釋淨土群疑論

Part I. The Bodies and Lands of Ordinary Beings Who Attain Rebirth.

1. A General Discussion of Bodies and Lands.

Question: How many kinds of Buddha-bodies are there? How many kinds of lands are there? ⁽¹⁾

Answer: There are three kinds of Buddha-bodies. There are likewise three kinds of lands. The three kinds of Buddha-bodies are the dharma-nature body, the enjoyment body, and the transformation body. The three kinds of lands are the dharma-nature land, the enjoyment land, and the transformation land. The dharma-nature body abides in the dharma-nature land, the enjoyment body abides in the enjoyment land, and the transformation body abides in the transformation land.

a. The Dharma-Nature Body and Land:

The dharma-nature body and land both take the pure suchness of the dharmadhatu as their essential nature. The Prajnaparamita Sutra says: “The wondrous essence of the Tathagata is precisely the Dharma-body of all Buddhas.” The essence of Dharma has neither shape nor form and cannot be seen. In the Sutra on the Essential Nature of the Dharmadhatu, Manjusri speaks this verse:

The Vimalakirti Sutra says:

As one contemplates one’s own body,

So too should one contemplate all Buddhas.

Concerning the dharma-nature land, the Prajnaparamita Sutra says: “To adorn a Buddha-land is precisely not to adorn a Buddha-land.” Likewise, the Vimalakirti Sutra says: “Although one knows that all Buddha-lands and sentient beings are empty.” It also says: “All Buddha-lands are like empty space.” It further says: “Although one knows that body and land are both the one suchness.” Suchness means neither identical nor different. When it is presently said, “The dharma-nature body abides in the dharma-nature land,” the “meaning of the nature that awakens and illuminates” is designated as the body, while the “essence of the true principle of Dharma” is designated as the land.

b. The Enjoyment Body and Land: These are of two kinds:

(i) The Self-Enjoyment Body and Land: The bodhisattva practices that enter into the eighty-four thousand paramita practices, the fully cultivated virtues of fruition as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, benefiting oneself and others, the perfection of the four wisdoms, the purification of the five skandhas, and so forth constitute the essence of the self-enjoyment body. The essence of the self-enjoyment land consists of the four subtle, pure sense-objects, vast and all-pervading, reflected and manifested within wisdom; only the Buddhas are able to see it.

(ii) The Other-Enjoyment Body and Land: Great bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward use the wisdom of equality to activate the virtues of benefiting others inherent in the great perfect mirror wisdom. In accordance with beings’ responses, a portion of the subtle objective realm is manifested as the essential nature of the other-enjoyment land.

c. The Transformation Body and Land:

Bodhisattvas prior to the bhumis and practitioners of the Two Vehicles use the wisdom of accomplishing activities to activate the virtues of benefiting others inherent in the wisdom of equality. In accordance with beings’ responses, a portion of the coarse objective realm is manifested as the essential nature of the transformation land.

The essential nature of the enjoyment land and the transformation land is explained in three ways:

(i) Gathering phenomena and returning them to suchness: All sentient beings take suchness as their essence. Both the recompense lands (the self-enjoyment and other-enjoyment lands) and the transformation land take suchness as their essence.

(ii) Gathering appearances and returning them to mind: Both the recompense land (the enjoyment land) and the transformation land are manifested by the Tathagata’s pure and impartial mind. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: “If the mind is pure, the Buddha-land is also pure.” The Consciousness-Only teachings and the Mahayana-samgraha likewise maintain that all dharmas are not separate from one’s own mind.

(iii) Clarifying the distinction between the root and the branches: Both the recompense land (the enjoyment land) and the transformation land take precious adornments as their essential nature.

2. A Discussion of the Body and Land of Sukhavati

a. A Discussion of the Land of Sukhavati

Question: Among the three kinds of lands, to which does the Western World of Sukhavati belong? ⁽²⁾

Answer: There are three explanations:

⁽¹⁾ Sukhavati is an other-enjoyment land: This is because the Buddha’s body is six hundred thousand kotis of nayutas of Ganges sands of yojanas in height. Most beings in that land are bound to attain Buddhahood after one more birth; there is no suffering, and they experience only bliss, and so forth. It must therefore be an other-enjoyment land.

⁽²⁾ Sukhavati is a transformation land: Is there any scripture stating that whenever a Buddha’s body is six hundred thousand kotis of nayutas of Ganges sands of yojanas in height, and so forth, the land must be a recompense land (an enjoyment land)? If the Buddha’s body in a transformation land were six hundred thousand kotis of nayutas of Ganges sands of yojanas in height, what would be unacceptable about that? The Sutra on the Contemplation of Amitayus and other scriptures all state that ordinary beings attain rebirth in the Pure Land. It is therefore known that Sukhavati is a transformation land.

⁽³⁾ Sukhavati is both an enjoyment land and a transformation land: Bodhisattvas at or below the Three Worthy Stages see Sukhavati as a transformation land, while bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward see Sukhavati as an enjoyment land. Although it is the same dwelling place, each person sees a different Buddha-land according to his own mind; Sukhavati therefore encompasses both kinds of lands. Thus, the Sutra on the Contemplation of Amitayus says that Amitabha Buddha’s body is not an objective appearance that ordinary beings can perceive, and therefore instructs practitioners to contemplate a Buddha-body sixteen feet in height.

b. An Explanation of the Enjoyment Land and the Transformation Land

Question: According to the answer to question ⁽¹⁾, if Sukhavati is an other-enjoyment land, how can ordinary beings attain rebirth there? Conversely, if Sukhavati is a transformation land, why are bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward—noble beings—reborn there? ⁽³⁾

Answer: Bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages, sravakas, and ordinary beings have not yet realized all-pervading suchness ^[1], nor have they eliminated attachment to self and attachment to dharmas. Their consciousness remains coarse and inferior, and the Pure Land manifested by it cannot resemble the subtle and wondrous Pure Land manifested from the consciousness of bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward. Nevertheless, through the empowering condition of Amitabha Buddha’s supreme Fundamental Vow, although the consciousness of bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages and others is coarse and inferior, they are still able to see a subtle, wondrous, vast, and magnificently adorned realm of the Pure Land resembling that seen by bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward.

The Treatise on the Buddha-Bhumi and other texts hold that bodhisattvas from the First Bhumi upward are reborn in an other-enjoyment land, whereas bodhisattvas at or below the Three Worthy Stages are reborn in a transformation land. This distinction in the rebirth of bodhisattvas is made from the standpoint of self-power and is not based on the supreme power of the conditions created by the Fundamental Vow.

For example, ordinary eyes can see only “forms within obstructions”; they can see only the Desire Realm and not the Form Realm, and can see objects only when separated from them (cognition amid separation), not objects in direct contact with the eyes (cognition amid contact). Nevertheless, the chapter “The Merits of the Dharma Preacher” in the Lotus Sutra says that the eyes received from one’s parents can see Mount Sumeru and even the Akanistha Heaven. Does this not mean that ordinary eyes can see “forms beyond obstructions,” the Akanistha Heaven, and so forth?

The Samdhinirmocana Sutra, the Mahayana-samgraha, and other texts say: “It is like a person looking into a mirror and seeing his own face. Because there is no actual image within the mirror, he is able to see the features of his face clearly. This occurs because the external physical sense faculty ^[2] is joined with the visual faculty, thereby enabling him to see the features of his face in the mirror.” Is this not “cognition amid contact”—seeing an object in direct contact with the eye?

