大智度論 淨佛國土品之下Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Purifying the Buddha-land, Part 2 of 2

Purifying the Buddha-land, Last Part: Grasping at Marks Is Also a Coarse Deed, Six Vows Adorning the Land, the Discussion of the Five Desires, the Land without Even the Name of the Three Evil Destinies, and Hearing the Buddha's Name One Is Assured of Becoming a Buddha

What Is Being Asked

The First Part, a whole fascicle, is answering two matters throughout. Its first half answers 「菩薩道」 tr. "the bodhisattva path": the six perfections, the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, the eighteen emptinesses, the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, the Buddha's ten powers and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and so on up to all dharmas—all are the bodhisattva path. Once it has been said that all dharmas are the path, this at once forces out the objection 「若一切法空，云何言菩薩學一切法」 tr. "if all dharmas are empty, how can it be said that the bodhisattva trains in all dharmas", and the Buddha answers it with 「今眾生實不知一切法空」 tr. "now beings in reality do not know that all dharmas are empty"—that dharmas are empty is real, that beings do not know it is real; it is spoken by distinguishing dharmas for the sake of those who do not know, and it is not called idle discourse. Next he sets up the mark of practice with 「無所住」 tr. "nowhere to abide": practising the six perfections without abiding in the six perfections, obtaining the fruits without abiding in the fruits; and from 「不住」 tr. "not abiding" he presses on to the passage 「道即是菩提」 tr. "the path is precisely awakening"—by the path of arising it is not obtained, by the path of non-arising it is not obtained, by the path of neither arising nor non-arising it is also not obtained, and at the end it is established by a double negation: awakening is not obtained by means of the path, nor is awakening obtained by means of what is not the path. Only the second half enters the chapter's title: Subhūti asks 「云何菩薩摩訶薩淨佛國土」 tr. "how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva purify buddha-lands", and the Buddha answers with, as the general headrope, himself removing the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind and also purifying the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind of others; he takes killing and so on up to wrong views as the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind, and takes stinginess, breaking morality, anger, slackness, a scattered mind, and delusion as the coarse deeds of mind. The treatise-author explains following the text, and fascicle 92 ends here.

The Last Part comes on from this, yet pushes the two Chinese characters 「麁業」 tr. "coarse deed" one layer further. The sūtra text begins straight away with 「復次」 tr. "Further", and what it connects to is not a new topic but the third layer of coarse deeds: the first coarse deeds were the ten unwholesome deeds, the next coarse deeds were the minds of the six obscurations, and these coarse deeds are 「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks"—grasping at the mark of form, grasping at the marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to grasping at the mark of conditioned dharmas and the mark of unconditioned dharmas. Evil is certainly coarse, but the wholesome too is coarse; the conditioned is certainly coarse, but the unconditioned too is coarse. So the first joint of the Last Part lies here: the 「淨」 tr. "purity" of purifying buddha-lands is not exchanging evil for the wholesome; it is keeping far, all together, even from the mind that grasps at the wholesome.

Once keeping far has been established, what follows is all 「立」 tr. "establishing". The main body of Sūtra ② is six rounds of offering and six rounds of making vows—the seven jewels filling the land, heavenly music and dance, heavenly fragrance, food of the hundred flavours, heavenly fragrance and fine smoothness, the five desires at will; and one more round is added, the vow of the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, and so on up to the thirty-seven limbs of the path. Every vow has the same form: making offerings to the Buddha and the Saṅgha with some thing, and, holding these causes and conditions of roots of goodness, vowing that within my land there may be some matter. This form must be seen clearly: the pure land is not obtained by seeking, it is made; what makes it is the bodhisattva's own giving and vowing, not a gift of another's power. After the six vows the sūtra text at once closes with 「是菩薩隨爾所時行菩薩道，滿足是諸願」 tr. "this bodhisattva, through so long a time, practises the bodhisattva path and fulfils these vows"—the accomplishing of the land is accomplished in the fulfilling of the vows.

The marks of the vows' fruit the sūtra text sets apart as a passage of their own: within the land there is not even the name of the three evil destinies, there is no name of wrong views, the three poisons, or the two vehicles, the ear does not hear the sound of impermanence, suffering, or emptiness, there is no name of what is mine or of the various fetters and afflictions, there is no name that distinguishes the several fruits; the wind blows on the trees of the seven jewels and brings out the sound of emptiness, the signless, and non-action; beings who hear this Buddha's name will surely reach awakening; when the Buddha teaches the Dharma there is no one who gives rise to doubt. At the very end it turns out the reverse side—people of meagre merit are sunk in the view of self and in extreme views, call what is not the Buddha's word the Buddha's word and what is not the Dharma the Dharma, and because of breaking the Dharma fall into the evil destinies; the buddhas, seeing these beings going and coming in the five destinies, pull them out and make them abide in the rightly assured assembly. The whole sūtra section is summed up in the two sentences 「淨佛國土中眾生，無雜穢心」 tr. "the beings within the pure Buddha-land have no mixed and defiled mind" and 「畢竟至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "ultimately reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi".

Treatise ② explains this sūtra text sentence by sentence, and its centre of gravity is threefold. The first is the discussion of 「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks": since it is said that one does not grasp at marks, on what then do wearying of form and accomplishing the wholesome rest? The treatise-author answers with the two gates of the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas—what is broken is 「定實相」 tr. "a definitely real mark", not form and wholesome dharmas themselves. The second is the discussion of 「五欲」 tr. "the five desires", the place in this unit where the text is longest and the objections most dense: since the sūtra text vows that the beings of the land 「常得隨意五欲」 tr. "always obtain the five desires at will", while the Buddha plainly said that the five desires are like fire, like a pit, and also taught the disciples to wear robes of cast-off rags and beg for food, how can the two sayings stand together? The treatise-author begins from poverty leading to the ten unwholesome deeds, settles it with the one sentence 「捨苦樂，用智慧，處中道」 tr. "relinquish suffering and pleasure, use wisdom, abide in the middle way", and then by the affair of the bhikṣu Alizha in the Vinaya distinguishes the capacity each word is addressed to—what the Buddha said for the white-robed, a bhikṣu may not move into the dharma of those gone forth. The third is the discussion of ‘hearing the Buddha's name one is assured of becoming a Buddha’: since for all buddhas, hearing the name, one will become a Buddha, why speak only of the Buddha of a pure land? The treatise-author answers it with 「法性身」 tr. "the Dharma-nature body"—what makes it surpassing lies not in the name, but in the reverence of the hearer and in the Buddha-body that is seen.

So what the Last Part speaks of is still the four Chinese characters 「淨佛國土」 tr. "purifying buddha-lands"; it only takes the general headrope of the First Part and splits it into the two sections of cause and fruit: the cause lies in keeping far from grasping at marks while practising the six perfections and making vows; the fruit lies in the land having no name of the three evil destinies and in beings ultimately reaching awakening. The First Part says what matter 「淨」 tr. "purity" is; the Last Part says how 「淨」 tr. "purity" is accomplished, and what it looks like once accomplished.

