The Protagonists: Śāriputra, Subhūti, Śakra, and the Others
Most of the interest in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras shown by commentators, whether traditional or modern, has understandably been focused on the doctrinal content rather than the narrative structure, which is sometimes even dismissed as contrived and largely irrelevant. But while the narrative content may not be these sūtras’ most essential feature, it has both purpose and meaning. An appreciation of how the teachings are said to unfold, and of who is saying what, why, and in answer to what question, adds a rich and rewarding layer of understanding for anyone reading these difficult texts closely. Who, then, are the protagonists in this work, and why are they the protagonists and not others?
Most of the interest in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras shown by commentators, whether traditional or modern, has understandably been focused on the doctrinal content rather than the narrative structure, which is sometimes even dismissed as contrived and largely irrelevant. But while the narrative content may not be these sūtras’ most essential feature, it has both purpose and meaning. An appreciation of how the teachings are said to unfold, and of who is saying what, why, and in answer to what question, adds a rich and rewarding layer of understanding for anyone reading these difficult texts closely. Who, then, are the protagonists in this work, and why are they the protagonists and not others?
The most obvious feature of all the longer Perfection of Wisdom sūtras in this regard is that much of the discussion occurs between the Buddha and his śrāvaka disciples, although the subject matter lies at the heart of the Mahāyāna, the path of bodhisattvas.
The most obvious feature of all the longer Perfection of Wisdom sūtras in this regard is that much of the discussion occurs between the Buddha and his śrāvaka disciples, although the subject matter lies at the heart of the Mahāyāna, the path of bodhisattvas.
A number of Mahāyāna sūtras feature conversations between the Buddha, bodhisattvas, and śrāvaka disciples in which the śrāvaka disciples are depicted as rigid and limited in their views compared to the bodhisattvas. But in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras this is not the case. Substantial statements about the perfection of wisdom are made not only by the Buddha in answer to the śrāvaka interlocutors’ questions, but also directly by the śrāvaka interlocutors themselves. Indeed very little is said by any bodhisattvas, despite their explicit presence at the teaching recounted in these sūtras. Even Mañjuśrī, who could be expected to have a leading role, is simply said to be present among the other bodhisattvas, but no more. Avalokiteśvara too, so central in the Heart Sūtra, is merely present in the audience. The sole exception is Maitreya, who takes part in the dialogue a few times.
Instead, much of the teaching on the Perfection of Wisdom is set out in the form of exchanges between the Buddha and his śrāvaka disciples. Seven or eight names of well-known disciples are variously mentioned in the sūtra collectively as small groups concerned in the discussions on particular topics, sometimes along with the bodhisattvas, but the only ones among them who speak as individuals are Śāriputra, Subhūti, Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, and Ānanda.
Of these, it is to Śāriputra—without Śāriputra having asked any question—that the Buddha addresses the brief statement at the beginning of chapter 2 that starts off the entire teaching.61 In the canonical literature, Śāriputra (whose name takes the longer form Śāradvatīputra in the sūtra) is “foremost of those with great wisdom” among the disciples,62 the specialist in the distinction and analysis of dharmas characteristic of the Abhidharma, and it is therefore fitting, as the Dazhidu lun points out,63 that the teaching should initially be addressed to him. Śāriputra then asks for more detail, and the Buddha’s response forms the entirety of the rest of the long chapter, which is accordingly known as the “Śāriputra chapter” and forms a survey of what is meant by the bodhisattva’s practice of the perfection of wisdom that is relatively easy to understand—suggesting that it is the material particularly appropriate to Śāriputra’s perspective. Nevertheless, in subsequent chapters, Śāriputra continues to participate. He does so mainly by asking questions, many of them put to Subhūti rather than to the Buddha himself, and makes few statements of his own. Nevertheless, he is wise and experienced enough even to be able to correct a misunderstanding of Śakra’s at one point (25.8). Śāriputra is appreciative and respectful of the teaching, and wants to understand it in terms of his own framework. The other interlocutors treat Śāriputra’s perspective on it respectfully. Implicitly, however, as the sūtra proceeds it becomes clear that Śāriputra’s category-based understanding lacks the profundity of Subhūti’s.
Indeed, it is Subhūti who is by far the most prominent protagonist in these sūtras. At the beginning of chapter 3, the Buddha asks Subhūti to address the bodhisattvas and tell them how a bodhisattva will become emancipated or go forth in the perfection of wisdom. This important passage sets the scene for the rest of the intermediate teaching (on which see i.69 above), all of which (up to the end of chapter 13) is referred to as the “Subhūti chapter” since much of the teaching is either delivered by Subhūti himself, or given by the Buddha in response to Subhūti’s questions.64 This does not mean, however, that Subhūti’s participation as a protagonist is limited to that section of the sūtra. His conspicuous presence and his major statements continue throughout, and there are only a few (mostly short) chapters in the rest of the text in which Subhūti does not figure at all.
