have been written on it, over eighty of which are extant in the Buddhist canon. The list of figures who have written commentaries on the sūtra include Zhongfeng Mingben, Yongming Yanshou, all of the Four Eminent Monks of the Wanli Era, Youxi Chuandeng, Taixu and Hsuan Hua. The sūtra has also always been classified as an authentic scripture in all Chinese-language Tripitakas, including the Taisho Tripitaka where it is placed in the Esoteric Sūtra category. It remains a major subject of doctrinal study and practice in most contemporary Chinese Buddhist traditions. In addition, the sūtra in its entirety is chanted during certain rituals like the Shuilu Fahui ceremony and the mantra revealed within the sūtra is chanted during daily morning liturgical services in contemporary Chinese Buddhist practice.The Qianlong Emperor and the Third Changkya Khutukhtu, the traditional head tulku of the Gelug lineage of Tibetan Buddhism in Inner Mongolia, believed in the authenticity of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra. They later translated the Śūraṅgama Sūtra into the Manchu language, Mongolian and Tibetan.
In Japan, records state that the Śūraṃgama-sūtra was brought to Japan by the visiting monk Fushō in 754, which caused a debate over its authenticity. Emperor Shōmu gathered monastics from the Sanron and Hossō Buddhist traditions during the Tenpyō era to examine the sūtra, and eventually reached the conclusion that it was authentic. During the Hōki era, Emperor Kōnin sent Master Tokusei, Master Kaimyō and a group of monks to China, asking whether this book was a forgery or not. A Chinese upasaka or layperson named Faxiang told the head monk of the Japanese monastic delegation, Master Tokusei, that this was forged by Fang Yong. This once again raised doubts about the sūtra in Japan, but these were dismissed with another report from China that Emperor Daizong had the sūtra preached at the Tang court. Later during the Hōki era, various monks gathered at Daian-ji and claimed the sūtra to be false, but Master Kaimyō, who had gone on the expedition to Tang-dynasty China earlier, refused to co-sign their claims and insisted that the sūtra was authentic. The sūtra remained influential in Japanese Buddhism as over seventy commentaries have been written on it, with the majority being from the Zen tradition. In addition, eminent monastics such as Kōbō Daishi, the Eighth Patriarch and founder of the Shingon Buddhist tradition, and Dengyō Daishi, the founder of the Tendai Buddhist tradition, have also written works based on it. For instance, Kōbō Daishi wrote the Daibutchō-kyō kaidai, a commentary on the Śūraṃgama Sūtra in which he referred to it as a nītārtha sūtra, a class of sūtras that contain the definitive and direct teachings of the Buddhas. In contemporary Japanese Buddhist practice, the mantra revealed within the sūtra is still chanted across the three main Zen traditions of Rinzai, Sōtō and Ōbaku.
In favor of full Chinese composition
In China during the early modern era, the reformist Liang Qichao claimed that the sūtra is apocryphal, writing, "The real Buddhist scriptures would not say things like Surangama Sūtra, so we know the Surangama Sūtra is apocryphal. In the same era, Lü Cheng wrote an essay to claim that the book is apocryphal, named "One hundred reasons about why Shurangama Sūtra is apocryphal".According to James Benn, the Japanese scholar Mochizuki Shinko's Bukkyo kyoten seiritsu shiron "showed how many of the text's doctrinal elements may be traced to sources that already existed in China at the beginning of the eighth century, and he also described the early controversy surrounding the text in Japan."