Passage by Passage

1. The sūtra text sets up separately a third layer of coarse deeds—grasping at marks. After the continued title of fascicle 93, the sūtra text at once goes on: 「復次，須菩提！菩薩取色相、受想行識相，眼相、耳鼻舌身意相，色聲香味觸法相，男相、女相，欲界相、色界相、無色界相，善法相、不善法相，有為法相、無為法相，是名菩薩麁業。」 tr. "Further, Subhūti! The bodhisattva grasps at the mark of form, the marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the mark of the eye, the marks of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, the marks of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and dharmas, the male mark and the female mark, the mark of the desire realm, the mark of the form realm, and the mark of the formless realm, the mark of wholesome dharmas and the mark of unwholesome dharmas, the mark of conditioned dharmas and the mark of unconditioned dharmas—this is called the coarse deed of the bodhisattva." First one question: the First Part has already said that killing and so on up to wrong views are the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind, and has already said that stinginess, breaking morality, anger, slackness, a scattered mind, and delusion are the coarse deeds of mind; why is yet another gate set up here? The answer lies in the two Chinese characters 「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks". What the coarse deeds of the first two layers counteract is evil; what this layer counteracts is grasping—the evil person grasps at evil, the practitioner grasps at the wholesome, and the grasping in grasping at the wholesome is still coarse. The items listed go from the five aggregates to the six faculties and the six sense-objects, to male and female, to the three realms, to the wholesome and the unwholesome, to the conditioned and the unconditioned—from coarse to subtle, from defiled to pure—and at the very end even 「無為法相」 tr. "the mark of unconditioned dharmas" is listed among the coarse deeds, precisely to cut off the line of retreat ‘once the grasping reaches the subtlest place it no longer counts as coarse’. The sūtra text continues 「菩薩摩訶薩皆遠離如是麁業相」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva keeps far from all such marks of coarse deeds", and at once turns into the right practice: 「自布施，亦教他人布施，須食與食、須衣與衣」 tr. "he himself gives, and also teaches others to give; to one who needs food he gives food, to one who needs clothing he gives clothing", and so on up to 「持是福德與一切眾生共之，迴向淨佛國土故」 tr. "he shares this merit with all beings, for the sake of dedicating it to purifying buddha-lands". Keeping far negates, giving discloses; negating and disclosing go together, and only then is the cause of the pure land established. Within this, the phrase 「與一切眾生共之」 tr. "shares it with all beings" must not be passed over—if the merit of giving is received by oneself, it does not become a land; only when it is shared and then dedicated is the land accomplished by shared deeds. At the end it says 「持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧亦如是」 tr. "keeping morality, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are likewise"—the six perfections are all raised, not giving alone.

2. Six rounds of offering, six rounds of making vows. This passage is the main body of Sūtra ②; there are six vows in all, in a regular form: making offerings with some thing, holding these causes and conditions of roots of goodness, vowing that within my land there may be some matter. The first vow is the seven jewels—「我以善根因緣故，令我國土皆以七寶成」 tr. "because of the causes and conditions of my roots of goodness, may my land be made wholly of the seven jewels"; the second vow is heavenly music—「以是善根因緣，願我國土中常聞天樂」 tr. "by these causes and conditions of roots of goodness, may heavenly music always be heard within my land"; the third vow is heavenly fragrance—「令我國土中常有天香」 tr. "may there always be heavenly fragrance within my land"; the fourth vow is food of the hundred flavours—「令我國土中眾生皆得百味食」 tr. "may the beings within my land all obtain food of the hundred flavours"; the fifth vow is heavenly fragrance and fine smoothness—「令我國土中一切眾生受天香細滑」 tr. "may all beings within my land receive heavenly fragrance and fine smoothness"; the sixth vow is the five desires at will—「令我國土中弟子及一切眾生皆得隨意五欲」 tr. "may the disciples and all beings within my land all obtain the five desires at will". What the six vows correspond to is precisely what, among the six sense-objects, can be offered: the treasures are form, music and dance are sound, heavenly fragrance is smell, the hundred flavours are taste, fine smoothness is touch, and the five desires gather them all. In reading this passage one must guard against one misunderstanding: thinking that what the bodhisattva vows is only the wealth and splendour of the land. The last sentence of the sūtra text already resolves this doubt itself—「是菩薩以隨意五欲共一切眾生迴向淨佛國土」 tr. "this bodhisattva, together with all beings, dedicates the five desires at will to purifying buddha-lands"; what it is dedicated to is 「淨佛國土」 tr. "purifying buddha-lands", not the five desires themselves; the five desires are the things given, the pure land is the fruit tended toward. This last sentence has its own vow-words, 「我得佛時，是國土中如天五欲，應心而至！」 tr. "When I obtain buddhahood, within this land the five desires, like those of the heavens, will arrive as the mind wishes!", and so in this passage the words 「作是願言」 tr. "makes this vow, saying" appear seven times in all while the things offered are only six—the seventh appearance is a restatement of the sixth vow, saying it once more from the side of dedication, not setting up a separate thing. Further, the fields of giving of the six vows do not go beyond three kinds: the first vow gives to the Three Honoured Ones, the second and third vows give to the Buddha and the stūpas, the fourth, fifth, and sixth vows give to the Buddha and the Saṅgha, and the sixth vow further includes all beings—none gives to oneself, nor to those one is personally close to; the breadth of the field of giving is precisely the breadth of the vow's fruit.

3. The vow of the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, and so on up to the thirty-seven limbs of the path, and the marks of the vows' fulfilment. The six vows before are all made with regard to the dependent retribution; this one vow alone is made with regard to the direct retribution: 「我當自入初禪，亦教一切眾生入初禪，第二、第三、第四禪，慈、悲、喜、捨心，乃至三十七助道法亦如是」 tr. "I shall myself enter the first dhyāna, and also teach all beings to enter the first dhyāna; the second, the third, and the fourth dhyāna, the minds of kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, and so on up to the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, are likewise", and at the end it further says 「我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，令一切眾生不遠離四禪，乃至不遠離三十七品助道法。」 tr. "When I obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I shall cause all beings not to be far from the four dhyānas, and so on up to not to be far from the thirty-seven limbs of the path, the dharmas that aid the path." First one question: what the six vows before vow for is what beings enjoy, what this vow vows for is the gate of beings' practice; why are they set side by side? Because the purity of a land does not stop at the purity of the vessel-world—if the vessel is pure and the people do not practise the path, it is still not called purifying buddha-lands. So entering oneself and teaching others are raised together, both sides complete within one sentence: 「自入初禪，亦教一切眾生入初禪」 tr. "myself enter the first dhyāna, and also teach all beings to enter the first dhyāna". Here the sūtra text sets down a verdict: 「如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩能淨佛國土。」 tr. "Thus, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is able to purify buddha-lands." At once it speaks of the marks of the vows' fulfilment: 「是菩薩隨爾所時行菩薩道，滿足是諸願」 tr. "this bodhisattva, through so long a time, practises the bodhisattva path and fulfils these vows", whereupon 「自成就一切善法，亦成就一切眾生善法」 tr. "he himself accomplishes all wholesome dharmas, and also accomplishes the wholesome dharmas of all beings", whereupon 「受身端正，所化眾生亦得端正」 tr. "the body he receives is upright and handsome, and the beings he transforms also obtain upright handsomeness". Why does the body obtain upright handsomeness? The sūtra text answers itself: 「福德因緣厚故。」 tr. "Because the causes and conditions of merit are thick." This one question and one answer are scaffolding the sūtra text itself provides; there is no need to seek outside. At the end it closes this section on the cause with 「須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應如是淨佛國土」 tr. "Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should purify buddha-lands in this way".