Now, to say that one can see “forms beyond obstructions” (the Form Realm) would contradict the meaning of the treatises, while to say that one cannot see them would contradict the meaning of the sutra. It is therefore known that the masters of the Dilun school generally spoke only from the standpoint of the “causes and conditions of self-power” and not from that of the supreme “causes and conditions of the power of the vows” of the Buddhas.

Material form produced through “mastery in samadhi” is not an ordinary material sense-object, and thus the eyes of ordinary beings cannot see it. Yet ordinary eyes can see material form produced through mastery in samadhi when it issues from the meditative power of beings possessed of great spiritual authority!

The case here is likewise. Through the power of Amitabha Buddha’s original vows, bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages and below are enabled to attain rebirth in the land of enjoyment for others; it cannot be said that they cannot attain rebirth there. Moreover, the ninth contemplation in the Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life states: “The body of Amitabha Buddha, the color of true gold, is six hundred thousand kotis of nayutas of Ganges sands of yojanas in height and possesses eighty-four thousand excellent marks.” This is Amitabha Buddha’s enjoyment body, which bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages and below are unable to see.

Yet a passage later in the sutra states: “Through the power of Amitabha Buddha’s vows, all practitioners of contemplation will be able to see it.” From this we know that practitioners, through the power of Amitabha Buddha’s vows, are able to see his enjoyment body and, also through the power of his vows, are able to be born in the enjoyment land.

The Treatise on the Buddha Land also poses a similar question: “The Pure Land discussed above takes the ultimately pure consciousness as its essential nature. Why, then, are there shravakas in the Dharma assembly of that land without this contradicting the meaning of the Pure Land? Where would the contradiction lie? The shravakas see the same realm that the bodhisattvas see, and because they see the same realm, they are able to hear the wondrous Dharma.”

One master of the treatise replies: “It may be that, through the empowering spiritual power of the Tathagata, they are temporarily enabled to see and hear the wondrous Dharma. This is due to the Tathagata’s inconceivable majestic power. Questions concerning faculties, stages, levels of attainment, and so forth cannot be raised against it.”

This master means that when the Buddha preached the Sutra on the Buddha Land in the enjoyment land, the shravakas and others were able to see that Pure Land and hear the Sutra on the Buddha Land entirely through the Tathagata’s inconceivable majestic power.

The Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life now teaches that one relies upon the inconceivable original vows of Amitabha Buddha to attain rebirth in the Land of Ultimate Bliss. What error could there be in this that warrants objection?

Question: The foregoing argument is still untenable. If bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages and below can rely upon the original vows to be born in the land of enjoyment for others, can bodhisattvas at the First Bhumi and above likewise rely upon the original vows to be born in the land of self-enjoyment? ⁽⁴⁾

Answer: The land of self-enjoyment is “self” enjoyment—for oneself—and therefore cannot, through the power of vows, be made available for the enjoyment of others. The land of enjoyment for others is “other” enjoyment—for others—and therefore one may attain rebirth there through extraordinary causes and conditions. Furthermore, the land of self-enjoyment is supremely subtle and wondrous, and rebirth there cannot be attained through the power of vows.

The land of enjoyment for others, however, is manifested for the sake of others; thus, although it too is exceedingly subtle and wondrous, bodhisattvas of lower stages can still see it. Moreover, the land of enjoyment for others is manifested through the power of original vows, and therefore ordinary beings can rely upon that power to attain rebirth there. The land of self-enjoyment, however, does not arise through the power of original vows, and therefore bodhisattvas cannot see it.

Question: The land of self-enjoyment is “self” enjoyment. If others could attain rebirth there, the meaning of “self” would not be established. Yet all Buddhas see one another’s lands of self-enjoyment, so this meaning of “self” would likewise not be established. ⁽⁵⁾

Answer: All Buddhas possess bodies of ultimate liberation, have attained perfect realization, and are one in self and other. Bodhisattvas, however, have not yet completely eliminated the afflictive and cognitive hindrances and cannot be born in the Buddhas’ lands of self-enjoyment. There are many questions and answers of this kind, and they cannot all be explained here. Those who are wise should contemplate these principles thoroughly for themselves.

Suppose that bodhisattvas at the Three Worthy Stages and below manifest the objective aspect of their own consciousness and see a portion of the coarse characteristics but cannot see the subtle and wondrous aspects of the Pure Land. Nevertheless, these bodhisattvas enjoy the bliss of the Dharma, experience no suffering or distress whatsoever in body or mind, possess only immeasurable pure joy and bliss, are not disturbed by fear or elation, and do not give rise to weariness or doubt.

This too is called birth in the land of enjoyment for others. The Treatise on the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana also states: “Bodhisattvas, from their initial generation of the aspiration until the ultimate fruition, are all able to see the reward body.” This passage accords with the meaning that bodhisattvas below the First Bhumi can see the reward body.

If they can see the body of enjoyment for others—the reward body—what could prevent them from attaining rebirth in the land of enjoyment for others—the reward land? This principle also accords with the explanation of a master of the Dilun School. Alternatively, the Treatise on the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana may be referring to bodhisattvas at the First Bhumi and above, who have realized the “generation of the aspiration,” when it states that they see the Buddha’s reward body.

As for the statement that bodhisattvas at the First Bhumi and above are born in transformation lands, it means that the bodies of bodhisattvas encompass both the land of enjoyment for others—the reward land—and the transformation land. According to causes and conditions, they see either the reward land or the transformation land, but ordinary beings and noble ones nevertheless remain distinct.

Some hold that bodhisattvas of lower stages cannot attain rebirth in the enjoyment lands of bodhisattvas of higher stages, because those of lower stages cannot see the superior, subtle, and wondrous lands of those above them. Furthermore, because their meritorious karma is weak, they cannot attain rebirth there. Conversely, bodhisattvas of higher stages can see bodhisattvas of lower stages and, wishing to guide and receive bodhisattvas at the First Bhumi and below, they manifest birth in transformation lands. Moreover, when bodhisattvas of higher stages are born in transformation lands, their bodies are all transformation bodies. There is likewise no error in arguments of this kind.

3. The Contaminated Land and the Uncontaminated Land

Question: Ordinary beings can attain rebirth in the Land of Ultimate Bliss. Is the Land of Ultimate Bliss, then, a contaminated or an uncontaminated land? ⁽⁶⁾

Answer: The Land of Ultimate Bliss is manifested by the Buddha’s mind as a land of enjoyment for others. Since the Buddha’s mind is uncontaminated, that land must also be uncontaminated. The minds of ordinary beings have not yet become uncontaminated; nevertheless, relying upon Amitabha Buddha’s uncontaminated land, their own minds manifest a contaminated land into which they are reborn.

From the standpoint of Amitabha Buddha’s original land, it may be said that ordinary beings are born in an uncontaminated land. From the standpoint of the land of enjoyment manifested by their own minds, however, it may also be said that ordinary beings are born in a contaminated land. Although it is contaminated, because it is manifested in reliance upon Amitabha Buddha’s uncontaminated land, it closely resembles the Buddha’s uncontaminated land and therefore contains no evil or painful circumstances.

4. Whether or Not It Is Included within the Three Realms. b. Two Interpretations of Non-Inclusion.

Question: If it is a contaminated land, within which of the three realms is it included? ⁽⁷⁾

Answer: There are two explanations:

(i) The contaminated Pure Land is included within both the Desire Realm and the Form Realm, because a contaminated mind does not transcend the three realms. The three realms are precisely the contaminated, and the contaminated is precisely the three realms. Therefore, whatever is said to be contaminated must necessarily be included within the three realms.