Charles Muller and Kogen Mizuno also hold that this sūtra is apocryphal. According to Muller, "even a brief glance" through these apocryphal works "by someone familiar with both indigenous sinitic philosophy and the Indian Mahāyāna textual corpus yields the recognition of themes, terms and concepts from indigenous traditions playing a dominant role in the text, to an extent which makes it obvious that they must have been written in East Asia." He also notes that apocryphal works like the Śūraṅgama contain terms that were only used in East Asia:
...such as innate enlightenment and actualized enlightenment and other terms connected with the discourse of the tathāgatagarbha-ālayavijñāna problematik appear in such number that the difference from the bona fide translations from Indic languages is obvious. Furthermore, the entire discourse of innate/actualized enlightenment and tathāgatagarbha-ālayavijñāna opposition can be seen as strongly reflecting a Chinese philosophical obsession dating back to at least the time of Mencius, when Mencius entered into debate with Kao-tzu on the original purity of the mind. The indigenous provenance of such texts is also indicated by their clear influence and borrowing from other current popular East Asian works, whether or not these other works were Indian or East Asian composition.James A. Benn notes that the Śūraṅgama also "shares some notable similarities with another scripture composed in China and dating to the same period", that is, the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment. Indeed, Benn states that "One might regard the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment, which has only one fascicle, as opposed to the Śūraṅgama
James A. Benn also notes how the Śūraṅgama even borrows ideas that are mostly found in Taoist sources , such as the idea that there are ten types of "immortals" in a realm located between the deva realm and the human realm. The qualities of these immortals include common ideas found in Taoism, such as their "ingestion of metals and minerals" and the practice of "movement and stillness". Benn argues that the Śūraṅgama's "taxonomy" of immortals was "clearly derived" from Taoist literature. In a similar fashion, the Śūraṅgama's'' "ten types of demons", are also influenced by Taoist and Confucian sources.
In favor of the sūtra being based on Indian originals
After the critiques of the Śūraṅgama from Lü Cheng and Liang Qichao, Shi Minsheng wrote a book titled the Bianpo lengyan baiwei, establishing a rigorous response to them by criticizing both Lü and Liang for misunderstanding the Śūraṅgama Sūtra. In Shi Minsheng's book, he listed one hundred arguments that directly corresponded to and countered Lü Cheng's list of one hundred critiques, cross-referencing and citing multiple other scriptures in the Buddhist canon to undermine each of Lü's critiques by demonstrating that they were based on misinterpretations of the text or lack of understanding regarding Buddhist doctrines.Likewise, Jinhua Jia contends that the text is not a Chinese forgery but a genuine Indian Buddhist scripture that underwent a culturally adaptive translation process in the early 8th century. In his examination of the authenticity of the Surangama Sūtra as well as arguments presented by past academics on the issue, Jia notes that the presence of Chinese or Taoist elements in the text that have been noted by some academics, such as those mentioned by James A. Benn, "comprise only a tiny ratio of the whole sūtra, and are mostly sporadic terms and allusions that do not form significant ideas of indigenous Chinese origin; thus, they do not necessarily indicate a Chinese origin for the sūtra. Rather, they can be seen as translative substitutions of parallel Sanskrit elements applied by the translators." In other words, they represent the translators' method of finding functional native Chinese equivalents that closely resemble and parallel the original concepts in the Sanskrit source. Indeed, he further notes that "Chinese terms and allusions appear more or less in almost all Buddhist scriptures of Chinese translation. For example, Daoist “philosophical” terms such as Dao 道, wu 無, wuwei 無為, and so forth appear everywhere in authentic translated sūtras. While Daoist “religious” terms are less commonly seen, several sūtras translated during Empress Wu’s reign do contain this kind of terminology." Furthermore, Jia argues that these Chinese elements within the sutra, including Taoist influenced terminology and a refined literary style, resulted from Fang Rong's and Huai Di's editorial contributions during translation. These modifications were shaped by the contemporary intellectual environment, which synthesized Buddhist and indigenous ideas, and by the translators' connections to early Chan Buddhism. Thus, the current text of the Śūraṃgama was a Mahāyāna text that absorbed Chinese cultural influences through translation.
Ron Epstein gives an overview of the arguments for Indian or Chinese origin, and concludes:
A number of scholars have associated the Śūraṅgama Sūtra with the Buddhist tradition at Nālandā.
Epstein thinks that certain passages in the sūtra do show Chinese influence, such as the section on the Taoist immortals, but he thinks that this "could easily represent an adaptive Chinese translation of Buddhist tantric ideas. The whole area of the doctrinal relationship between the Taoist nei-tan, or so-called "inner alchemy", and early Buddhist tantra is a murky one, and until we know more about both, the issue probably cannot be resolved adequately." Epstein further writes regarding uniquely Chinese influences found in the text: "As to things Chinese, there are various short references to them scattered throughout the text, but, just as well as indicating the work's Chinese origin, they also could be an indication of a translation style of substitution of parallel items, which would fit right in with the highly literary Chinese phraseology."