4. The marks of the land's fruit—no name of the three evil destinies, the jewelled trees bringing out the sound of the Dharma, hearing the name one will surely reach awakening, and the reverse side. This passage is the longest; it contains four layers, which must be cleared layer by layer. The first layer is 「無」 tr. "there is not": 「乃至無三惡道之名」 tr. "there is not even the name of the three evil destinies", 「亦無邪見、三毒、二乘——聲聞、辟支佛之名」 tr. "nor are there the names of wrong views, the three poisons, or the two vehicles—the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha", 「耳不聞有無常、苦、空之聲」 tr. "the ear does not hear the sound of impermanence, suffering, or emptiness", 「亦無我所有乃至無諸結使煩惱之名」 tr. "nor is there the name of what is mine, and so on up to the names of the various fetters and afflictions", 「亦無分別諸果之名」 tr. "nor is there the name that distinguishes the several fruits". What is absent is almost always spoken of as 「名」 tr. "name", not as 「事」 tr. "matter" (the third item speaks of 「聲」 tr. "sound" with regard to the ear faculty, and when the treatise-author explains it he too gathers it in as 「名」 tr. "name"—「亦無無常、苦、空、無我之名者」 tr. "as for: nor is there the name of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, or non-self"); it is not saying that the beings there have forgotten the three evil destinies, it is saying that there, there is from the root no such name to be set up. The second layer is 「有」 tr. "there is": 「風吹七寶之樹，隨所應度而出音聲」 tr. "the wind blows on the trees of the seven jewels and, according to those who are to be delivered, brings out sound", the sound brought out being 「空、無相、無作」 tr. "emptiness, the signless, non-action", and it further cites the words brought out: 「有佛無佛，一切法、一切法相空，空中無有相，無相中則無作」 tr. "Whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, all dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty; in emptiness there is no mark; in the signless there is then no making"; and the time of their hearing the Dharma is 「若晝、若夜，若坐、若臥、若立、若行，常聞此法」 tr. "whether by day or by night, whether sitting, lying down, standing, or walking, they constantly hear this Dharma". The third layer is the Buddha's virtue and beings' faith: 「十方國土中諸佛讚歎」 tr. "the buddhas in the lands of the ten directions praise him", 「眾生聞是佛名，必至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "beings who hear this Buddha's name will surely reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and when he teaches the Dharma 「無有不信而生疑」 tr. "there is none who fails to believe and so gives rise to doubt"; as to why it is so, the sūtra text explains itself: 「諸法實相中，皆是法，無有非法。」 tr. "Within the real mark of all dharmas, all is Dharma; there is nothing that is not the Dharma." The fourth layer turns out the reverse side, saying that people of meagre merit are 「沒在我見中」 tr. "sunk in the view of self" and 「墮在邊見——若斷、若常」 tr. "fall into extreme views—whether of annihilation or of permanence", that because of wrong views 「非佛言佛、佛言非佛，非法言法、法言非法」 tr. "they call what is not the Buddha's word the Buddha's word, and the Buddha's word not the Buddha's word, call what is not the Dharma the Dharma, and the Dharma not the Dharma", and that because of breaking the Dharma they fall into the evil destiny of hell; while the buddhas, when they obtain awakening, 「見此眾生往來五道，令離邪聚，立正定聚中，更不墮惡道」 tr. "seeing these beings going and coming in the five destinies, make them leave the wrongly assured assembly and establish them in the rightly assured assembly, so that they no longer fall into the evil destinies". The order of the four layers is: no evil, the presence of the wholesome, the presence of faith, pulling out those who do not believe—the layer of the reverse side must not be omitted; omit it, and the pure land becomes another place having nothing to do with the evil world, whereas the sūtra text plainly says that it is precisely here that the buddhas pull beings out.

5. Summing up—no mixed and defiled mind, ultimately reaching awakening. The last passage of Sūtra ② closes with two sentences: one sentence speaks of the mind, 「菩薩摩訶薩淨佛國土中眾生，無雜穢心：若世間法、若出世間法，若有漏、若無漏，若有為、若無為」 tr. "the beings within the Buddha-land purified by the bodhisattva-mahāsattva have no mixed and defiled mind: whether worldly dharmas or world-transcending dharmas, whether with outflows or without outflows, whether conditioned or unconditioned"; one sentence speaks of the fruit, 「乃至是國土中眾生，畢竟至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "and so on up to: the beings within this land ultimately reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". The two Chinese characters 「雜穢」 tr. "mixed and defiled" must be seen in the light of what precedes—the 「無」 tr. "there is not" listed before are all the reasons there is nothing mixed; the three pairs, six names, here are precisely where the mixed and defiled arises from: to give rise to discrimination about the worldly and the world-transcending, to give rise to discrimination about with outflows and without outflows, to give rise to discrimination about the conditioned and the unconditioned—this is the mixed and defiled. So 「無雜穢心」 tr. "no mixed and defiled mind" does not merely say that the people there are clean at heart; it says that the people there do not give rise to taking and rejecting over these three pairs. The last sentence, 「是為菩薩摩訶薩淨佛國土」 tr. "this is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's purifying of buddha-lands", answers, the one before and the one after corresponding, to the 「應如是淨佛國土」 tr. "should purify buddha-lands in this way" of entry 3: the one concludes the cause, the other concludes the fruit.

6. The treatise-author begins the explanation—there is another coarse deed: grasping at marks within ultimate emptiness and giving rise to clinging. The treatise section begins with 「釋曰：」 tr. "Explanation:", and first explains in general the coarse deed newly set up by the sūtra text: 「復有麁業，於諸法畢竟空中取相生著心」 tr. "there is another coarse deed: within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas, grasping at marks and giving rise to a clinging mind", and then briefly runs once through the items the sūtra text lists. Here the seven Chinese characters 「於諸法畢竟空中」 tr. "within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas" are added by the treatise-author and are not in the sūtra text—and the addition is of the utmost importance: grasping at marks is coarse not because the dharma grasped is not good, but because the place where it is grasped is from the first ultimately empty. Grasping at marks in an empty place is therefore named giving rise to clinging. Without this one phrase, the saying ‘grasping at the mark of unconditioned dharmas is also a coarse deed’ would have nothing to be fastened to.

7. The marks of male and female are certainly false; if one does not grasp at the marks of the other dharmas, how can one weary of form and accomplish the wholesome? The treatise-author poses an objection himself: 「男女相可是虛妄不實，餘色等、善不善法，若不取相，云何能厭色等、成就善法？」 tr. "The male mark and the female mark may be false and unreal; but as for the other dharmas, form and so on, and wholesome and unwholesome dharmas, if one does not grasp at their marks, how can one weary of form and the rest and accomplish wholesome dharmas?" This objection is asked very concretely—practice is from the first to leave desire by wearying of form and to accomplish the path by taking up the wholesome; if it is said that even the mark of wholesome dharmas may not be grasped, then wearying and accomplishing both lose their ground. The treatise-author's answer falls into three sections. The first section sets up the distinction of the two emptinesses: 「佛法中有二種空：一者、眾生空，二者、法空。」 tr. "Within the Buddha's Dharma there are two kinds of emptiness: first, the emptiness of beings; second, the emptiness of dharmas." The two emptinesses each have what they break—「以眾生空破眾生相，所謂男女等相；以法空破色等法中虛妄相」 tr. "by the emptiness of beings one breaks the marks of beings, namely the male mark, the female mark, and the like; by the emptiness of dharmas one breaks the false marks within dharmas such as form"—and he points to its source as lying within 「破一切法空」 tr. "breaking all dharmas as empty". The second section says that without grasping at marks one can still weary: 「能觀色等、善法如幻、如化，不取定實相，得厭心，則捨戲論常、無常等，是不名為取相。」 tr. "To be able to contemplate form and the rest, and wholesome dharmas, as like an illusion, like a conjuration, not grasping at a definitely real mark, obtaining the mind of weariness, and then relinquishing such idle discourse as permanent and impermanent—this is not called grasping at marks." The joint lies in the three Chinese characters 「定實相」 tr. "definitely real mark"—what is dismissed is 「定實」 tr. "the definitely real", not the function of 「相」 tr. "mark"; contemplating things as like an illusion, like a conjuration, one gives rise to weariness, and weariness is still weariness, only one does not hold to it as definitely real. The third section says that without grasping at marks one still does not give rise to afflictions: 「又色等及善法皆和合性空行故，不生諸煩惱。」 tr. "Further, because form and the rest, and wholesome dharmas, are all practised as coming together and empty of nature, one does not give rise to the various afflictions." The method of this answer deserves attention: the objector thinks that 「不取相」 tr. "not grasping at marks" and ‘wearying of form and accomplishing the wholesome’ are two matters that cannot stand together; the treatise-author denies neither of them, but points out that what is called grasping at marks refers to something else—he does not break what is sought, he only corrects what is referred to.

8. Since unconditioned dharmas are real, why are they too not grasped? The objector presses forward step by step: 「一切有為法假名和合故不應取；無為法是真實法，所謂如、法性、實際，何以不取？」 tr. "All conditioned dharmas, because they are the coming together of provisional names, should not be grasped; unconditioned dharmas are real dharmas, namely suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality—why are they not grasped?" The force of this objection is the most dangerous—the conditioned may be empty, but the unconditioned surely cannot be empty; suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are precisely where the Buddha's Dharma returns to, and if even these may not be grasped, it seems there is nowhere to return to and rest. The treatise-author's answer has only two sentences, yet it cuts very cleanly: 「以不取相是無為法，無相名為無為法門；若取相，便是有為。」 tr. "Because not grasping at marks is the unconditioned dharma, and the signless is called the gate of the unconditioned dharma; if one grasps at marks, it is then the conditioned." The meaning is: the unconditioned is not an object that can be grasped; 「不取」 tr. "not grasping" is itself the unconditioned; once it is grasped as a mark, what is grasped has already become conditioned and is no longer the unconditioned. The last sentence, 「如是等，一切虛誑取相不實」 tr. "In all such ways, all grasping at marks is false, deceptive, and unreal", sums up the whole section—it is not saying that suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are unreal; it is saying that the act of ‘grasping at their marks’ is unreal. Here one must guard against a slip: do not read ‘unconditioned dharmas cannot be grasped’ as ‘unconditioned dharmas do not exist’. What the treatise-author breaks is the manner of grasping, not the place returned to.