Subhūti is an intriguing figure. As an arhat, he is declared by the Buddha in the canonical literature to hold two distinctions of the “foremost among…” type: “foremost among those worthy of donations” and “foremost among those dwelling free of afflicted mental states.”65 In the Chinese canon he has another distinction, that of being “foremost among those dwelling in meditation on emptiness.”66 Despite these mentions of his distinctions Subhūti figures surprisingly rarely in the Pali canon.67 In the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya corpus he seems to be mentioned even less, but the one story about him, found in the Vinayakṣudrakavastu (Toh 6) as well as in the Pali paracanonical literature, is perhaps significant in explaining his interest in the most profound views;68 it has also traditionally been used to place the timing of the Prajñāpāramitā teachings in the main events of the Buddha’s life. In the Lokottaravāda Mahāvastu he does not appear at all. In the Mahāyāna sūtras, however, he figures much more frequently, and his appearances as a protagonist mostly show him in a respectful light that conforms to the personal characteristics alluded to in the Pali and Mūlasarvāstivāda literature: those of someone interested above all in meditative practice and the profound view of impermanence, emptiness, nonself, and the ultimate that transcends conceptuality.69 In the Lotus Sūtra he is one of the small group of śrāvakas whose future full awakening to buddhahood is prophesied by the Buddha.70 On the other hand, there are also a few Mahāyāna works, as there are for other śrāvaka disciples, in which he is demonstratively outclassed by bodhisattvas.71
That Subhūti’s role in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras is not presented as paradoxical—a śrāvaka arhat who teaches the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattvas—is perhaps surprising at first sight, but is an important key to understanding the long sūtras.
That Subhūti’s role in the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras is not presented as paradoxical—a śrāvaka arhat who teaches the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattvas—is perhaps surprising at first sight, but is an important key to understanding the long sūtras.
First of all, to practice the perfection of wisdom, as is made clear in the sūtra, is not itself the exclusive domain of the bodhisattva path. For example, Śāriputra himself confirms to Subhūti at the end of chapter 4 (4.54) that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, as well as bodhisattvas, “should earnestly study, should retain, should hold, should read aloud, should master, and should attend in the correct manner to this very perfection of wisdom.” Moreover, as Subhūti starts his explanations to Śakra in chapter 14 (14.3) by exhorting the gods to become bodhisattvas, he also implies that although śrāvaka arhats are (from their own perspective) in their last life, there is nothing to prevent them from spending their remaining time practicing the perfection of wisdom.
Is it a different matter for a śrāvaka to teach the perfection of wisdom—especially to bodhisattvas? The important role of śrāvakas in the past teaching the six perfections to future bodhisattvas, and thus ensuring the emergence of future buddhas, is mentioned by Subhūti in chapter 14 (14.78). If there is nevertheless any basis for a śrāvaka teaching the perfection of wisdom to be seen as paradoxical, it is exposed and dispelled early on, at least from a formal perspective. No sooner has the Buddha asked Subhūti to teach than some of the arhats and bodhisattvas present wonder whether he will teach using his own understanding and inspired eloquence, or through the power of the Buddha (3.2); Subhūti replies immediately (3.3) that a śrāvaka like him can only teach anything through the power of the Buddha. A good deal of room for interpretation is nonetheless left in this passage—first in what is meant by “inspired eloquence” (pratibhāna, spobs pa), then also in the details of Subhūti’s disclaimer, but most of all in the way Subhūti begins to respond to what the Buddha has asked him to do (3.4). For instead of launching straight into a teaching of his own, he asks how he could possibly teach bodhisattvas a perfection of wisdom when neither bodhisattvas nor a perfection of wisdom can be observed other than their mere designations. This key prompt elicits a long teaching by the Buddha on just that topic that lasts for several chapters, punctuated by further questions from Subhūti and long statements by him addressed either to the Buddha, or to Śāriputra when the latter again asks for clarification. Indeed that central question continues to echo throughout the text.
On a few particular occasions we are reminded that Subhūti, or in other places Śāriputra, speaks by the power of the Buddha. But each of the two arhats remains firmly in character, and it is clear that—while both are technically on the same level—Subhūti is someone of a very different category and status compared to Śāriputra. He also has a quite different role. While both at times seek clarifications from the Buddha, Śāriputra does little more than elicit such clarifications, whether from the Buddha or from Subhūti—while Subhūti, on the other hand, makes long and extensive statements of his own. Indeed, at one point in chapter 13 (13.277) Śāriputra exclaims that Subhūti should have been declared “supreme among those who teach the Dharma,” which of course was not one of his official distinctions.
The question of what is meant by Subhūti speaking by the power of the Buddha takes a new turn later in the discussions, when Śakra is advised by Śāriputra that the perfection of wisdom should be sought in Subhūti’s discourse (16.100). Subhūti emphatically deflects the assertion that his discourse might be his own and not derived from the power and blessings of the Buddha, but then goes on to deconstruct all notions that there are such things as the power and blessings of a tathāgata that can be apprehended in any way.