In arguing for an Indic origin, Epstein gives three main reasons:
- He argues many Sanskrit terms which appear in the text, "including some not often found in other Chinese translations. Moreover, the transliteration system does not seem to follow that of other works."
- Epstein also notes that the general doctrinal position of the sūtra does indeed correspond to what is known about the Buddhist teachings at Nālandā during this period.
- Large sections "definitely seem to contain Indic materials. Some passages could conceivably have been constructed from texts already translated into Chinese, although given the bulk and complexity of the material, to account for much of the text in that way would mean that the task of authorship would have had to have been an enormous one. About other portions of the work, such as the bodhimanda and mantra, there can be no doubt about their direct Indic origin."
Non-Chinese [|Translations]
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra was translated into Tibetan probably during the late eighth to early ninth century. However possibly because of the persecution of Buddhism during King Langdarma's reign, only a portion of Scroll 9 and Scroll 10 of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra are preserved in the surviving two ancient texts. Buton Rinchen Drub Rinpoche mentioned that one of the two texts was probably translated from Chinese; thereby suggesting the second text may have possibly been translated from another language.The entire Śūraṅgama Sūtra was translated in 1763 from Han Chinese into the Manchu language, Mongolian and Tibetan languages and compiled into a four language set at the command of the Qianlong Emperor. The third Changkya Khutukhtu Rölpé Dorjé or 若必多吉 or Lalitavajra convinced the Qianlong Emperor to engage in the translation. The third Changkya Khutukhtu supervised with the help of Fu Nai the translation of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra. The complete translation of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra into Tibetan is found in a supplement to the Narthang Kangyur.
English translations
There are a few English translations:- The Surangama Sūtra, published in A Buddhist Bible, translated by Dwight Goddard and Bhikshu Wai-tao.
- Charles Luk, 1967, Shurangama Sūtra
- The Shurangama Sūtra with commentary by Master Hsuan Hua. Volumes 1 to 8. Buddhist Translation Society, 2nd edition.
- Buddhist Text Translation Society. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra, With Excerpts from the Commentary by the Venerable Master Hsüan Hua, A New Translation, p. 267. Dharma Realm Buddhist Association, 4951 Bodhi Way, Ukiah, California 95482 462–0939, bttsonline.org.
Teachings
Doctrinal orientation
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra contains teachings from Yogācāra, Buddha-nature, and Vajrayana. It makes use of Buddhist logic with its methods of syllogism and the catuṣkoṭi "fourfold negation" first popularized by Nāgārjuna.Main themes
One of the main themes of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is how knowledge of the Buddha's teaching is worthless unless it is coupled with the power of samādhi, as well as the importance of moral precepts as a foundation for the Buddhist practice. Also stressed is the theme of how one effectively combats delusions and demonic influences that may arise during meditation.According to Ron Epstein, a key theme of the sūtra is the "two types of mind", furthermore, "also contained in the work are a discussion of meditational methodology in terms of the importance of picking the proper faculty as a vehicle for meditation, instructions for the construction of a tantric bodhimanda, a long mantra, a description of fifty-seven Bodhisattva stages, a description of the karmic relationship among the destinies, or paths of rebirth, and an enumeration of fifty demonic states encountered on the path."
Ron Epstein and David Rounds have suggested that the major themes of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra reflect the strains upon Indian Buddhism during the time of its creation. They cite the resurgence of non-Buddhist religions, and the crumbling social supports for monastic Buddhist institutions. This era also saw the emergence of Hindu tantrism and the beginnings of Esoteric Buddhism and the siddha traditions. They propose that moral challenges and general confusion about Buddhism are said to have then given rise to the themes of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, such as clear understanding of principles, moral discipline, essential Buddhist cosmology, development of samādhi, and how to avoid falling into various delusions in meditation.