If practitioners have not yet eliminated sensual desire, they use the “innately acquired wholesome qualities” and “expedient wholesome qualities” of the Desire Realm to cultivate the sixteen contemplations and so forth. Through these wholesome roots, they attain rebirth in a Pure Land within the Desire Realm, such as Maitreya’s Inner Court of Tushita Heaven. If practitioners have eliminated sensual desire and attained a mind of the Form Realm, they cultivate the sixteen contemplations and attain rebirth in a Pure Land within the Form Realm.

Thus, Pure Lands extend across both the Desire Realm and the Form Realm. Beings of the Formless Realm have no material bodies with which to attain rebirth there. Furthermore, Pure Lands are adorned with precious substances, which are forms, and therefore they are not included within the Formless Realm.

In the Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss, the jeweled ground belongs to the Desire Realm, while the space above belongs to the heavens of the Desire Realm and the Form Realm. In the Infinite Life Sutra, Ananda asked the Buddha: “If that Buddha-land has no Mount Sumeru, upon what do the devas of the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings and the Trayastrimsa Heaven rely in order to dwell?” The Buddha said to Ananda: “In this Saha world, upon what do the devas from the Yama Heaven up to the Akanistha Heaven rely in order to dwell?” Ananda replied to the Buddha: “The karmic actions and their fruits are inconceivable, the realms of the Buddhas are inconceivable, and the meritorious wholesome karma of sentient beings is also inconceivable;

therefore, they bring forth such realms.” The lower fascicle of the Infinite Life Sutra says: “At that time, the Buddha said to Ananda: ‘In that Buddha-land, from the surface of the ground up to the Pure Abodes, have you clearly seen all the naturally pure and magnificent treasures that fill the intervening space?’” The Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss is manifested by contaminated minds and therefore belongs to the two realms of Desire and Form.

(ii) Although Ultimate Bliss is manifested by contaminated minds, it cannot be said that this land belongs to the three realms.

b. Questions and answers concerning its non-inclusion.

Question: The Land of Ultimate Bliss is manifested by mind-consciousness. Contaminated minds belong to the three realms. Since the mind belongs to the three realms, how could that land not belong to the three realms? ⁽⁸⁾

Answer: Although it is understood that contaminated nature does not extend beyond the three realms, there is another explanation according to which it may be called contaminated yet does not belong to the three realms. It should be understood that the meaning of “the three realms” is narrow, whereas the meaning of “contaminated” is broad. Moreover, ordinary beings who attain rebirth in the Western Land do not belong to the five destinies ^[3].

As the Infinite Life Sutra says: “They transcend the five evil destinies, and the five evil destinies cease to exist.” The Amitabha Sutra says: “In Amitabha Buddha’s land there are no three evil destinies...” The Infinite Life Sutra also says: “The sentient beings of that land are neither devas nor humans. They are called devas and humans only in conformity with other Buddha-lands.” From this, we know that the Land of Ultimate Bliss has no five destinies.

If it is accepted that the beings of that land are ordinary beings yet do not belong to the five destinies, what fault could there be in maintaining that the land is contaminated yet does not belong to the three realms?

c. Comparative questions and answers.

Question: There would be no problem in regarding the ordinary beings of the Land of Ultimate Bliss as devas or humans. The sutra merely says that there are no three evil destinies; it does not say that there are no devas or humans. As for the sutra’s statement that they are neither devas nor humans, this refers to the great bodhisattvas, who are neither devas nor humans but are called devas and humans in conformity with other Buddha-lands. It is not a designation based on those devas and humans who attain rebirth there. What could be improper about calling the ordinary beings of that land devas and humans? ⁽⁹⁾

Answer: If ordinary beings who attain rebirth in the Pure Land are born as humans, are they humans of Jambudvipa in the south, Purvavideha in the east, Aparagodaniya in the west, or Uttarakuru in the north? If they are born as devas, do they belong to the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, or to one of the heavens extending up to the Akanistha Heaven? If they are humans of the four continents, then those of Uttarakuru should be subject to the impediment of Uttarakuru, one of the eight impediments.

If they are devas of the Form Realm, they should be subject to the impediment of the long-lived devas. These are places of impediment; why, then, would others be encouraged to attain rebirth there? If it is said that it is a human realm but its inhabitants are not humans of the four continents, could there be another kind of human living outside the four continents?

If it is said that it is a deva realm but does not belong to such heavens as the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, could there be yet another deva realm? If it is said that the devas and humans of the Pure Land are not the devas and humans belonging to the four continents and so forth, then it may likewise be said that the contaminated Pure Land is not the contaminated three realms. What contradiction is there in this meaning?

Furthermore, if it is accepted that “there is no human realm outside the four continents, nor any deva realm outside such heavens as the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, and yet the ordinary beings of the Pure Land do not belong to the realms of devas and humans,” then what is unreasonable about the proposition that the Pure Land is contaminated yet does not belong to the three realms?

Moreover, the meanings of the characteristics of dharmas may be broad or narrow. For example, “worldly” may have a broad meaning while “contaminated” has a narrow meaning; or “contaminated” may have a broad meaning while “the three realms” has a narrow meaning; or “the three realms” may have a broad meaning while “the four modes of birth” has a narrow meaning; or “the four modes of birth” may have a broad meaning while “the five destinies” has a narrow meaning. Why is this so? For example, the defiled land manifested by the Tathagata may resemble the three realms, yet it is not the three realms. Although it is uncontaminated, it is called worldly. This is a case in which “worldly” has a broad meaning while “contaminated” has a narrow meaning.

What is the case in which “contaminated” has a broad meaning while “the three realms” has a narrow meaning? The contaminated mind-consciousness of ordinary beings and so forth manifests the Pure Land. Although this land is contaminated, it cannot be called the three realms.

The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom says: “The Pure Land is not the three realms. Because desire has ceased, it is not the Desire Realm. Because its inhabitants dwell upon the ground, it is not the Form Realm.

Because it possesses visible form, it is not the Formless Realm.” The treatise intends to say: “The Pure Land is not said to transcend the three realms only when it is manifested by uncontaminated mind-consciousness. When contaminated mind-consciousness manifests the features of the Pure Land, fully endowed with the efficacy of the Buddha-Dharma to bring benefit and happiness to sentient beings, it too is said to transcend the three realms.”

What is the case in which “the three realms” has a broad meaning while “the four modes of birth” has a narrow meaning? The four modes of birth are restricted to sentient beings whose five skandhas are worldly products of karmic maturation, whereas the three realms encompass all three natures as well as the receptacle world. Therefore, “the three realms” has a broad meaning while “the four modes of birth” has a narrow meaning.

What is the case in which “the four modes of birth” has a broad meaning while “the five destinies” has a narrow meaning? The intermediate-state body is born by transformation but does not belong to the five destinies. Moreover, the sentient beings of the Pure Land and so forth are born by transformation but likewise do not belong to the five destinies. Therefore, “the four modes of birth” has a broad meaning while “the five destinies” has a narrow meaning.

Such terms have broad or narrow meanings and differing essential natures, and the sutras and treatises set forth these various meanings. Why, then, must a Pure Land manifested by contaminated mind-consciousness necessarily belong to the three realms?

