Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra
The Laṅkāvatāra discusses numerous Mahayana topics, such as Yogācāra philosophy of mind-only (cittamātra) and the three natures, the ālayavijñāna (store-house consciousness), the inner "disposition" (gotra), the buddha-nature, the luminous mind (prabhāsvaracitta), emptiness (śūnyatā) and vegetarianism.
[3][1] The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra was often quoted and paraphrased by Indian philosophers like Chandrakirti and Shantideva, and it also figured prominently in the development of East Asian Buddhism.
[1] Various scholars like DT Suzuki and Takasaki Jikido have noted that the text is somewhat unsystematic and disorganized, resembling the notebook or commonplace book of a Mahayana master which recorded important teachings.
vijñānavada), the teaching that consciousness as the only reality and that "all the objects of the world, and the names and forms of experience, are manifestations of the mind" as well as the "identification of the Buddha-nature (in the state of tathāgatagarbha) with alayavijñāna".
[3] Other topics discussed in the sutra include Buddhist vegetarianism, the theory of icchantikas, the wrong views of non-buddhists (tirthikas, especially Samkhya), a critique of the sravakayana, the limited nature of language in describing the ultimate truth, the One Vehicle, the bodhisattva path, and the three bodies of the Buddha (trikaya) doctrine.
Thus, even though the Lanka presents a "mind-only" view in some passages, other sections state that the ultimate truth or Suchness transcends even mind, thought, discrimination and subjectivity itself.
The Lanka describes buddha-nature as "the purity of natural luminosity, it is primordially pure, endowed with the thirty-two major marks, and hidden within the bodies of all sentient beings...just like a gem of great value wrapped in a stained cloth, it is wrapped up in the cloth of the skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas, is tainted by the stains of desire, hatred, ignorance, and false imagination but is permanent, eternal, peaceful, and everlasting".
Rather, Mahāmati, the tathāgatas give the instruction on the tathāgatagarbha as bearing the meaning of words such as emptiness, true end, nirvāṇa, nonarising, signlessness, and wishlessness.
The Laṅkāvatāra explains this paradoxical buddha-nature consciousness which is defiled and yet undefiled as follows:Mahāmati, the tathāgatagarbha contains the causes of virtue and non-virtue and is the creator of all births and forms of existence.
Its body, together with the seven consciousnesses that arise from the ground of the latent tendencies of ignorance, always operates uninterruptedly, just like a great ocean and its waves, is free from the flaw of impermanence, is the cessation of the position of a self, and is utterly pure by nature.
It terminates only through seeing the five dharmas, the three natures, and phenomenal identitylessness....Therefore, Mahāmati, bodhisattva mahāsattvas who have this special goal should purify the tathāgata heart, which is known as "the ālaya-consciousness.
[19] According to Suzuki, the most common terms for this ultimate reality include: Tathatā ("suchness" or "thusness"), as well as "Satyatā, "the state of being true", Bhūtatā, "the state of being real", Dharmadhātu, "realm of truth", Nirvana, the Permanent (nitya), Sameness (samatā), the One (advaya), Cessation (nirodha), the Formless (animitta), Emptiness (śūnyatā), etc.
[20] Meanwhile, liberation and awakening (bodhi) arises when discrimination is brought to an end by a deep intuitive and non-conceptual knowledge (jñana) of suchness (tathata).
"[21] Suzuki notes that aryajñāna is also designated by other terms, such as pravicayabuddhi ("an insight fixed upon the ultimate ground of existence"), svabuddhi (innate understanding), nirābhāsa or anābhāsa (imagelessness), nirvikalpa (beyond discrimination / concepts).
[21] The noble wisdom stands in contrast to vikalpabuddhi, discriminative understanding, a relative and conceptual kind of knowledge based on duality and pluralities.
Or just as the sun and moon illuminate images all at once, tathagatas likewise reveal the supreme realm of inconceivable wisdom all at once to those who have freed themselves of the habit-energy and misconceptions that are perceptions of their own minds.
[24] Another important idea found in the Laṅkāvatāra is how the ultimate reality (dharmata) transcends all language and conventional expressions and is free from verbal discrimination (vāgvikalpa).
[11] Because ultimate reality is eternal, free from arising and ceasing, and cannot be grasped or cognized (anupalabdhi) the sutra states that Buddhas "do not teach the doctrine that is dependent letters (akṣarapatita).
[1][29] Lambert Schmithausen has argued that the evidence attributing this text to Nagarjuna is insufficient and that furthermore, a passage from the Lankavatara seems to be a direct quotation from Vasubandhu's Trimsika (4th to 5th century CE).
But the issue of the dating of the Lanka is further complicated by the complex nature of Vasubandhu's authorship of various texts and the fact that his Vyākhyāyukti also quotes the Lankavatara.
[30] Four translations of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra were made from Sanskrit into the Chinese language between roughly 420 CE and 704, the earliest being attributed to Dharmarakṣa in the 5th century.
[31]: 20 Suzuki also suggests that the chapter on meat eating, where the Theravada 'thrice clean' practice is criticized, may be a later edition based on its different tone and content from the rest of the text.
[31]: 20 Based on the text's lack of organization, varying and sometimes irrelevant chapter headings, and expansion over time, Suzuki suggests that it may have originated as a collection of individual passages summarizing essential Mahayana doctrines, which were later shaped into a narrative.
[43] Jñānavajra's commentary presents a unique Yogācāra-Svātantrika-Madhyamaka perspective which was termed ‘cognitive centrism’ (vijñaptimadhyama, rnam rig dbu ma) and he also heavily relies on the works of Kamalaśīla, particularly the Madhyamakāloka.
[43] According to H. Hadano, Jñānavajra's commentary "takes the standpoint that the myriad pure and defiled dharmas are all manifestations of mind (citta), that they are not different to mind, and that they are mind-itself, in other words, the standpoint of the Rnam par rig pa tsam gyi dbu ma (vijñapti-mātrika-mādhyamika) which considers saṃvṛtti and paramārtha as two sides of the same coin, and discards duality.
"[2] Fazang considered the Lankāvatāra to be one of the definitive sutras which taught the theme (zong) of "the attribute of reality" which teaches that consciousness is produced by buddha-nature.
"[2] This "Bodhidharma commentary...has to date from between 445 and 740" and "shares much in common with the theories of Jingying Huiyuan (523-592) of the Southern Dilun Faction, who quoted the Lankāvatāra Sūtra as one of his authorities.
Baochen, writing in the Northern Song dynasty era, also wrote a long commentary to the Lanka which was influenced by the Awakening of Faith and Huayan.
[2] One of the most important Japanese commentaries is Kokan Shiren’s (1278-1346) Treatise on the Essence of the Buddha’s Words (Butsugoshinron 佛語心論), in 18 scrolls 巻, which was written in 1324.
Kokan attempts to show that Zen is a superior and separate transmission of the Buddha’s realization which stands entirely apart from all other Buddhist teaching, doctrine and scriptures and abandons all relative discourse, all "words and letters.