Two types of mind
A key theme found in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is the distinction between the true mind and the discriminating mind. The discriminating worldly mind is the ordinary quotidian mind that becomes entangled in rebirth, thinking, change and illusion. But, according to the Śūraṅgama, there is also "an everlasting true mind, which is our real nature, and which is the state of the Buddha." According to the Śūraṅgama, the worldly mind "is the mind that is the basis of death and rebirth and that has continued for the entirety of time...dependent upon perceived objects."This worldly mind is mistaken by sentient beings as being their true nature. Meanwhile, the "pure enlightened mind" is the underlying nature of all dharmas. It is the ultimate reality which is also enlightenment, which has no beginning. It is the original and pure essence of nirvana. The true awakened mind is an unchanging awareness that remains still and independent of all sense objects, even while the discriminating mind changes. The pure mind then is the essential nature of awareness, not the ordinary awareness which is distorted and diseased.
This theme of the everlasting true mind which is contrasted with the samsaric mind is also a common theme of the Mahayana Awakening of Faith treatise.
Buddha-nature
The "everlasting true mind" is associated with the Mahayana teaching of tathāgatagarbha or Buddha-nature. Rounds and Epstein explain the Śūraṅgama's conception of the tathāgatagarbha, the "Matrix of the Thus Come One", as follows:Thus, according to the Śūraṅgama Sūtra the "Buddha-womb" or "Buddha-essence" is source of mind and world. This Buddha-nature is originally pure enlightenment, however, due to the deluded development of a subject-object separation, the whole world of birth and death arises.
Meditation practices
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra teaches about the Śūraṅgama Samādhi, which is associated with complete enlightenment and Buddhahood. This samādhi is also featured extensively in the Śūraṅgama Samādhi Sūtra. It is equally praised in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, where it is explained by the Buddha that this samādhi is the essence of the nature of the Buddha and is indeed the "mother of all Buddhas." The Buddha also comments that the Śūraṅgama Samādhi additionally goes under several other names, specifically Prajñāpāramitā, the Vajra Samādhi, the Siṃhanāda Samādhi, and the Buddha-svabhāva.The Śūraṅgama Sūtra contains various explanations of specific meditation practices which help one cultivate samadhi, including a famous passage in which twenty five sages discuss twenty five methods of practice. The main intent of these various methods is to detach one's awareness of all sense objects and to direct awareness inward, to the fundamental true nature. This leads to the experience of the disappearance of everything and finally to illumination.
The most well known part of this passage is the meditation taught by Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, the last of these sages to teach. Avalokiteshvara describes their method as follows:
I began with a practice based on the enlightened nature of hearing. First I redirected my hearing inward in order to enter the current of the sages. Then external sounds disappeared. With the direction of my hearing reversed and with sounds stilled, both sounds and silence ceased to arise. So it was that, as I gradually progressed, what I heard and my awareness of what I heard came to an end. Even when that state of mind in which everything had come to an end disappeared, I did not rest. My awareness and the objects of my awareness were emptied, and when that process of emptying my awareness was wholly complete, then even that emptying and what had been emptied vanished. Coming into being and ceasing to be themselves ceased to be. Then the ultimate stillness was revealed. All of a sudden I transcended the worlds of ordinary beings, and I also transcended the worlds of beings who have transcended the ordinary worlds. Everything in the ten directions was fully illuminated, and I gained two remarkable powers. First, my mind ascended to unite with the fundamental, wondrous, enlightened mind of all Buddhas in all ten directions, and my power of compassion became the same as theirs. Second, my mind descended to unite with all beings of the six destinies in all ten directions such that I felt their sorrows and their prayerful yearnings as my own.The other section of the sūtra which is influential in Chinese Buddhism is the passage which details the meditation method of Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva. This section is considered to be a major text of [Pure Land Buddhism#China|Chinese Pure Land Buddhism], since it discusses the practice of nianfo. This passage states:
beings who are always mindful of the Buddha, always thinking of the Buddha, are certain to see the Buddha now or in the future. They will never be far from Buddhas, and their minds will awaken by themselves without any special effort. Such people may be said to be adorned with fragrance and light, just as people who have been in the presence of incense will naturally smell sweet. The basis of my practice was mindfulness of the Buddha. I became patient with the state of mind in which no mental objects arise. Now when people of this world are mindful of the Buddha, I act as their guide to lead them to the Pure Land. The Buddha has asked us how we broke through to enlightenment. In order to enter samādhi, I chose no other method than to gather in the six faculties while continuously maintaining a pure mindfulness of the Buddha. This is the best method.