“Venerable Subhūti! You are the son and heir of the Blessed Lord! Born from his mouth, arisen from the Dharma, emanated by the Dharma, inheritor of the Dharma, not an inheritor of material things, but an immediate physical eyewitness to the attributes of the buddhas. You are the one said by the Blessed Lord to be supreme among śrāvakas who practice without afflicted mental states, and this exposition of yours is reminiscent of that approach.”
The unimpeded flight path of an arrow does seem an apt image for Subhūti’s approach to everything. As he demonstrates from the start in his response to the Buddha instructing him to teach, he feels no hesitation at all in pursuing to the very end each and every implication of the teaching. Nothing will stop him.72
The unimpeded flight path of an arrow does seem an apt image for Subhūti’s approach to everything. As he demonstrates from the start in his response to the Buddha instructing him to teach, he feels no hesitation at all in pursuing to the very end each and every implication of the teaching. Nothing will stop him.72
In chapter 50, the Buddha tells Śakra (50.5) that although Subhūti is fully immersed in nonapprehending, emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, the degree to which he dwells in the perfection of wisdom is insignificant compared to the profundity of the way bodhisattvas do so. This reminder of Subhūti’s standing, after so much brilliance displayed in so many of his discourses, may come as something of a shock. However, the Buddha has already given Śāriputra a decisive explanation of what it is that makes the difference in an important statement early on (2.211–2.214). It is not the wisdom itself, which is single and undifferentiated whether for a śrāvaka or a bodhisattva; it is the motivation for seeking to realize it. Bodhisattvas seek that wisdom in order to bring all beings to enlightenment. So what Subhūti teaches so magnificently (whether from his own understanding or by the Buddha’s power) on the one hand, and how that teaching is actually to be applied on the other, are two different things. In that respect Subhūti does not seem to have gone all the way—that is, if there is a Subhūti to be apprehended at all.
Another arhat, Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, who in the canon bears the distinction of being “foremost in teaching the doctrine,” has a relatively minor role in the sūtra, but asks pertinent questions of the other interlocutors. His main contribution is in chapter 8, when he spontaneously proposes to offer his own “inspired eloquence” on the subject of why bodhisattvas are called “great beings” and what is meant by the “Great Vehicle.” His lengthy statements on this particular subject are preceded by much shorter ones by Śāriputra and Subhūti, and are followed by the Buddha’s own explanation. It is not that the viewpoint of each is corrected by the following speaker. These four perspectives on a single topic provide the clearest picture of how the possible different viewpoints are seen as contributing to the overall picture.
The role taken in the sūtra by the Buddha’s personal attendant Ānanda is mostly his accustomed one of asking why the Buddha smiles, and then of receiving predictions of future events, and of being entrusted with the preservation and transmission of the teachings. But he also asks other questions at a few points in the text: on the perfections in chapter 21, and about Māra’s activities in chapter 46.
The role taken in the sūtra by the Buddha’s personal attendant Ānanda is mostly his accustomed one of asking why the Buddha smiles, and then of receiving predictions of future events, and of being entrusted with the preservation and transmission of the teachings. But he also asks other questions at a few points in the text: on the perfections in chapter 21, and about Māra’s activities in chapter 46.
Last in this brief survey of the interlocutors, but by no means least, comes a figure who is neither bodhisattva, nor arhat: Śakra, chief of the gods of the Trāyastrimśa realm. A magnificent, powerful, and long-lived (but not eternal) being in his own right, Śakra has taken a personal role at several key points in the Buddha’s past and present lives and quest for enlightenment.73 The Buddha knows him well, and addresses him by his personal name, Kauśika—as indeed do the other interlocutors. Śakra first appears at the start of the detailed teaching, i.e., at the beginning of chapter 14. He is accompanied by a vast assembly of gods and, as their spokesman, immediately begins questioning Subhūti. The long section featuring Śakra and the gods, from chapter 14 through 23, is known as the Śakra section of the text, but in fact Śakra continues to contribute to the conversation by asking pertinent questions in subsequent chapters, too. Ostensibly Śakra and the gods are present to promise their support of bodhisattvas who practice the perfection of wisdom, but Śakra’s questions to the Buddha and to Subhūti provide many more opportunities for everyone present to learn about further aspects of the perfection of wisdom. Śakra is clearly a wise and highly intelligent leader in his own right, with the broad perspective over time and place that goes with his status. However, at one point (30.9) the Buddha, having congratulated Śakra on having thought to ask such a good question, then goes on to remark that it is through the power of the buddhas that Śakra’s questions arise.
Like all the other protagonists, he is thus both a participant with his own individual status, character, and interests, and at the same time one among the cast of dramatis personae with a role to play as the Buddha orchestrates his epic demonstration of the perfection of wisdom.