Furthermore, the eighth consciousness has three names: (a) alaya-consciousness, (b) adana-consciousness, and (c) maturation-consciousness. Upon attaining the fruit of arhatship or pratyekabuddhahood, or upon becoming a bodhisattva of the Eighth Bhumi or above, the eighth consciousness is called adana-consciousness and maturation-consciousness, but is no longer called alaya-consciousness. Could one hear that “the name alaya no longer applies” and then suppose that an arhat no longer has an eighth consciousness to retain the seeds of all dharmas?

Could one hear that “the designation of the three realms no longer applies” and then suppose that the contaminated minds of sentient beings reborn in the Pure Land cannot manifest the Pure Land so that they may enjoy the Dharma-bliss of the Mahayana?

Moreover, relying upon the Buddha’s uncontaminated Pure Land, contaminated minds manifest the Pure Land. This Pure Land arises from its original nature and does not cause the afflictions to increase, just as when a contaminated mind takes the truth of cessation or the truth of the path as its object, the afflictions do not increase. Therefore, this Pure Land is not the three realms and does not increase contaminated afflictions.

d. Reconciliation with the teachings.

Question: If it is maintained that the Pure Land does not belong to the Desire Realm or the Form Realm, why does the Infinite Life Sutra say: “Up to the Pure Abodes, and so forth...” ⁽¹⁰⁾

Answer: This is merely a provisional designation calling them devas; it cannot be taken to mean that they truly possess the bodies of devas of the Desire Realm or Form Realm. If it were held that they truly possess deva bodies, could the realm manifested by the Buddha’s purified mind possibly belong to the Desire Realm or Form Realm? Furthermore, supposing that the Pure Land belonged to the Form Realm, would it be superior or inferior to the heavens of the Desire Realm?

If it were said to be inferior, why would the Form Realm be inferior to the Desire Realm? If it were said to be superior, then, just as in the Saha world the Desire Realm and Form Realm differ in superiority and inferiority, the sentient beings of these two realms would also differ in superiority and inferiority. The Land of Ultimate Bliss would likewise be such that rebirth in its Form Realm would be more excellent than rebirth in its Desire Realm.

If so, why does the section on the Forty-Eight Vows state: “If the devas and humans in the Land of Ultimate Bliss should differ in appearance, some being ugly and others beautiful, I shall not attain Buddhahood”? If it is now maintained that the appearance of those in the Form Realm is more excellent than that of those in the Desire Realm, why was the vow made that “their appearances shall be alike”? It should therefore be understood that the assertion that the Land of Ultimate Bliss contains the Pure Abodes and so forth is only a provisional establishment; in truth, there is neither a Desire Realm nor a Form Realm there.

e. Further explanation of why it is not subsumed within them.

Question: The Pure Land manifested by the consciousness of ordinary beings is a conditioned, outflowed realm, yet it does not belong to the three realms. The beings reborn there are unlike devas and humans who commit evil and undergo suffering, and so they are said not to be devas or humans. As the Srimala Sutra states: “Transformational birth and death does not belong to the three realms and is not the true karmic retribution of birth and death.” Such is transformation birth and is not included among devas or humans.

Is it also the case that ordinary beings born by transformation in the Pure Land do not belong to the three realms? The Sutra of Peace and Bliss says: “To say that sentient beings exist outside the three realms is the view of the Dharma master Anduojie of Magadha, not the teaching of the Buddha.” How could a body within the three realms not be a body of the three realms? ⁽¹¹⁾

Answer: Why do you remain confused and ask such questions? Although the Pure Land is manifested by outflowed consciousness, it cannot be called one of the three realms. This is a case in which the meaning of “outflowed” is broad, while the meaning of “the three realms” is narrow. Ordinary beings in the Pure Land can only be called sentient beings born by transformation; they cannot be called devas or humans. This is a case in which the meaning of “the four modes of birth” is broad, while that of “the five destinies” is narrow. The same principle applies here: although theirs are the outflowed bodies of ordinary beings, they cannot be called bodies of the three realms.

f. Continuation of the questions and answers.

Question: This meaning is even more difficult to understand. If that is so, the response body is not a body of the three realms, and the karma is likewise not karma of the three realms. At present, sentient beings in the Saha world attend to and support their parents, cultivate the three kinds of merit, practice the sixteen contemplations, recollect the Buddha, and so forth.

While these karmic acts are presently arising, if practitioners have not yet attained a mind of the Form Realm, these are the wisdom of hearing and the wisdom of reflection produced by wholesome karma of the Desire Realm. If they have attained meditative concentration of the Form Realm, these constitute the wisdom of cultivation produced by wholesome karma of the Form Realm. After being born in the Form Realm, if they aspire to be born in the Western Land, these constitute the wisdom of hearing and the wisdom of cultivation produced by wholesome karma of the Form Realm.

An outflow-free mind cannot bring about karmic retribution. The karma presently being created is karma of the three realms. If this karma brings about a result, that result must also belong to the three realms.

Cause and effect are definite. To say now that the body reborn in the Pure Land is not a body of the three realms—would this not contradict the principle just explained? ⁽¹²⁾

Answer: The meaning of “outflowed yet not belonging to the three realms” has already been clearly established above. This merely means that the designation is lost, not that the essential nature is lost. What is unreasonable about this that you should continue to challenge it?

Although it is understood that this karma arises from wholesome outflowed minds of the Desire Realm and Form Realm, these minds bring about retribution in the Pure Land, which does not belong to either the Desire Realm or Form Realm. Moreover, if this result is used to subsume its cause, that karma cannot be called karma of the Desire Realm or Form Realm, but rather karma for the Pure Land.

If it is argued that bodies in the Desire Realm and Form Realm give rise to minds of the Desire Realm and Form Realm, and therefore this must be karma of the Desire Realm or Form Realm, consider this: karma of the Desire Realm brings about retribution as a deva or human, whose lifespan at most is sixteen thousand years, as in the Heaven of Mastery over Others’ Transformations. Yet if it brings about retribution in the Pure Land, one attains a lifespan of immeasurable, boundless asamkhyeya kalpas.

How could karma of the Desire Realm possibly bring about retribution lasting immeasurable, boundless asamkhyeya kalpas? This occurs through reliance upon the vast and inconceivable power of Amitabha Buddha’s vows, which causes the power of karma to bring about retribution of limitless duration. This is not a realm that ordinary beings can fathom.

The sutras teach this clearly, and it cannot be disbelieved. The principles of the Mahayana are difficult to understand and difficult to fathom. Ordinary beings cannot fathom the realm of the Buddhas; they can only look up to it with faith and single-mindedly cultivate and study with sincerity and reverence.

They must not cling rigidly to the characteristics of dharmas, judging right and wrong and debating whether the Land of Ultimate Bliss does or does not belong to the three realms.

5. What Is Outflowed Can Also Be Pure.

a. Impure in essence but pure in appearance.

Question: Ordinary beings reborn in the Pure Land have still not attained a pure, outflow-free mind. Since the realm appears in accordance with the mind, that realm must still be outflowed. An outflowed land remains a defiled and impure land; how, then, can this be called rebirth in a Pure Land? ⁽¹³⁾

Answer: There are many kinds of purity: true purity, approximate purity, ultimate purity, and purity that is not yet ultimate. True purity is the wholesome outflow-free mind. Approximate purity is the wholesome outflowed mind. Ultimate purity pertains to the Buddhas, the World-Honored Ones. Purity that is not yet ultimate pertains to bodhisattvas from the Ten Grounds downward, extending even to ordinary beings.