9. Keeping far from coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind—because of shared causes and conditions of purity the Buddha-land is pure. The treatise-author takes up one sentence of the sūtra text, 「遠離麁身、口、意業。」 tr. "Keeping far from coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind.", as a heading, and at once explains it: 「菩薩欲行淨佛土，遠離如是等麁身、口、意業，自行六波羅蜜，亦教他人令行；共清淨因緣故，則佛土清淨。」 tr. "The bodhisattva, wishing to practise purifying buddha-lands, keeps far from all such coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind, himself practises the six perfections, and also teaches others and makes them practise; because of shared causes and conditions of purity, the Buddha-land then becomes pure." The key to this explanation lies in the Chinese character 「共」 tr. "shared". The sūtra text's 「亦淨他人身、口、意麁業」 tr. "also purifies the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind of others" and the 「亦教他人令行」 tr. "also teaches others and makes them practise" here carry on from one another; the treatise-author goes a step further and points out why it is so: the purity of a Buddha-land is not something one person's purity can bring about; it requires 「共清淨因緣」 tr. "shared causes and conditions of purity". A land is a shared retribution, and a shared retribution requires shared causes—this saying is the bone of the meaning of the pure land in the whole chapter.

10. The treatise-author marks the divisions himself—above, said by way of the general mark; below, by way of the specific marks. A very short sentence, yet it is the outline of the treatise section. The negating of coarse deeds and the disclosing of the six perfections spoken of above are all by way of the general mark; the vows spoken of below—the seven jewels, the lamp-wick, flowers and incense, music and dance, fragrance, the hundred flavours, unguents, the five desires—are all by way of the specific marks. The reader should make a preparation here: the string of passages that follows, ‘again, there are bodhisattvas who … make this vow’, is not a miscellaneous listing; it is the item-by-item laying out of 「別相」 tr. "the specific marks".

11. The first specific mark—the vow of giving the seven jewels to the Buddha and the Saṅgha. The treatise-author explains the sūtra text's vow of the seven jewels, saying: 「是菩薩滿三千大千世界七寶施佛及僧，作是願：「我以是布施因緣，令我國土皆七寶莊嚴。」」 tr. "This bodhisattva gives the seven jewels filling the three-thousand great-thousand world to the Buddha and the Saṅgha, and makes this vow: ‘By the causes and conditions of this giving, may my land be wholly adorned with the seven jewels.’" Reading it against the sūtra text's 「施與三尊」 tr. "gives to the Three Honoured Ones" and 「令我國土皆以七寶成」 tr. "may my land be made wholly of the seven jewels", one can see that here the treatise-author restates the meaning of the sūtra in his own word order, not taking up the sūtra word for word. This pattern holds throughout the vows below—what the treatise-author values lies not in repeating, but in posing objections wherever they arise and explaining them.

12. Where are the treasures of the three-thousand world obtained, and who can receive them? The treatise-author poses three questions at once: 「若滿三千大千世界珍寶，從何處得？又諸佛賢聖少欲知足，誰受是者？若凡夫無厭足，何能受三千世界物？」 tr. "If it is precious things filling the three-thousand great-thousand world, where are they obtained? Moreover the buddhas and the worthy and the sages have few desires and know contentment; who would receive these? If ordinary people are never satisfied, how could they receive the things of the three-thousand world?" The three questions each have their point—the first asks where the things come from, the second asks whether the receivers are willing to receive, the third asks whether the receivers are able to receive. The treatise-author's answer too falls into three sections. The first answers the source and the standing of the body: 「是菩薩是法性生身，住具足神通波羅蜜中，為供養十方佛故，以如三千世界珍寶供養。」 tr. "This bodhisattva is a body born of the Dharma-nature, abiding complete in the perfection of the supernormal powers; for the sake of making offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, he makes offerings with precious things as many as the three-thousand world." The four Chinese characters 「法性生身」 tr. "a body born of the Dharma-nature" are the pivot of several passages below, and they will be used again in the passage below that explains that the Buddha of a pure land is the Dharma-nature body. The second answers the ability to receive: 「又此寶物，神通力所作，輕細無妨。」 tr. "Further, these treasures are made by the power of the supernormal powers, light and subtle, without obstruction." The treasures are not heavy worldly things, so there is no question of whether one can bear to receive them. The third completes it with a simile: 「如第三禪遍淨天，六十人坐一針頭而聽法，不相妨礙，何況大菩薩深入神通所作寶物！」 tr. "Just as in the Heaven of Universal Purity of the third dhyāna sixty people sit on the point of one needle and hear the Dharma without obstructing one another—how much more the treasures made by a great bodhisattva who has entered deeply into the supernormal powers!" What this simile takes is the one point 「不相妨礙」 tr. "without obstructing one another"—it is not saying the treasures are small, it is saying they occupy no place. A simile takes one point and does not drag in the rest; this is the common practice of this treatise.

13. The second specific mark—the vow of transforming the body to the size of Mount Sumeru as a lamp-wick. 「或有菩薩變身如須彌山，遍十方佛前，以為燈炷，供養於佛、若佛塔廟，而作願言：「令我國土常有光明，不須日月燈燭。」」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who transform their bodies to be like Mount Sumeru, present everywhere before the buddhas of the ten directions, and make them a lamp-wick, making offerings to the Buddha or to the Buddha's stūpa-shrines, and make a vow, saying: ‘May my land always have light, not needing sun, moon, lamps, or candles.’" What this vow offers is the body, not a thing outside the body; the fruit vowed for is light. One should note how cause and fruit correspond: making the body a wick, he offers light, and so obtains a land always bright. The vows below all have this principle of correspondence; in reading, one can check it for oneself one by one.

14. The third specific mark—the vow of raining flowers, incense, banners, canopies, and necklaces, and the summary of the causes and conditions of beautiful form. 「或有菩薩雨諸華香、幡蓋、瓔珞以為供養，復作是願：「令我國土眾生端正如華，身相嚴淨，無有醜陋。」」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who rain down all kinds of flowers and incense, banners and canopies, and necklaces as offerings, and further make this vow: ‘May the beings within my land be upright and handsome like flowers, their bodies adorned and pure, without ugliness.’" Making offerings with flowers and vowing that beings be like flowers—this too is the correspondence of cause and fruit. The treatise-author at once makes a small conclusion with one sentence: 「如是等種種好色因緣。」 tr. "All such as these are the various causes and conditions of beautiful form." This sentence is a section marker—the two vows above, the lamp-wick and the flowers and incense, belong alike to the class of 「好色」 tr. "beautiful form"; below, it turns to the classes of sound, smell, taste, and touch. Here the reader can see the treatise-author's division: the six sense-objects are its sequence.

15. The fourth specific mark—the vow of offering heavenly music and dance. 「復有菩薩以天伎樂娛樂於佛、若佛塔廟。」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who entertain the Buddha, or the Buddha's stūpa-shrines, with heavenly music and dance." Here the treatise-author sets out separately three grades of offering: 「或時以神通力故作天伎樂，或作天王、轉輪聖王伎樂，或作阿修羅神、龍王等天伎樂供養」 tr. "sometimes by the power of his supernormal powers he makes heavenly music and dance, sometimes he makes the music and dance of heavenly kings and wheel-turning sage kings, sometimes he makes heavenly music and dance such as that of the asura spirits and the nāga kings, as offerings", and at the end attaches the vow: 「願我國中常聞好音。」 tr. "May fine sounds always be heard within my land." The listing of three grades says that the music offered differs according to the bodhisattva's power; it is not all of one kind.