Ethics and traditional practices
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra also focuses on the necessity of keeping traditional ethical precepts, especially the five precepts and the monastic vinaya. These precepts are said to be the basis to samadhi which in turn leads to wisdom. The Buddha describes the precepts as clear and unalterable instruction on purity which transverse time and place. If one breaks them one will never reach enlightenment, no matter how much one meditates.Indeed, according to the Śūraṅgama:
No matter how much you may practice samādhi in order to transcend the stress of entanglement with perceived objects, you will never transcend that stress until you have freed yourself from thoughts of killing. Even very intelligent people who can enter samādhi while practicing meditation in stillness are certain to fall into the realm of ghosts and spirits upon their rebirth if they have not renounced all killing.Similarly, the sūtra also claims that unless one frees oneself from sensual desire, sexual activity, meat eating, stealing or lying, one will not reach enlightenment. According to the Śūraṅgama, even though one may have some wisdom and meditative absorption, one is certain to enter bad rebirths, even the hells, if one does not cease lust, killing, stealing and making false claims.
The Śūraṅgama also warns against heterodox teachers who practice meditation without being properly prepared and then fall under the influence of demons. These teachers then begin to spout heterodoxies, such as the idea that practitioners should stop revering stupas and temples, wishing to destroy sūtras and Buddha statues and engaging in sex while saying that "the male and female organs are the true abodes of bodhi and nirvana". James A. Benn notes that the first teaching may be a reference to certain radical Chan masters of the time, while the second one may refer to certain esoteric Buddhist practices which made use of ritual sex.
Diet, lifestyle and ascetic practice
The Śūraṅgama ''Sūtra argues for strict dietary rules, including vegetarianism and the avoidance of the five pungent roots. The sūtra argues that these dietary choices "drive away Bodhisattvas, gods, and xian , who protect the practitioner in this life, and attracts instead hungry ghosts." The sūtra also states that eating meat can have dire consequences:You should know that those who eat meat, although their minds maybe opened and realize a semblance of samadhi, will become great raksasas. When that retribution is over, they will sink back into the bitter ocean of samsara and will not be able to be disciples of the Buddha.The Śūraṅgama'' goes even further with its ascetic injunctions, recommending the avoidance of animal products such as silk, leather, furs, milk, cream, and butter and arguing that this abstention can be a cause of enlightenment:
Bodhisattvas and pure monks walking on country paths will not even tread on living grasses, much less uproot them. How then can it be compassionate to gorge on other beings' blood and flesh? Monks who will not wear silks from the East, whether coarse or fine; who will not wear shoes or boots of leather, nor furs, nor birds' down from our own country; and who will not consume milk, curds, or ghee, have truly freed themselves from the world. When they have paid their debts from previous lives, they will roam no longer through the three realms. "Why? To wear parts of a being's body is to involve one's karma with that being, just as people have become bound to this earth by eating vegetables and grains. I can affirm that a person who neither eats the flesh of other beings nor wears any part of the bodies of other beings, nor even thinks of eating or wearing these things, is a person who will gain liberation.The sūtra also teaches the practice of the burning of the body as an offering to the Buddhas.
The White Parasol Crown Dhāraṇī
In addition to the sūtra's doctrinal content, it also contains a long dhāraṇī which is known in Chinese as the Léngyán Zhòu, or Śūraṅgama Mantra. It is well-known and popularly chanted in East Asian Buddhism. In Sanskrit, the dhāraṇī is known as the Sitātapatra Uṣṇīṣa Dhāraṇī. This is sometimes simplified in English to White Canopy Dhāraṇī or White Parasol Dhāraṇī. In Tibetan traditions, the English is instead sometimes rendered as the "White Umbrella Mantra." The dhāraṇī is extant in three other translations found in the Chinese Buddhist canon, and is also preserved in Sanskrit and Tibetan.This dhāraṇī is often seen as having magical apotropaic powers, as it is associated with the deity Sitātapatra, a protector against supernatural dangers and evil beings. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra also states that the dhāraṇī can be used as an expedient means to enter into the Śūraṅgama samadhi. According to Rounds, the sūtra also "gives precise instructions on the construction and consecration of a sacred space in which a practitioner can properly focus on recitation of the mantra."