Furthermore, there are four cases: pure in essence but impure in appearance; impure in essence but pure in appearance; pure in both essence and appearance; and impure in both essence and appearance.

“Pure in essence but impure in appearance” means that the Buddha’s outflow-free mind is pure, so the Pure Land it manifests must also be pure; nevertheless, the Buddhas manifest lands bearing the appearance of defilement. As the Vimalakirti Sutra states: “Because the Buddha wishes to liberate sentient beings of inferior faculties, he manifests an impure, defiled land.” “Impure in essence but pure in appearance” means that when the outflowed alaya-consciousness, the sixth consciousness (mental consciousness), and the seventh consciousness (manas) of bodhisattvas who have entered the Grounds, together with the outflowed minds of all ordinary beings, manifest the Pure Land, that land is defiled in its essential nature.

Yet because it rests upon the Buddha’s pure land, it takes on the appearance of a pure realm. “Pure in both essence and appearance” means that when the outflow-free minds of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas who have entered the Grounds manifest the Pure Land, that Pure Land is pure in both essential nature and appearance. “Impure in both essence and appearance” means that an outflowed mind manifests a defiled land.

The Western Pure Land in which ordinary beings are now reborn belongs to the second category: impure in essence but pure in appearance.

b. Reconciliation with the Vimalakirti Sutra.

Question: The Vimalakirti Sutra states: “If a bodhisattva wishes to be reborn in a Pure Land, let him purify his mind. When his mind is pure, the Buddha-land is also pure.” This passage means that only bodhisattvas of the Ten Grounds can be said to possess pure minds. How, then, could ordinary beings hope to be reborn in a Pure Land? If one is reborn in a Pure Land, one’s mind must already be pure; yet ordinary beings who are presently cultivating are filled with afflictions, which arise ceaselessly. Since their minds are impure, how can they be reborn in the Pure Land? ⁽¹⁴⁾

Answer: There are many kinds of Pure Lands, not merely one. For example, there is ultimately purified mind, not-yet-ultimately purified mind, contaminated purified mind, uncontaminated purified mind, purified mind with characteristics, purified mind without characteristics, purified mind that subdues manifest activity, purified mind that eliminates the seeds, purified mind attained through self-power, purified mind attained through other-power, and so forth.

The meanings are numerous and cannot be subjected to a single line of questioning. The Buddhas, the Tathagatas, teach the Dharma according to the capacities of sentient beings, sometimes speaking true words and sometimes speaking expediently. Such Dharma teachings do not have only one fixed meaning.

One cannot rely solely on the Vimalakirti Sutra’s teaching that the purified minds of bodhisattvas on the Ten Grounds produce a purified land—referring to ultimately purified mind—and consequently disbelieve the Contemplation Sutra’s teaching that one may subdue the seeds and their manifest activity and, relying upon Amitabha Buddha’s vow-power, attain rebirth in the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss, claiming that because one’s mind is impure, one cannot be reborn in a Pure Land.

It is like a person who has attained supernormal powers and can fly through the air: one who has not attained supernormal powers may also fly through the air by relying upon someone who has. Moreover, the Vimalakirti Sutra speaks of an ultimately purified mind manifesting an uncontaminated Pure Land, whereas the teaching presently under discussion concerns rebirth in a Pure Land manifested through reliance upon the Buddha’s pure characteristics.

The Vimalakirti Sutra speaks of the “root,” while the Contemplation Sutra speaks of the “branches.” The Vimalakirti Sutra speaks of what is “higher,” while the Contemplation Sutra speaks of what is “lower.” There is nothing here to dispute.

6. An Impure Land Within a Pure Land

Question: Is there a defiled land within the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss? If there is, how can it be called a Pure Land? If there is not, then consider the thousand-petaled lotus of Vairocana Buddha: upon each petal are ten billion worlds, and every world is defiled. Why, when Vairocana Buddha of the Flower Treasury World sits upon the kingly lotus throne, does each petal contain defiled worlds? Again, in the Vimalakirti Sutra, Shariputra sees Shakyamuni Buddha’s land as defiled, while the Great Brahma deity sees the Buddha-land as pure. Shakyamuni Buddha’s land simultaneously possesses both pure and defiled aspects; why, then, does the Land of Ultimate Bliss possess only a pure aspect and no defiled aspect? ⁽¹⁵⁾

Answer: There are two explanations:

⁽¹⁾ The Land of Ultimate Bliss contains only the Pure Land and has no defiled appearances, because that land is supremely wondrous and pure. If it had defiled appearances, it would incur the fault of being both pure and defiled. Moreover, material forms obstruct one another; therefore, the two aspects of purity and defilement cannot appear simultaneously in the same place.

If both appeared simultaneously, this would incur the fault of “material forms containing one another,” and the realm would become confused and disorderly. Furthermore, the Contemplation Sutra does not describe such a state, nor do the Forty-Eight Vows mention it. If the Land of Ultimate Bliss possessed both aspects, then sentient beings reborn there would also have to be born simultaneously in two lands.

Since sentient beings are not born in two lands and do not see a defiled land there, we know that the Land of Ultimate Bliss contains no defiled land.

⁽²⁾ Some hold that the Land of Ultimate Bliss also contains a defiled land, existing in the same place and at the same time without obstructing the Pure Land in any way. To say that two material forms cannot contain one another is an incomplete teaching of the Lesser Vehicle. The two lands, pure and defiled, manifest throughout the ten directions without limit.

Just as the defiled Saha world also contains a Pure Land, the pure kingly lotus throne of Vairocana Buddha contains ten billion defiled worlds. Thus, a pure land contains a defiled land, and a defiled land contains a pure land, without their obstructing one another in any way. According to the observer’s vision, purity and defilement are seen differently.

The question just posed reflects the understanding of the Lesser Vehicle, not that of the Great Vehicle. The explanation given above is taught extensively in the Mahayana-samgraha and other treatises, as well as in the Mahayana sutras. It will not be discussed here in detail.

Although pure and defiled lands may exist simultaneously, the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss is a pure land, not a defiled land. Sentient beings whose minds are defiled cannot attain rebirth there. The sutras describe only its pure aspect and not its defiled aspect because they seek to inspire sentient beings in all lands to vow to attain rebirth in the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss.

7. Dharma Master Dao’an’s Three Principles

a. Explanation of the Three Principles

Question: Dharma Master [Dao]’an’s Treatise on the Pure Land states: “Regarding the two lands, pure and defiled: their being one substance cannot be established; their being different substances cannot be established; and their being without substance cannot be established.” Dao’an himself explained: “Their being one substance cannot be established, for purity and defilement respectively wax and wane; their being different substances cannot be established, for upon searching into their depths, one finds correspondence; their being without substance cannot be established, for dependent origination produces the myriad forms and appearances.” Although this explanation has been given, its profound meaning is difficult to fathom.

I respectfully ask that you elucidate it and clarify the meaning of this passage. ⁽¹⁶⁾

Answer: Dharma Master [Dao]’an possessed penetrating wisdom and profound learning. The treatise he composed is deep in meaning. At that time, Mahayana scriptures were still scarce, yet he was able to reason with profound insight. He was indeed Bodhisattva Ấn Thủ. It may be said that he pioneered the way for the Buddhadharma in China and illuminated the meaning of emptiness. Yet the treatise’s meaning is so profound that readers find it difficult to understand his intended purport clearly. I shall now explain this meaning.