16. The buddhas are free from desire—why need offerings of music and dance? The objection: 「諸佛賢聖是離欲人，則不須音樂歌舞，何以伎樂供養？」 tr. "The buddhas and the worthy and the sages are people free from desire, and so have no need of music, song, and dance; why make offerings with music and dance?" This objection is entirely proper—for one free from desire to receive song and dance seems to go against his virtue. The treatise-author's answer contains three sections. The first section first grants what the objector sets up: 「諸佛雖於一切法中心無所著、於世間法盡無所須」 tr. "although the buddhas have a mind without clinging within all dharmas, and within worldly dharmas need nothing at all", not concealing that the Buddha really has no need. The second section says why he receives: 「諸佛憐愍眾生故出世，應隨供養者，令隨願得福故受。」 tr. "The buddhas appear in the world because of compassion for beings; they should accord with those who make offerings, and they receive in order to let them obtain merit according to their wishes." Receiving is not for himself; it is for the giver's merit. And he proves it with the example of flowers and incense: 「如以華香供養，亦非佛所須，佛身常有妙香，諸天所不及，為利益眾生故受。」 tr. "Just as offering flowers and incense is also not something the Buddha needs—the Buddha's body always has a wondrous fragrance that the gods cannot equal—he receives it for the sake of benefiting beings." The third section further speaks, from the bodhisattva's side, of his intention in seeking sound: 「是菩薩欲淨佛土故求好音聲——欲使國土中眾生聞好音聲，其心柔軟；心柔軟故，易可受化。」 tr. "This bodhisattva seeks fine sounds because he wishes to purify buddha-lands—he wishes to make the beings within the land hear fine sounds, so that their minds become soft; because the mind becomes soft, they can easily receive transformation." At this point the vow of music and dance does not land on entertainment; it lands on the four Chinese characters 「易可受化」 tr. "can easily receive transformation". This way of answering can serve as the pattern for all the objections about the five desires in the whole chapter: wherever it is asked ‘what need has a sage of this thing?’, the answer never lies in the thing, but in the benefit to those who receive.

17. The fifth specific mark—the vow of offering fragrance that fills the world. 「或有菩薩滿三千大千世界香供養諸佛、若塔」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who make offerings to the buddhas, or to stūpas, with fragrance filling the three-thousand great-thousand world"; the treatise-author lists the kinds of fragrance: 「根香、莖香、葉香、末香，若天香、若變化香、若菩薩果報生香」 tr. "root fragrance, stem fragrance, leaf fragrance, powdered fragrance, or heavenly fragrance, or fragrance made by transformation, or fragrance born of the bodhisattva's retribution", and attaches the vow, saying: 「令我國土中常有好香，無有作者。」 tr. "May there always be fine fragrance within my land, and no one who makes it." The last four Chinese characters are the most worth savouring—「無有作者」 tr. "no one who makes it" says that the fragrance is not made by human work but is born of merit; all the things of a pure land are so, needing no contriving.

18. The sixth specific mark—offering the hundred flavours, and the differing explanations of 「百味」 tr. "the hundred flavours" given by different people. 「或有菩薩以百味供養諸佛及僧。」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who make offerings of the hundred flavours to the buddhas and the Saṅgha." Here the treatise-author does not lay down a definition outright but records five differing explanations, all opening with 「有人言」 tr. "someone says": the first says 「能以百種供養，是名百味」 tr. "being able to make offerings with a hundred kinds of things—this is called the hundred flavours"; the second says 「餅種數五百，其味有百，是名百味」 tr. "the kinds of cakes number five hundred, and their flavours number a hundred—this is called the hundred flavours"; the third says 「百種藥草、藥果作歡喜丸，是名百味」 tr. "making joy-pills out of a hundred kinds of medicinal herbs and medicinal fruits—this is called the hundred flavours"; the fourth says 「飲食羹餅，總有百味」 tr. "food and drink, broths and cakes, have a hundred flavours in all"; the fifth says 「飲食種種備足故，稱為百味」 tr. "because food and drink of all kinds are fully provided, it is called the hundred flavours". The five explanations stand side by side and the treatise-author does not judge between them—this is the treatise's usual practice in recording differing explanations: it keeps what has been handed down and does not force them into one. When the record is done, he speaks for himself of what matters to him, which lies not in the number but in the grades of food: 「人飲食故百味，天飲食則百千種味；菩薩福德生果報食及神通力變化食，則有無量味」 tr. "human food and drink is therefore of a hundred flavours, the food and drink of the gods is of hundreds of thousands of kinds of flavour; the food that is the retribution born of the bodhisattva's merit and the food transformed by the power of the supernormal powers have immeasurable flavours", and its function lies in 「能轉人心，令離欲清淨」 tr. "being able to transform a person's mind, making him free from desire and pure". At the end he gathers it up in one sentence: 「是四種食，菩薩隨因緣供養佛及僧，是故國土中自然有百味飲食。」 tr. "These four kinds of food the bodhisattva offers to the Buddha and the Saṅgha according to causes and conditions; therefore within the land there is, of itself, food and drink of the hundred flavours." The so-called four kinds of food are the human food, the food of the gods, the food born as the retribution of the bodhisattva's merit, and the food transformed by the power of the supernormal powers, which he has just gone through above; the treatise-author counts them himself, and they are not added from outside. The teaching of this passage is: differing explanations may stand together, but where the meaning lands must have its own place of return—it returns to 「令離欲清淨」 tr. "making him free from desire and pure", not to the number being a hundred.

19. The seventh specific mark—the vow of offering heavenly unguents. 「或有菩薩以天塗香。」 tr. "Again, there are bodhisattvas who make offerings with heavenly unguents." Here the treatise-author mentions in passing a matter of local custom: 「天竺國熱，又以身臭，故以香塗身，供養諸佛及僧。」 tr. "The land of India is hot, and moreover because the body has a bad smell, people smear the body with fragrance, and with this he makes offerings to the buddhas and the Saṅgha." This explains why 「塗香」 tr. "unguents" became an object of offering—not for its beauty but for removing smell; lands are hot or cold and customs have what suits them, and so the objects of offering also differ with the region. The vow attached says: 「以此因緣故，令我國土眾生，受天細滑。」 tr. "Because of these causes and conditions, may the beings of my land receive heavenly fine smoothness." Vowing fine smoothness by means of unguents is still the correspondence of cause and fruit.

20. A śrāmaṇera does not even smear his body with fragrance—how can one make offerings with fragrance? The objection: 「沙彌戒乃至受一日戒，尚不以香塗身，云何以香供養佛及僧？」 tr. "One who holds the śrāmaṇera precepts, and so on up to one who receives the one-day precepts, does not even smear the body with fragrance; how can one make offerings to the Buddha and the Saṅgha with fragrance?" This objection is raised on the basis of the precepts and asked very tightly—one who has received the precepts is not permitted to use it even on himself, so how may it be offered up? The treatise-author's answer is extremely brief, only one sentence: 「是菩薩以身所貴物，隨所須時，用以供養，或以塗地、塗壁及行坐處。」 tr. "This bodhisattva takes what he himself prizes and, at the time it is needed, uses it as an offering, or uses it to smear the ground, to smear walls, and the places of walking and sitting." The answer has two key points: the first is 「身所貴物」 tr. "what he himself prizes"—the meaning of the offering lies in giving up what one prizes, not in the thing being fragrance; the second is 「塗地、塗壁及行坐處」 tr. "smear the ground, smear walls, and the places of walking and sitting"—the use lies not on the Buddha's body but on places. The precept the objector holds to is 「不以香塗身」 tr. "not smearing the body with fragrance"; the use the treatise-author speaks of is smearing the ground and smearing walls; the two do not conflict. This way of answering points, within the very wording the objector holds to, to what it does not reach; there is no need to set up a new meaning.

