DURING THE COURSE of the eighth century in T’ang China, Ch’an grew from a relatively unknown school of Buddhism into a sect of considerable prominence. Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch, is one of the most revered figures among Chinese Ch’an and Japanese Zen Buddhists. In many ways he is the most important personage in the Sect, regarded, together with Bodhidharma, as its founder, as the man who set Ch’an on the course it was to follow from the eighth century until today. The Platform Sutra, the book that purports to convey his teachings, has seen many editions and many changes since the Tun-huang manuscript version, the earliest text that is still extant.
In order to describe the rise of Ch’an and to make clear the position of Hui-neng in the early history of the Sect, I have discussed, in the introduction, the development of Ch’an in the eighth century, and have provided an annotated translation of the Tun-huang text of the Platform Sutra, as well as a corrected version of the text. In the introduction I have confined myself to the history and legends of Ch’an itself, attempting only very occasionally to relate Ch’an to other Buddhist groups that flourished at the same time. Nor have I touched, except in passing, upon the explosive development of Ch’an towards the end of the T’ang dynasty. In addition, the complicated political and social history of the times has been alluded to in only the most casual degree. Detailed consideration of these subjects would involve research quite beyond the intended scope of this book.
The history of the Platform Sutra spans the development of Ch’an Buddhism from the eighth century until modern times. Except for a discussion of some of the bibliographic problems involved, I have not concerned myself with the uses or the significance of the work from the Yüan dynasty to the present. This is an entirely unrelated and extremely complex problem, far removed from a discussion of the Tun-huang manuscript itself.
In the translation I have attempted to adhere as closely as possible to the original text. There are occasions, however, when the Tun-huang manuscript is unintelligible or clearly in error. Where possible the Kōshōji edition, derived from a Northern Sung Text, has been relied on to supplement or adjust the Tun-huang version. For convenience, the translation and the text have been divided into sections, following the arrangement established by D. T. Suzuki in his edition of the Platform Sutra. Textual errors have in many cases been indicated in the notes to the translation, but no attempt has been made to include reference to all such errors. They have, however, been noted in the corrections to the text itself.
The study of the early history of Ch’an must rely heavily on the documents discovered at Tun-huang. The authorities of the British Museum have had the foresight to make all the documents of the Stein Collection available on microfilm, with the result that specialists, particularly in Japan, have been given the opportunity of making a fairly thorough study of this material, and thus contributing greatly to the advancement of sinological research. Other collections of Tun-huang materials are not so readily available for consultation, with the result that many vital documents may well remain undiscovered among these hoarded archives.
Mention of all the people, both in Japan and the United States, who helped towards the completion of this work, would be impossible. My first and principal acknowledgment must go to Professor Yoshitaka Iriya, head of the Chinese Literature Department of Nagoya University, and a member of the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies, Kyoto University. Professor Iriya has given me much of his time and has assisted me in all phases of my work. I have taken advantage of his great knowledge, and count myself privileged to have been able to work under his guidance. Various members of the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies have assisted me greatly: I am particularly indebted to Messrs. Tairyō Makita and Jikai Fujiyoshi for having provided me with a comfortable place for study in the Religion Research Room of the Institute and for their kind help in numerous ways. Professor Seizan Yanagida of Hanazono University has allowed me to benefit from his wide knowledge of the texts and history of Ch’an, by freely answering the numerous questions with which I plagued him. Professors Wm. Theodore de Bary, Yoshito Hakeda, Chih-tsing Hsia, and Burton Watson of Columbia University have read the manuscript with care, and their corrections and suggestions have proved to be of significant help. Lastly, I should like to express my thanks to my wife, Yuiko, who assisted in the copying of texts and in numerous other understanding ways.