The two lands, pure and defiled, arise because the two kinds of karma—wholesome and unwholesome—cause one’s own mind to manifest pure and defiled lands. These pure and defiled appearances arise from pure and defiled minds. When the mind is pure, the land is pure; when the mind is defiled, the land is defiled.

All arise from one’s own mind. Since minds differ, the lands must also differ. Therefore, it is said: “Their being one substance cannot be established, for purity and defilement respectively wax and wane.” In the Vimalakirti Sutra, before the Buddha touched the earth with his toe, defilement waxed—the land was filled with impurity—while purity waned and was absent.

But as soon as the Buddha touched the earth with his toe, purity waxed—the land became pure—while defilement waned and disappeared. Because Shariputra’s mind and Brahma’s mind differed, they saw the land differently.

The two minds, pure and defiled, manifest the two lands, pure and defiled. The minds have two different essences and manifest two distinct lands. Yet these two lands exist in the same place and at the same time without obstructing one another in any way.

One cannot say that no defiled land exists within the pure land, that no pure land exists within the defiled land, or that purity and defilement are separate from and obstruct one another. Because the two lands, pure and defiled, appear in the same place and at the same time, it is said: “Their being different substances cannot be established, for upon searching into their depths, one finds correspondence.” Alternatively, this may be explained as meaning that although the two appearances of purity and defilement differ, their essential nature is one.

When their true nature is thoroughly investigated, there is only one essence. Therefore, it is said: “Upon searching into their depths, one finds correspondence.”

Although the two lands, pure and defiled, appear in the same place, their two aspects remain distinct. This is entirely because the differing causes and conditions of wholesome and unwholesome karma manifest as various thickets and forests, jeweled trees, gravel and stones, and precious pearls. Arising in dependence upon causes and conditions—the nature of dependent arising—they manifest as the forms and features of lands, unlike flowers in the sky or the fur of a tortoise and horns of a rabbit—the nature of the wholly imagined—which have no actual form or substance. Therefore it is said: “Without substance, nothing can be formed; through dependent arising, myriad forms and appearances come into being.”

b. Material Form Is Unobstructed.

Question: Although the two lands, pure and defiled, differ from each other, both are composed of the four sensory objects ^[4] and the four great elements ^[5], and both possess the nature of obstruction. If they are obstructive, how can they exist in the same place and at the same time without obstructing each other? How can these two mutually contradictory principles be reconciled? Please clearly explain this contradiction. ⁽¹⁷⁾

Answer: If one maintains that atoms possess the nature of obstruction, this is the view of the Sarvastivada school, not the subtle purport of the Mahayana teaching that material forms interpenetrate. In the Mahayana teaching, the duration of time and the size of worlds are all indeterminate. With respect to time, seven days may be extended into a great kalpa, and a thousand years may be compressed into a single instant.

With respect to spatial capacity, Mount Sumeru may be placed inside a mustard seed, and the great ocean may be placed inside a pore. How, then, could one still cling to notions of large and small, long and short? The obstruction of material form is likewise.

What is deemed obstruction is not necessarily obstruction. Obstruction is exemplified by using wood to obstruct wood or stone to obstruct stone. Non-obstruction is exemplified by water: human beings see it as water, hungry ghosts see it as fire, heavenly beings see it as lapis lazuli, and fish see it as their dwelling.

Ultimately, the water remains in the same place; it is not located in separate places. By using this to infer the nature of the two lands, pure and defiled, their meaning may be understood. Thus, Shariputra saw a defiled land while the Brahma King saw a pure land; were these two different places?

This is because the myriad phenomena are mind-only: purity and defilement arise in accordance with the mind. How could the subtle purport of Consciousness-Only be confined by the obstruction of material form?

c. A Defiled Essence Manifests Purity.

Question: The essential nature of the contaminated consciousness is inherently turbid and defiled. If a turbid and defiled mind manifests a realm, it should be capable only of manifesting turbid and defiled appearances. How could it manifest the appearances of a Pure Land, just as a pure, uncontaminated mind manifests the appearances of a Pure Land transcending the Saha world? If a turbid and defiled mind can manifest pure appearances, why does the Vimalakirti Sutra say that, because of the obstructions created by their transgressions, sentient beings cannot see the magnificent purity of the Buddha-land? ⁽¹⁸⁾

Answer: If a pure essence can manifest turbid and defiled appearances, why should a turbid and defiled essence be unable to manifest pure appearances? One should understand that a single mind can manifest all manner of pure and defiled appearances. The mind has many capacities and manifests many appearances.

Moreover, through his original vows, the Buddha liberates sentient beings and causes a pure land to manifest. Over many lifetimes, sentient beings have made vows before the Buddha to abandon the turbid and defiled mind and cultivate pure practices. Relying upon the pure appearances of the Buddha-land, although the consciousness of sentient beings remains contaminated, it can nevertheless manifest a pure realm, just as the Buddha himself manifests a pure, uncontaminated Buddha-land.

The power of the Buddha’s vows serves as the dominant condition, causing the contaminated mind to manifest the appearances of the Pure Land.

Furthermore, the Buddha also possesses spiritual power by which he can cause great bodhisattvas to see only the defiled land and not the pure land. For example, when nine million bodhisattvas from the Land of Fragrant Accumulation came to the Saha world, they saw only the turbid and defiled land and did not see its pure appearances. Alternatively, the Buddha’s spiritual power can cause practitioners of inferior capacity to see only pure appearances and not defiled appearances.

For example, when the Buddha pressed his toe against the earth, he caused Shariputra and the others to see the entire Saha world adorned with precious jewels. Or he can cause both the pure and defiled lands to appear simultaneously, as when the jeweled canopy revealed at the same time the Pure Lands of the ten directions and the defiled Saha world.

Rebirth in the Pure Land is now attained through the awe-inspiring power of the Buddhas. Ordinary beings must not use their limited wisdom to speculate about it and thereby give rise to doubts concerning the Great Sages. Practitioners should simply rely upon the teachings and put them into practice.

Part II. Ordinary Beings Can Attain Rebirth

The Pure Land Possesses Form.

1. Seeking That Which Possesses Form.

Question: The Large Prajnaparamita Sutra and other scriptures teach inner emptiness, outer emptiness, the emptiness of both inner and outer, and so forth. The Pure Land in question is outer emptiness, while sentient beings are inner emptiness. If so, what sentient being could be the one who takes rebirth, and what Pure Land could be the place in which rebirth occurs?

Moreover, the Vimalakirti Sutra says: “All Buddha-lands are empty. Question: By what are they made empty? Answer: They are made empty by emptiness.

Question: How does a bodhisattva contemplate sentient beings? Answer: As one would contemplate a fifth great element, a sixth skandha, a seventh faculty, a thirteenth ayatana, or a nineteenth dhatu, ^[6] and so forth.” The Lotus Sutra says: “All dharmas, from the very beginning, have always borne the mark of quiescent extinction.” The Diamond Prajnaparamita Sutra says: “The Tathagata teaches that adorning a Buddha-land is precisely not adorning a Buddha-land.” It also says: “In truth, there are no sentient beings who attain extinction.” Such ultimate Mahayana sutras and treatises of definitive meaning all maintain that all dharmas are empty and quiescent.