21. The eighth specific mark—the vow of giving the five desires at will to the Buddha, the Saṅgha, and beings. 「又以隨意五欲供養諸佛及僧及餘眾生。」 tr. "Further, with the five desires at will he makes offerings to the buddhas, the Saṅgha, and the other beings." The treatise-author lists the things: 「是菩薩以好車、馬、妻妾、伎直、幡蓋、金銀、衣服、珍寶」 tr. "this bodhisattva takes fine carriages, horses, wives and concubines, hired performers, banners and canopies, gold and silver, clothing, and precious things", and himself adds a limiting sentence: 「出家人所不受，則施諸眾生」 tr. "whatever those gone forth do not accept, he gives to beings"—whatever those gone forth do not accept is turned over and given to beings; things not in accord with the Dharma are not forced upon the Saṅgha. The vow attached says: 「令我國土眾生常得隨意五欲。」 tr. "May the beings of my land always obtain the five desires at will." As soon as this passage appears, the great objection below arises; the treatise-author first sets down this limiting phrase himself precisely to reserve the boundary for the discussion below.

22. The five desires are like fire, like a pit—why does the bodhisattva vow that beings obtain them? This is one of the longest objections in this unit, and the treatise-author poses it as two questions at once: the first rests on the Buddha's words, 「此五欲，佛說如火、如坑、如瘡、如獄、如怨、如賊，能奪人善根，菩薩何以願使眾生得五欲？」 tr. "These five desires the Buddha said are like fire, like a pit, like a sore, like a prison, like an enemy, like a thief, able to rob people of their roots of goodness; why does the bodhisattva vow to make beings obtain the five desires?"; the second rests on what the Buddha established, 「又佛說弟子應納衣、乞食、坐林樹下，菩薩何以為眾生求得五欲？」 tr. "Further, the Buddha said that disciples should wear robes of cast-off rags, practise begging for food, and sit beneath the trees of the forest; why does the bodhisattva seek to obtain the five desires for beings?" One asks about principle, one asks about practice. The treatise-author first answers the principle, beginning from poverty: 「天上、人中五欲是福德果報。」 tr. "The five desires of the heavens and of the human world are the retribution of merit." Since they are the fruit of merit, they are not the root of sin. Next he speaks of what poverty gives rise to: 「貧窮薄福者不能自活，則行劫盜；或為物主所害，或為財殺他；或被詰問，妄言不作。」 tr. "Poor people of meagre merit cannot support themselves and so commit robbery; either they are killed by the owner of the goods, or for the sake of goods they kill others; or when questioned they lie, saying they did not do it." From robbery to killing, to false speech—「如是，次第作十不善，皆由貧窮故作。」 tr. "In this way, in sequence they commit the ten unwholesome deeds, all done because of poverty." At the end he turns it over and sets up the right view: 「若人五欲具足，則所欲隨意，則不行十不善。」 tr. "If a person is complete in the five desires, then whatever he desires is at his will, and he does not practise the ten unwholesome deeds." The meaning of this section is of the utmost importance: the harm of the five desires lies in creating evil when one seeks and does not obtain; one who is complete and seeks nothing, on the contrary, does not enter evil by this door. The treatise-author is not overturning the verdict on the five desires; he is pointing out that the real cause of evil lies in want.

23. When the land is rich and happy there are no evils—the simile of a garment soiled with grease soaked in ash and mud. Carrying on from the above, the treatise-author speaks of the condition of the beings of a pure land: 「菩薩國土眾生豐樂自恣、無所乏少，則無眾惡，但有愛、慢等軟結使。」 tr. "The beings within the bodhisattva's land are rich and happy, free at their will, lacking nothing, and so they have none of the various evils, only soft fetters such as love and pride." The three Chinese characters 「軟結使」 tr. "soft fetters" mark the boundary—it is not that there are no fetters at all, it is that what remains is soft. Being soft, they are easily broken, and so he goes on: 「若聞佛所說、或聞弟子所說，以心柔軟故，聞法，易可得道」 tr. "if they hear what the Buddha teaches, or hear what the disciples teach, because the mind is soft, hearing the Dharma they can easily obtain the path"; and he adds a sentence to forestall doubt: 「雖著心多，利根故，聞無常、苦、空等，即便得道。」 tr. "Although the clinging mind is much, because their faculties are keen, hearing impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and so on, they at once obtain the path." Then he makes it clear with a simile: 「譬如垢膩之衣，則以灰泥淹之，經宿以水浣之，一時都去。」 tr. "It is like a garment soiled with grease: one soaks it in ash and mud, and after a night washes it with water, and at one time it is all removed." What this simile takes is 「一時都去」 tr. "at one time it is all removed"—when the dirt is thick and the way of washing is fitting, it is all gone at one time; the point is not the amount of the dirt. At the end he states the bodhisattva's intention directly: 「菩薩不欲令眾生著故以五欲施，但欲令一時捨故與之。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not give the five desires wishing to make beings cling; he gives them only wishing to make them relinquish at one time." Giving them is precisely to make them relinquish—this sentence is the eye of the whole passage; if one does not see this sentence, everything before becomes words that indulge desire.

24. Answering the objection about robes of cast-off rags and begging for food—because the five desires are all equal in the pure land, beings no longer prize them and cling. At this point the treatise-author turns back to answer the objector's second question, first taking up his words: 「如汝先說：「佛教弟子納衣、乞食。」」 tr. "As you said before: ‘The Buddha taught the disciples to wear robes of cast-off rags and beg for food.’" Then he distinguishes the capacity addressed: 「宿罪因緣生在惡世，染著心多，若得好衣、美食著心則深」 tr. "through the causes and conditions of sins of former lives they were born in an evil age, and the defiled and clinging mind is much; if they obtained fine clothing and fine food, the clinging mind would become deep", together with one more matter: 「又為求好衣食故，妨廢行道。」 tr. "Moreover, because of seeking fine clothing and food, the practice of the path would be hindered and neglected." Both matters belong to the condition of an evil age. Once the capacity is made clear, the difference of the pure land shows itself: 「是菩薩淨佛國土眾生，無量福德成就，五欲一等故，不復貴著，亦不更求，故無所妨。」 tr. "The beings within the Buddha-land purified by this bodhisattva have accomplished immeasurable merit; because the five desires are all equal, they no longer prize them and cling, nor do they seek further, and so there is no hindrance." The joint lies in the four Chinese characters 「五欲一等」 tr. "the five desires are all equal"—clinging in an evil age arises from inequality: this one has and that one lacks, and so they prize them and seek them; when all is equal there is nothing to prize and nothing to seek. What the rule of robes of cast-off rags and begging for food counteracts is prizing and clinging, and hindrance and neglect; since the pure land is free of these two sicknesses, that rule need not be applied there.

25. Leaving the five desires to practise austerities increases anger—relinquish suffering and pleasure, use wisdom, abide in the middle way. The treatise-author goes a layer further, pointing out that a one-sided clinging to austerities also has its sickness: 「若行者離五欲修苦行，則增長瞋恚」 tr. "if a practitioner leaves the five desires and practises austerities, he increases anger"; yet to turn back and seek pleasure will not do either: 「憶念五欲，則生煩惱」 tr. "if he recollects the five desires, afflictions arise"; both ends are lost, and 「爾時則無所向」 tr. "at that time he has nowhere to tend toward". Having set up the two losses, he cites the Buddha's words as the verdict: 「是故佛言：「捨苦樂，用智慧，處中道。」」 tr. "Therefore the Buddha said: ‘Relinquish suffering and pleasure, use wisdom, abide in the middle way.’" At the end he concludes: 「是故淨佛國土，五欲施無妨。」 tr. "Therefore within the pure Buddha-land, giving with the five desires is no hindrance." This passage is the positive verdict of the whole discussion of the five desires in this piece—it is not ‘the five desires are harmless’, it is ‘both extremes, suffering and pleasure, are wrong; one practises the middle way with wisdom’. Note that what the treatise-author cites to settle the case is the Buddha's words, not a view he sets up himself.