The Śūraṅgama Mantra is widely recited in China, Korea and Vietnam by Mahayana monastics on a daily basis and by some laypersons as part of the morning liturgical service. The mantra is also recited in some Japanese Buddhist traditions.
Realms of rebirth, Bodhisattva stages and Demons
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra also contains various explanations of Buddhist cosmology and soteriology. The sūtra outlines various levels of enlightenment, the fifty-five Bodhisattva stages. It also contains explanations of the horrible sufferings that are experienced in the hells as well as explanations of the other realms of rebirth.Another theme found in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is that of various Māras which are manifestations of the five skandhas. In its section on the fifty skandha-māras, each of the five skandhas has ten skandha-māras associated with it, and each skandha-māra is described in detail as a deviation from correct samādhi. These skandha-māras are also known as the "fifty skandha demons" in some English-language publications. Epstein introduces the fifty skandha-māras section as follows:
Influence
China
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra has been widely studied and commented on in Chinese Buddhism. Ron Epstein has "found reference to 127 Chinese commentaries on the Sūtra, quite a few for such a lengthy work, including 59 in the Ming dynasty alone, when it was especially popular".Two principal factors underpinned its appeal. First, the text presents Buddha-nature through the concept of xin xing, or mind-nature, aligning with the interpretive framework common to most Chinese Buddhist traditions. Second, its doctrinal content is thoroughly Mahāyāna, resonating with the dominant philosophical orientation of Chinese Buddhism since the Tang. Once the sūtra appeared during the Tang, it was swiftly integrated into various schools, especially the Chan tradition. Chan patriarch Baotang Wuzhu, founder of the Baotang lineage, was the first to extensively cite the Śūraṃgama Sūtra to support Chan teachings. Prominent later Chan figures such as Guishan, Yangshan, and Fayan were also deeply familiar with the text. The earliest known commentary, by Weique, was produced in 766.
In the Tang and Song dynasties influential figures like Guifeng Zongmi and Yongming Yanshou helped advance the sūtra's prestige. Zongmi, who bridged the Huayan and Chan schools, frequently cited it in his interpretation of the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment and considered it a supreme expression of doctrine, emblematic of the unity of Chan and scriptural teaching. Similarly, Yanshou made extensive use of the sūtra in his major treatise, Zongjing lu, to reinforce the same theme. Exegesis on the Śūraṃgama Sūtra proliferated during the Song, especially among thinkers affiliated with the Huayan, Tiantai, and Chan traditions. Changshui Zixuan, who revitalized the Huayan school, earned the epithet "Grand Master of the Śūraṃgama" due to his influential commentary, Lengyan yishu. His disciple, Jinshui Jingyuan, composed the first ritual manual based on the sūtra, Shoulengyan tanchang xiuzheng yi. Tiantai tradition also revered the sūtra. Key Tiantai masters of the Song like Siming Zhili and Ciyun Zunshi drew upon the Śūraṃgama Sūtra to support their positions. Commentaries by Gushan Zhiyuan and Renyue Jingjue became especially influential.
In the Song era Chan school, the sūtra was revered as “the marrow of Chan” and became a central text. Chan monks used its content to support and deepen the integration of meditative and doctrinal practice. Masters such as Dahui Zonggao and Hongzhi Zhengjue interpreted its teaching on the “ear-organ entry” as a model for Chan realization. During the Song dynasty the sūtra was used in a ritual called the Śūraṅgama assembly which "was held semi-annually during monastic retreats, and there the participants chanted the long magical spell contained in the sūtra. The dharani was also recited at memorial services for Chan abbots and patriarchs." The sūtra is cited in various Chan Buddhist texts, like the Blue Cliff Record. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra also influenced the work of several Song intellectuals, like Su Shi and Su Zhe.