Yet it is now asserted that there is a Western Pure Land as a place of rebirth and that there are sentient beings who take rebirth there. This encourages people to cling to appearances in their practice and relies upon scriptures of provisional meaning. It results from failing to understand the profound meaning of the Buddhas and clinging to the appearance of existence; it cannot be called the study of the Mahayana Dharma! ⁽¹⁹⁾

Answer: I hold the Mahayana doctrine of the emptiness of intrinsic nature, the ultimate definitive meaning, in the highest reverence and dare not disparage it. This is the sole ultimate path by which sentient beings transcend the two kinds of birth and death, eradicate attachment to self and attachment to dharmas, and attain great nirvana. There is only this path and no second path.

Nevertheless, for bodhisattvas of the lower stages, as well as shravakas and ordinary beings who are cultivating the practices of bodhi and seeking buddhahood but have not yet attained the patience regarding the non-arising of dharmas and have not yet escaped samsara, surely there are also many other skillful Dharma gates that they may cultivate in order to transcend birth and death! Why take Mahayana scriptures that teach ultimate emptiness and demolish attachment to the characteristics of dharmas, and maintain that these alone constitute the Buddha’s true teaching?

At present, the Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life and other scriptures describe the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss and exhort practitioners to attain rebirth there. This too is the Buddha’s true teaching. Why, then, use the scriptures on the emptiness of intrinsic nature to challenge the Pure Land scriptures?

To believe in one Dharma and reject another—how could this be reasonable? Moreover, when the Buddha taught the Dharma, he never departed from the two truths: first, the conventional truth; and second, the ultimate truth. The conventional truth concerns dharmas that arise through causes and conditions—the dependent nature—which do not truly exist but appear to exist.

The ultimate truth is the true, signless Dharma—the perfectly accomplished nature—directly realized inwardly by noble beings and truly existent. Yet these two truths are neither identical nor different. If the conventional truth is subsumed within the ultimate truth, then the conventional truth is itself the ultimate truth, meaning that the original nature of all dharmas is quiescent extinction.

If the ultimate truth is subsumed within the conventional truth, then one sees that all dharmas come into existence when causes and conditions converge and perish when causes and conditions disperse. The myriad dharmas are presently manifest and cannot be said not to exist.

The Buddha sometimes sought to break sentient beings’ attachment to characteristics so that they might awaken to signlessness, eliminate attachment to self and dharmas, and eradicate the delusions of views and thought. He therefore taught the ultimate truth, declaring that all dharmas are empty. At other times, wishing sentient beings to abandon the state of ordinary beings and become noble ones, forsake evil and cultivate good, seek rebirth in the Pure Land, and grow weary of the defiled land, he taught innumerable Dharma gates, the distinctions between causes and effects, the two classes of noble beings and ordinary beings, and the two lands, pure and defiled.

Now, because the Buddha wished sentient beings to leave the defiled land and be born in the pure land, and to relinquish the body of an ordinary being and enter the body of a noble one, he taught innumerable Dharma gates, all for the purpose of accomplishing the Buddha-Dharma and benefiting sentient beings. These are skillful means of teaching adapted to the capacities of sentient beings. Hence there are the two Dharma gates of Emptiness and Existence.

One must not read only scriptures that teach the truth of the ultimate meaning and ultimate emptiness and then claim that teachings concerning the Pure Land, cause and effect, and so forth are not the Buddha’s true teaching or the ultimate Dharma, thereby giving rise to disparagement and doubt. Nor may one read only scriptures that teach cause and effect while refusing to believe the Buddha’s teaching of the profound prajnaparamita—that all dharmas are empty, quiescent, and signless—and then reject and disparage it.

This is precisely to both praise and condemn the Mahayana scriptures and the sacred teachings of the Tripitaka, to both believe and doubt, and to cultivate wholesome dharmas while also committing grave offenses. One whose faith is incomplete is called an icchantika. The Kshitigarbha Ten Wheels Sutra clearly describes these offenses.

Practitioners should therefore give rise to faith in the Buddha’s teachings and skillfully harmonize the two schools of Emptiness and Existence.

The Vimalakirti Sutra says:

Skillfully discerning the characteristics of all dharmas,

They remain unmoved in the ultimate meaning.

“Skillfully discerning the characteristics of all dharmas” is spoken from the standpoint of the conventional truth. “They remain unmoved in the ultimate meaning” is spoken from the standpoint of the truth of the ultimate meaning.

It also says:

Dharmas are neither “existent” nor “nonexistent”;
Through causes and conditions, dharmas arise.

“Neither existent nor nonexistent” refers to the truth of the ultimate meaning, which transcends the four alternatives of “existence, nonexistence, neither existence nor nonexistence, and both existence and nonexistence.” “Dharmas arise” refers to the conventional truth: dharmas arise from mundane and supramundane causes and conditions.

It also says: “Although they contemplate the Buddha lands as quiescent extinction and empty, they ultimately do not fall into the ranks of the Two Vehicles. This is the practice of bodhisattvas: although they accomplish all dharmas, they remain far removed from the characteristics of dharmas.”

“To accomplish all dharmas” refers to the conventional truth. “To remain far removed from the characteristics of dharmas” refers to the signless truth of the ultimate meaning.

It also says: “Although they know that Buddha lands and sentient beings are all empty and quiescent, they constantly cultivate the practices of the Pure Land and teach and transform sentient beings.”

The phrase “Buddha lands and sentient beings are all empty and quiescent” refers to the truth of the ultimate meaning, while “cultivate the practices of the Pure Land and teach and transform sentient beings” refers to the conventional truth.

The Larger Prajnaparamita Sutra and other scriptures teach inner emptiness, outer emptiness, and so forth; this is the truth of the ultimate meaning. They also teach the purification of Buddha lands and the instruction and transformation of sentient beings; this is the conventional truth. Thus, many Mahayana scriptures that teach the Dharma gate of ultimate emptiness and quiescence also speak of purifying Buddha lands and teaching and transforming sentient beings.

One should read the scriptural passages carefully and in full, understand what precedes and what follows, and harmonize their meanings so as to eliminate half-belief and half-doubt. Only thereafter should one expound them to others, without both praising and disparaging them. This benefits both oneself and others and enables all to be liberated from every suffering and affliction.

Do not fall into the error of refusing to study carefully and, upon seeing apparent differences in the meanings of the scriptures, giving rise to disparagement because of weak faith, thereby causing yourself to fall and also leading those who listen to create the karma of an icchantika. This is to harm oneself and others as well!

The Samdhinirmocana Sutra, Lankavatara Sutra, Yogacarabhumi Shastra, Mahayana-samgraha, Consciousness-Only treatises, and other texts teach the three natures and the three non-natures: the perfectly accomplished nature, the dependent nature, and the imagined nature. The perfectly accomplished nature is true and free from characteristics; the dependent nature does not truly exist but appears to exist; and the imagined nature is held to exist although it is actually nonexistent, like a turtle’s hair or a rabbit’s horn.

The Pure Land teaching is based upon the dependent nature: dharmas arise through causes and conditions and, although not truly existent, appear to exist, with cause and effect clearly established. You, however, rely on the doctrine of the signless, perfectly accomplished nature and on scriptural passages that refute the imagined nature, declaring everything empty; you then refuse to believe the teaching concerning the causes and conditions of the dependent nature.

People who do this do not believe in cause and effect and claim that dharmas bear the characteristic of annihilation. Therefore, a scripture says: “It is better to give rise to a view of self as vast as Mount Sumeru than to give rise to a view of emptiness as small as a mustard seed.” This is a sincere admonition.