26. In the Vinaya a bhikṣu who said that receiving the five desires does not hinder the path was expelled—how is this to be reconciled? The objector presses in by another road, asking on the basis of the Vinaya: 「若爾者，毘尼中何以一比丘言：「我知佛法義，受五欲不妨道！」是比丘應呵，乃至三不止，擯出。」 tr. "If so, why is it that in the Vinaya a bhikṣu said: ‘I understand the meaning of the Buddha's Dharma; receiving the five desires does not hinder the path!’, and this bhikṣu was to be rebuked, and when he did not stop even at the third time, he was expelled?" This objection is very sharp—the treatise-author has just said that giving with the five desires is no hindrance, and in the Vinaya there is precisely a bhikṣu expelled for these words. The treatise-author's answer first sets up the great division: 「佛法有二種：小乘、大乘。」 tr. "The Buddha's Dharma is of two kinds: the Small Vehicle and the Great Vehicle." Next he speaks of the capacity the Small Vehicle addresses: 「小乘中，薄福之人三毒偏多。」 tr. "Within the Small Vehicle, people of meagre merit have the three poisons in excess." The capacities being different, the rules are different too—this is the groundwork for the sūtra proof cited in the next passage.

27. The white-robed disciples of the Pocha Sūtra, and the two sins of the bhikṣu Alizha. The treatise-author cites a sūtra as proof: 「如《婆差經》中，佛說：「我白衣弟子，非一非二，乃至出五百人，受赤栴檀塗身及受好香花，妻子共臥，使令奴婢，而斷三結得須陀洹；盡三結，薄三毒，得斯陀含。」」 tr. "As in the Pocha Sūtra, the Buddha said: ‘My white-robed disciples, not one, not two, and so on up to more than five hundred people, smear their bodies with red sandalwood and receive fine fragrant flowers, lie with their wives, employ servants and maids, and yet sever the three fetters and obtain srota-āpanna; with the three fetters exhausted and the three poisons thinned, they obtain sakṛdāgāmin.’" What this sūtra says—the white-robed receiving desire and obtaining the first two fruits—really is so. Where the sickness arises is in misplacing it: 「是阿梨吒比丘聞是事，即言：「雖受五欲而不妨道！」不知是事佛為誰說。」 tr. "This bhikṣu Alizha, hearing this matter, at once said: ‘Though one receives the five desires, it does not hinder the path!’ He did not know for whom the Buddha said this matter." The treatise-author settles it in one sentence: 「佛為白衣故說，此比丘持著出家法中說。」 tr. "The Buddha said it for the sake of the white-robed; this bhikṣu took it into the dharma of those gone forth and said it there." After this he further distinguishes the boundary by the presence or absence of an oath: the white-robed 「不作是言：「我盡形壽不犯欲！」」 tr. "do not say: ‘For the rest of this life I will not commit desire!’", and because 「有餘三毒故，時時忘道而發婬心」 tr. "the three poisons still remain, at times they forget the path and give rise to lustful thoughts"; whereas one gone forth 「於僧中口自誓言：「我盡形壽不犯婬欲！」」 tr. "in the midst of the Saṅgha takes the oath with his own mouth, saying: ‘For the rest of my life I will not commit sexual desire!’", and the Buddha's rule says: 「若出家人犯欲，則棄。」 tr. "If one gone forth commits desire, he is to be cast out." Thereupon he judges the two sins: 「是比丘自誓而犯，是一罪；知佛所制而故違犯，是二罪。」 tr. "This bhikṣu himself took the oath and broke it: this is the first sin; knowing what the Buddha established and deliberately violating it: this is the second sin." At the end he further points to its root: 「是比丘見白衣得道故，而以自身同彼，是故墮罪。」 tr. "This bhikṣu, because he saw the white-robed obtain the path, made himself the same as them, and therefore fell into sin." The way of teaching in this passage is very much worth seeing—one and the same fact is true for the white-robed and an error for the bhikṣu; the error lies not in the fact, but in 「以自身同彼」 tr. "making himself the same as them". To read the sūtras without distinguishing the capacity addressed is precisely this sickness.

28. The two kinds of beings in the pure Buddha-land—neither those at home nor those gone forth are at fault. Having distinguished the capacity of the Small Vehicle, the treatise-author returns to the pure land: 「淨佛國土有二種眾生：若出家，若在家。」 tr. "Within the pure Buddha-land there are two kinds of beings: those gone forth and those at home." Those at home 「雖受五欲無罪，亦無所妨」 tr. "though they receive the five desires, have no sin, nor any hindrance", and he cites two places as examples: 「如兜率陀諸天及欝單曰人，雖受五欲，不起重罪。」 tr. "Just as the gods of the Tuṣita heaven and the people of Uttarakuru, though they receive the five desires, do not give rise to grave sins." Those gone forth 「隨佛所聽出家五欲，亦無過咎」 tr. "using the five desires that the Buddha permits to those gone forth, also have no fault"—the four Chinese characters 「隨佛所聽」 tr. "according to what the Buddha permits" are a limit, not a blanket permission. With the two kinds of beings spoken of separately, the sūtra text's phrase 「弟子及一切眾生皆得隨意五欲」 tr. "the disciples and all beings all obtain the five desires at will" is thereupon free of obstruction.

29. The Small Vehicle spoke for Alizha's sake; those of the pure land train in and practise the six perfections and the three gates of liberation life after life. The treatise-author makes an overall judgement: 「小乘法中，為阿梨吒比丘說；薄福重罪之人，心多悔故。」 tr. "Within the dharma of the Small Vehicle it was said for the sake of the bhikṣu Alizha; because people of meagre merit and heavy sin have much remorse in their minds." This sentence points back to entries 26 and 27, making clear the limit of what was said. At once he says why the people of the pure land are different: 「淨佛土者，世世習行六波羅蜜、三解脫門，雖得五欲，亦不染著。」 tr. "Those who purify buddha-lands, life after life, train in and practise the six perfections and the three gates of liberation; although they obtain the five desires, they are not defiled by them or cling to them." The reason they are not defiled and do not cling lies in 「世世習行」 tr. "life after life train in and practise"—it is not the patience of a single moment, it is what long training has accomplished. Here the discussion of the five desires closes entirely: what is permitted is not the five desires, it is not being defiled by them and not clinging; what makes it possible not to be defiled and not to cling is long training in the six perfections and the three gates of liberation.

30. As the sūtra says—he himself enters the first dhyāna and also teaches beings to enter it; when he becomes a Buddha all practise the four dhyānas and so on up to the thirty-seven limbs of the path. The treatise-author turns back to take up the sūtra text's vow of the four dhyānas: 「如經中說，所謂菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，作是念：「我當自入初禪，亦當教化眾生入初禪；四禪、四無量心乃至三十七品亦如是。」」 tr. "As the sūtra says, namely, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he has this thought: ‘I shall myself enter the first dhyāna, and shall also teach and transform beings to enter the first dhyāna; the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, and so on up to the thirty-seven limbs of the path, are likewise.’" He also takes up the vow: 「是菩薩作是願：「我作佛時，盡行四禪乃至三十七品。」」 tr. "This bodhisattva makes this vow: ‘When I become a Buddha, all will practise the four dhyānas and so on up to the thirty-seven limbs of the path.’" At the end he attaches one sentence to answer the discussion of the five desires in the passages before: 「如是福德故，眾生雖受五欲，不能為妨。」 tr. "Because there is such merit, although beings receive the five desires, these cannot constitute a hindrance." This sentence is the treatise-author's joint: the sūtra text's vow of the four dhyānas was originally one of the separate vows, and the treatise-author uses it to answer why 「受五欲而不妨道」 tr. "receiving the five desires does not hinder the path": it is not that the five desires themselves are harmless, it is that the power of concentration and of the limbs of the path is enough not to be harmed by them.

31. Immeasurable asaṃkhyeya vows all made complete—the body upright and handsome, those who see it never satisfied. The treatise-author explains the sūtra text's passage on the fulfilment of the vows: 「是菩薩作無量阿僧祇願，隨爾所時行道，盡具足是願；是菩薩一切善法皆成就，及所成就眾生。」 tr. "This bodhisattva makes immeasurable asaṃkhyeya vows, practises the path through so long a time, and makes all these vows complete; this bodhisattva accomplishes all wholesome dharmas, and so too the beings he accomplishes." Next he explains the fruit of the bodily form: 「一切善法成就故，得身端正，見者無厭；亦成就眾生，令得端正。」 tr. "Because all wholesome dharmas are accomplished, he obtains a body upright and handsome, of which those who see it are never satisfied; he also accomplishes beings, making them obtain upright handsomeness." Compared with the sūtra text it has the four extra Chinese characters 「見者無厭」 tr. "those who see it are never satisfied"—the sūtra text only says 「受身端正」 tr. "the body he receives is upright and handsome", and the treatise-author supplies its function: the virtue of being upright and handsome lies in making those who see it never weary of it and so able to receive transformation; beauty is not prized for itself. At the end he takes up one sentence of the sūtra text, 「須菩提！菩薩應如是淨佛土。」 tr. "Subhūti! The bodhisattva should purify buddha-lands in this way.", as the conclusion, and the section on the cause ends here.