Beyond Buddhism, the sūtra also began to influence Daoist and Confucian intellectuals in the Song. It was a preferred text among literati with Buddhist interests. As noted by official Chen Guan, lay scholars often limited their Buddhist reading to a few key works, including the Śūraṃgama Sūtra. Distinguished figures such as Su Shi, Su Che, Wang Anshi, Zhang Shangying, and Huang Tingjian were all familiar with it. Commentaries by Wang and Zhang were particularly esteemed by monastic readers.
The sūtra retained its prominence during the Yuan dynasty. Chan masters Zhongfeng Mingben and his disciple Tianru Weize continued to promote its study. Weize’s commentary, Lengyan huijie, became the most authoritative exegetical work on the sūtra for the next two centuries. He asserted that no other scripture equaled the Śūraṃgama Sūtra in elucidating mind-nature, making it essential for Chan practice. Although Huayan and Tiantai were in decline during the Yuan, figures like Biefeng Datong and Yuanmeng Yunze sought to revitalize their respective schools through engagement with the Śūraṃgama Sūtra. Even Pure Land master Pudu drew on the sūtra to bolster his interpretation of Pure Land practice.
The Ming dynasty saw the Śūraṅgama Sūtra at the height of its popularity in China. By the mid-Ming period, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra retained significant influence, particularly among eminent monks and the educated elite. During this time, the Huayan monk Huijin 慧進 was invited to lecture on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra in the imperial capital, drawing audiences exceeding ten thousand. During the late Ming period, the Śūraṃgama Sūtra reached a peak in its influence and popularity among both Buddhist circles and the broader intellectual elite. Over the seventy-year span of the late Ming, more commentarial works on the Śūraṃgama Sūtra were produced than in any other historical period. The Qing-era monastic scholar Tongli recorded at least sixty-eight known commentaries between the sūtra’s appearance in the Tang and his own time, with thirty of these composed during the late Ming alone—surpassing the twenty produced in the Song. A more comprehensive modern count confirms this trend: out of 135 commentaries written from the Tang through the Qing, sixty originated in the Ming, with over fifty of those concentrated in the late Ming. The range of authors indicates the text’s wide dissemination and popularity among the literati.
The continued relevance of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra during the Ming is largely attributable to its sophisticated exposition of mind-nature, a theme that resonated across the Chinese intellectual landscape in the Ming. As a tradition of foreign origin, Buddhism had long positioned itself in dialogue with native Chinese philosophies. It was only in the Ming dynasty, however, that the convergence of Buddhism, Confucianism, and Daoism achieved a degree of philosophical integration around the principle that mind-nature is truth. This development reflected a broader trend of doctrinal synthesis among the three teachings. One key figure in this transformation was the Neo-Confucian philosopher Wang Yangming 王陽明, who reoriented Confucian metaphysics by emphasizing the concept of innate knowing. In his system, the mind supplanted Heavenly Principle as the foundational reality, thereby identifying the mind as the source and substance of all phenomena. Wang’s system gained wide acceptance in Confucian circles and served to dissolve longstanding boundaries between the three traditions. This philosophical convergence catalyzed the late Ming movement known as "Three Teachings in One", which advocated the fundamental compatibility of Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism.
Moreover, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra became a tool through which Buddhists articulated the superiority of their doctrine over that of the other traditions. For example, one promoter of the sūtra, the eminent monk Yunqi Zhuhong, while acknowledging that the three teachings express a common principle with varying degrees of profundity, asserted that the teachings of Confucian and Daoist sages failed to attain the depth of insight found in the sūtra’s presentation of the Way. As such, this influential monk held that would should begin one's studies with this sūtra: "The Śūraṃgama Sūtra has the best order , one should read it first." He also used the sūtra to defend his promotion of the dual practice of Chan and Pure Land, as well as to argue for the unity of all Buddhist teachings.