Furthermore, teachings of Emptiness and Existence are both expressed in conformity with worldly convention. The truth of the ultimate meaning is neither Empty nor Existent. Thus, to say that “all Pure Lands are empty” is also to speak in conformity with worldly convention, enabling listeners to enter deeply into the Buddha-Dharma. How, then, can one be right and the other wrong?

2. The phenomenal and noumenal aspects of seeking rebirth:

Question: The Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss is free from defilement and evil. Once one has attained rebirth there, one escapes birth and death, never again falls into the three evil realms, is no longer subjected to the suffering of the “five burnings,” enters the state of right concentration, and realizes avaivartika, the stage of non-retrogression. The Infinite Life Sutra states that the realm of Ultimate Bliss is nearly equivalent to the realm of nirvana.

If so, ordinary beings burdened by karmic transgressions and attached to the merit of their cultivation cannot attain rebirth there. They must rely upon the Mahayana scriptures and treatises such as the Madhyamaka Treatise and the Hundred Treatise, thoroughly studying and comprehending the “non-attainment” of all dharmas, before they can attain rebirth in the Pure Land. Yet people are now advised to rely upon the Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life and other scriptures, practicing the sixteen contemplations—of jeweled trees, jeweled ponds, and so forth—as well as contemplating the excellent physical marks of the Buddha and bodhisattvas, or reciting the Buddha’s name and fixing the mind upon perceptible forms.

Is this not a mind of attainment, attached to perceptible forms, and thus a “malady”? If one already has such a “malady,” it is difficult to escape samsara; how, then, can one attain rebirth in the Pure Land? ⁽²⁰⁾

Answer: Those who can contemplate all dharmas as ultimately empty and quiescent, without a contemplating subject or a contemplated object, transcending both discrimination and non-discrimination, and who, by contemplating in this way, attain rebirth in the Western Land, are all practitioners of the highest rank. As stated in the Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life: “Those of the highest grade who attain rebirth remain mentally undisturbed with regard to the truth of the ultimate meaning.

When such a person approaches the end of life, Amitabha Buddha and the assembly of sages come to welcome and guide him, praising him, saying: ‘Excellent, Dharma-child! Because you have thoroughly understood the truth of the ultimate meaning, I have come to welcome you.’ When that person’s life ends, he immediately attains rebirth in the Land of Ultimate Bliss of the Buddha of Infinite Life.”

However, ordinary beings are occupied by a multitude of worldly affairs and cannot extensively study the Mahayana scriptures or contemplate the truth of the ultimate meaning and the Dharma of non-attainment. Ordinary practitioners may uphold the precepts purely, provide filial care for their parents, respectfully serve their teachers and elders, cultivate the ten wholesome actions, or single-mindedly recollect the Buddha.

Although they remain attached to their practices, the merit of their cultivation is nevertheless extraordinarily excellent and inconceivable, and they can all attain rebirth in the Pure Land. How could one say that only the Dharma of non-attainment enables rebirth, while refusing to believe that the cultivation of the three meritorious acts, the sixteen contemplations, and so forth also enables rebirth in the Pure Land?

Moreover, a “mind attached to merit” extends throughout all three moral natures. Wholesome and unwholesome karma alike bring about their corresponding results. The three meritorious acts and so forth discussed here are all wholesome karma.

The Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life states that these three meritorious acts are the wholesome karma constituting the true cause [of rebirth in the Pure Land] for the Buddhas of the three times. Since they are wholesome karma, how could they fail to bring about the result of rebirth in the Pure Land? Why, then, do you maintain that one can attain rebirth in the Pure Land only through a mind of non-attainment, whereas a mind of attainment cannot lead to rebirth?

Do you have any scripture as evidence? If no scripture supports this claim, on what basis do you make such a statement?

The Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life and other scriptures clearly state that cultivating the three meritorious acts, the sixteen contemplations, and so forth constitutes karma characterized by forms and will lead to rebirth. The meaning of the scriptures is this clear and cannot be slandered. Could it be that you do not believe the Buddha’s teaching, but rashly presume on your own that one cannot attain rebirth if one has a mind of attainment?

A mind of attainment is wholesome in nature. Its excellent merit can eradicate the grave unwholesome karma accumulated in the Saha world and enable practitioners to attain rebirth in the Pure Land. For example, the contemplation of the ground states: “Practicing this contemplation eradicates grave transgressions leading to birth and death accumulated over eight billion kalpas.

After one’s life ends, one will certainly attain rebirth in the Pure Land, and one’s mind will be unobstructed.” Does this not mean that one attains rebirth in the Western Land by practicing a contemplation characterized by forms? If one does not believe such teachings, one incurs the transgression of disbelieving the Buddha’s words. The Sutra on the Contemplation of the Buddha of Infinite Life further states: “By invoking and recollecting the Buddha’s name, with each thought one eradicates karmic transgressions accumulated over eight billion kalpas and attains rebirth in the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss.” The scriptural passages cited here are not isolated examples.

You cannot reject these teachings of the Buddha and maintain that a mind of attainment cannot lead to rebirth and that only a mind of non-attainment can do so.

Furthermore, among practitioners who attain rebirth, some are ordinary beings and some are sages; some follow the Mahayana and some the Hinayana; some practice with a concentrated mind and some with a distracted mind; some have keen and penetrating faculties and some have dull and obscured faculties; some cultivate for a long time and some for a short time; some cultivate extensively and some only slightly—yet all can attain rebirth.

Therefore, the scriptures teach the distinctions of the three ranks and nine grades, and that the periods before the lotus flowers open differ in duration. If one understands that rebirth comprises different grades and categories, and that the cultivation of causes varies in depth, one cannot maintain that only a mind of non-attainment can lead to rebirth while a mind of attainment cannot, because those who attain rebirth include not only sages but ordinary beings as well.

Moreover, among the Pure Lands there are lands of phenomenal reality and lands of principle, lands of enjoyment and lands of transformation. Therefore, the causes cultivated for rebirth in the Pure Lands also comprise many different levels. By cultivating a formless cause, one attains rebirth in the Pure Land of principle; by cultivating a cause characterized by forms, one attains rebirth in the phenomenal Pure Land; by cultivating an undefiled cause, one attains rebirth in the land of true recompense; by cultivating a defiled cause, one attains rebirth in a transformation land. Buddha lands have both root and branches, and cultivated causes likewise have higher and lower levels. It is not the case that only the single “formless” cause enables one to attain rebirth in the Pure Land!

Notes:

^[1] All-pervading suchness, also called universally operative suchness, means that the principle of the twofold emptiness (the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of dharmas) pervades all existence (TĐPHHQ, NXBTHTPHCM,

2005)

^[2] The gross physical faculties (also called the gross faculties or gross faculty-objects): the outward physical portions of the five faculties, composed of flesh and skin and visible to the eye. In themselves, they do not function to produce consciousness that apprehends objects; they are merely material objects that support and serve as the basis for the faculties in the ultimate sense, such as the eye, ear, tongue, nose, and body.

^[3] The five destinies: gods, humans, hungry ghosts, animals, and hell beings (asuras are included within these five destinies).

^[4] The four objects: form, odor, taste, and touch.

^[5] The four great elements: earth, water, wind, and fire.

^[6] This means contemplating what does not exist, because there are only the four great elements, the five skandhas, the six sense faculties, the twelve ayatanas (the six sense faculties and six sense objects), and the eighteen dhatus (the six sense faculties, six sense objects, and six consciousnesses).