Spiritual Figures  Sosan (Third Zen Patriarch) FAQs  FAQ
How did Sosan’s teachings differ from those of other Zen masters?

Sosan, remembered through the verses of the *Xinxin Ming* (“Faith in Mind”), stands out in the Zen tradition through an unusually radical insistence on non-discrimination. Where many teachers challenge dualistic thinking, his teaching turns this into the central thread: the Great Way becomes accessible precisely when preferences such as “good” and “bad,” “right” and “wrong,” are relinquished. This non-dual vision is not limited to a few concepts but is applied to every polarity, so that reality is seen as a unified whole rather than a field of opposing categories. Suffering, in this light, arises from the mind’s habit of dividing and judging, and liberation is found in allowing those divisions to fall away.

The form of Sosan’s teaching also has a distinctive flavor. Instead of the dramatic encounters, shouts, and paradoxical exchanges that later came to typify Zen, his voice comes through a single, poetic text composed of concise, contemplative verses. These lines function less as puzzles to be broken through and more as meditative instructions, gently pointing away from conceptual elaboration toward direct awareness of Mind. The emphasis is not on a theatrical breakthrough but on a quiet, steady recognition of what has always been present.

Another hallmark of Sosan’s approach is the way it joins “faith” and “mind.” The *Xinxin Ming* points to a profound trust in the inherent Buddha-nature and completeness of Mind itself, rather than to strenuous striving for some distant attainment. Practice, in this perspective, is characterized by effortless effort: a relaxed, non-grasping awareness that neither chases enlightenment nor sinks into passivity. By ceasing to cling to preferences and aversions, one allows the natural clarity of Mind to reveal itself without force.

Finally, Sosan’s language bears a strong resonance with Taoist sensibilities, speaking of the Way, naturalness, and effortless accord. This gives his teaching a tone that is at once deeply Buddhist in its insight into emptiness and yet closely aligned with the Taoist spirit of spontaneity and non-interference. Instead of engaging in doctrinal debate or technical analysis, his verses offer a pragmatic, practice-oriented path: let go of grasping, stop dividing reality, and the unity of suchness becomes evident.