In this period, scholarly engagement with the Śūraṃgama Sūtra played a significant role in the broader Buddhist revival. Other influential figures who wrote commentaries on the Śūraṃgama were Hanshan Deqing, Zibo Zhenke, Ouyi Zhixu, Jiaoguang Zhenjian and Youxi Chuandeng. Chuandeng relied on the sūtra to revive the Tiantai school and wrote various commentaries on it. Hanshan Deqing captured the spirit of the Ming era's attachment to the sūtra when he wrote:
has thorough insight into the origin of the one-mind and includes all the dharmas to the utmost extent. No scripture surpasses the extensiveness and completion of this sūtra.The sūtra continued to remain popular during the succeeding Qing dynasty through to the modern era. For instance, the eminent monk, Venerable Yinguang, who is the Thirteenth Patriarch of the Chinese Pure Land tradition, promoted the "Chapter of Bodhisattva Dashizhi’s Perfect Realisation on Nianfo Samādhi" from the sūtra as the fifth Pure Land sūtra, together with the Amitābha Sūtra, the Amitāyus Sūtra, the Amitāyus Contemplation Sūtra and "The Practices and Vow of the Bodhisattva Puxian ". Commentaries also continued to be produced by various eminent monks during this period. For instance, during the early Qing dynasty, the eminent monk Boting Xufa, who was a dharma descendent of Yunqi Zhuhong and who specialized in the Huayan tradition, wrote a commentary titled the Shou lengyan jing guanding shu which has remained influential in contemporary times. As another example, the eminent Chan master Venerable Xuyun, who was a mentor to many influential Buddhist teachers, wrote a commentary on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra which was unfortunately lost in 1951 during the horrific persecution of monks under the Campaign to Suppress Counterrevolutionaries. Other examples of influential commentaries written during this period are the Dafoding lengyan jing jiangji by Venerable Hairen, the similarly titled Dafoding lengyan jing jiangji by Venerable Tanxu, the Dafoding lengyan jing miaoxin shu by Venerable Shoupei and the Dafoding lengyan jing jiangyi by Venerable Yuanying.
Venerable Hsuan Hua, who was among the first to teach Chinese Buddhism in America, was another major modern proponent of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra. The sūtra along with his commentary on it was translated and published in English in 2003 by the Dharma Realm Buddhist Association, which he founded. According to Hsuan Hua:
It remains a major subject of doctrinal study and practice in most contemporary Chinese Buddhist traditions, with many popular modern eminent monastics in China, Taiwan and overseas Chinese communities such as Sheng-yen, Chin Kung, Chengguan, Huilü and Jingjie having written commentaries on the sūtra or lectured on its teachings. The sūtra in its entirety is usually chanted in rituals such as the Shuilu Fahui ceremony, and the Śūraṅgama mantra revealed in the sūtra is typically chanted as part of the daily morning liturgical session in most Chinese Buddhist monasteries.
Korea
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra was also important in Korean Buddhism. It became a required text for Korea's monastic examination system during the Joseon period. The Śūraṅgama Sūtra remains one of the most influential sources in the advanced curriculum of Korean Sŏn monasteries, along with the Awakening of Faith and the Vajrasamadhi sūtra.Japan
The Japanese Zen Buddhist Dōgen held that the sūtra was not an authentic Indian text. But he also drew on the text, commenting on the Śūraṅgama verse "when someone gives rise to Truth by returning to the Source, the whole of space in all ten quarters falls away and vanishes" as follows:The sūtra was influential in Japanese Buddhism as over seventy historical commentaries have been written on it, with the majority being from the Zen tradition. In addition, eminent monastics such as Kōbō Daishi, the Eighth Patriarch and founder of the Shingon Buddhist tradition, and Dengyō Daishi, the founder of the Tendai Buddhist tradition, have also written works based on it. For instance, Kōbō Daishi wrote the Daibutchō-kyō kaidai, a commentary on the Śūraṃgama Sūtra in which he referred to it as a nītārtha sūtra, a class of sūtras that contain the definitive and direct teachings of the Buddhas. In contemporary Japanese Buddhist practice, the Śūraṅgama mantra revealed in the sūtra is still chanted across the three main Zen traditions of Rinzai, Sōtō and Ōbaku.