32. Not even the name of the three evils, how much less the three evil destinies. From here on it enters the section on the fruit. The treatise-author first takes up the text and extends it: 「復次，淨佛土者，乃至無三惡之名，何況有三惡道！」 tr. "Further, what is called purifying buddha-lands is to have not even the name of the three evils, how much less the three evil destinies themselves!" The sūtra text says 「無三惡道之名」 tr. "no name of the three evil destinies", and the treatise-author fills out its force with 「何況有三惡道」 tr. "how much less the three evil destinies themselves"—even the name is absent, how much more the matter. This sentence is both an explanation of the sūtra and the lead-in to the three objections below.

33. If there are no three evil destinies, on whom do the buddhas have compassion? The objection: 「諸佛以大慈悲心，為苦惱眾生故出世；若無三惡道，何所憐愍？」 tr. "The buddhas, with the mind of great kindness and compassion, appear in the world for the sake of suffering and vexed beings; if there are no three evil destinies, what is there to have compassion for?" This objection is raised from the Buddha's original intention in appearing in the world. The treatise-author's answer falls into two sections. The first distinguishes the capacity to be delivered: 「佛出為度眾生故，而三惡道眾生不可度，但可令種善根而已，是故佛名「天人師」。」 tr. "The Buddha appears for the sake of delivering beings; yet the beings of the three evil destinies cannot be delivered, one can only make them plant roots of goodness; therefore the Buddha is named ‘Teacher of Gods and Humans’." The Buddha is called 「天人師」 tr. "Teacher of Gods and Humans" and not ‘Teacher of the Five Destinies’ precisely because those he transforms are among gods and humans—this proves from the Buddha's own title the capacity he delivers. The second sets up a contrary situation to show that the objection does not hold: 「若無天、人，但有三惡道，可應有難、應作是問。」 tr. "If there were no gods and humans, only the three evil destinies, then there might be such an objection, then one should ask such a question." The meaning is: only if within the pure land there were not even gods and humans could this objection stand; now the pure land is not without a capacity to be transformed, and the objection falls of itself. The skill of this answer lies in taking the Buddha's title as its ground and not setting up a separate principle.

34. The Buddha has compassion for beings—why are there no beings of the three evil destinies in the pure land? The objector asks again, from another angle: 「佛憐愍眾生，淨佛國土中何以無三惡道眾生？」 tr. "The Buddha has compassion for beings; why are there no beings of the three evil destinies within the pure Buddha-land?" The previous objection asked ‘there is no one to have compassion for’; this objection asks ‘why does he not have compassion?’. The treatise-author's answer falls into four layers. The first sets up equality: 「憐愍一切眾生，平等無異」 tr. "his compassion for all beings is equal and without difference"—first cutting off the doubt ‘the Buddha of a pure land favours the pure in capacity’. The second points out the limit of this text: 「此中說清淨業因緣，是國土中無三惡道」 tr. "what is spoken of here is the causes and conditions of pure deeds, and so within this land there are no three evil destinies"—what is spoken of is the retribution of pure deeds, not a partiality in the Buddha's mind. The third opens out its measure: 「又佛非但一國土，乃有十方恒河沙國土。」 tr. "Further, the Buddha has not just one land; he has lands as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions." The fourth distinguishes their kinds: 「佛有清淨國土、有雜國土。雜國土中則具有五道；淨佛國土，或有人、天別異，或無有人、天別異。」 tr. "The Buddha has pure lands and has mixed and defiled lands. Within the mixed and defiled lands the five destinies are all present; within the pure Buddha-lands, either there is a distinction of humans and gods, or there is no distinction of humans and gods." At the end he proves it with a matter: 「如過去天王佛國土中，唯佛世尊以為法王，是故名為天王佛。」 tr. "Just as within the land of the past Buddha Heavenly King, only the Buddha, the World-Honored One, was the king of the Dharma; therefore he was named the Buddha Heavenly King." What this one example proves is the clause 「或無有人、天別異」 tr. "or there is no distinction of humans and gods"—in that land there was no distinction of gods and humans, only the Buddha was king of the Dharma, and so his name was as it was. The order of the four layers is: first cut off the doubt in the mind, next limit it to the text, then open out its measure, and last distinguish its kinds.

35. Again, there are lands without the three poisons and wrong views. The treatise-author raises one more clause of the marks of a land: 「復有國土無三毒、邪見。」 tr. "Again, there are lands without the three poisons and wrong views." This takes up the earlier sūtra text 「無邪見、三毒」 tr. "no wrong views, the three poisons" and sets it up as a separate item, and the text below raises an objection on just this.

36. If there are no afflictions, what does the Buddha appear in the world for—recording two explanations together. The objection: 「諸佛但為除眾生煩惱故出世，邪見、三毒即是煩惱，若無煩惱，出何所為？」 tr. "The buddhas appear in the world only for the sake of removing the afflictions of beings; wrong views and the three poisons are precisely afflictions; if there are no afflictions, what do they appear for?" Here the treatise-author does not set up an explanation of his own, but records the explanations of two parties. The first says: 「有人言：是中大福德因緣故，邪見、三毒不發故言無。」 tr. "Someone says: within this land, because of the causes and conditions of great merit, wrong views and the three poisons do not break out, and therefore it is said there are none." This explanation takes 「不發」 tr. "do not break out"—the seeds of the afflictions are not necessarily absent, but their present activity does not arise, and so the sūtra says there are none. The second says: 「復次，有人言：是中諸菩薩皆得無生法忍，常修六波羅蜜等諸功德，常遊十方度脫眾生，於諸佛所修習諸佛三昧」 tr. "Further, someone says: within this land the bodhisattvas all obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, constantly cultivate all kinds of merit such as the six perfections, constantly roam the ten directions delivering beings, and in the presence of the buddhas cultivate and train in the samādhis of the buddhas", and so what is transformed there is surpassing: 「勝教化無數聲聞、辟支佛，亦勝教化阿鞞跋致菩薩」 tr. "this surpasses teaching and transforming countless śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and also surpasses teaching and transforming avaivartika bodhisattvas", and it concludes at the end: 「成就眾生菩薩、淨佛土菩薩，為近佛道故，利益轉大。」 tr. "The bodhisattva who accomplishes beings, the bodhisattva who purifies buddha-lands, because he is near the Buddha path, has a benefit that grows the greater." This explanation does not speak in terms of whether afflictions are present or absent, but in terms of the superiority or inferiority of those transformed—though in that land there are no afflictions to be removed, the Buddha's appearing in the world has of itself a greater benefit. The two explanations are recorded side by side without judgement, and the reader keeps both: one explanation settles the word 「無」 tr. "there are none", the other settles ‘what the appearing in the world is for’.

37. In the land there is no name of the two vehicles—are the other buddhas, who teach by the three vehicles, then alone inferior? The treatise-author takes up the sūtra text's words as a heading: 「「是國土無二乘之名」者。」 tr. "As for ‘this land has no name of the two vehicles’." At once he poses an objection: 「餘佛有三乘教化，豈獨劣耶？」 tr. "The other buddhas teach and transform by the three vehicles; are they then alone inferior?" This objection is raised to protect the other buddhas against the sūtra text's 「無二乘之名」 tr. "no name of the two vehicles"—if having no two vehicles is the superior, are not the lands with three vehicles inferior? The treatise-author's answer is only one sentence: 「佛出五濁惡世，於一道分為三乘。」 tr. "The buddhas appear in the evil age of the five turbidities, and within the one path divide it into three vehicles." The answer is extremely brief and extremely right: the three vehicles are not originally in the Dharma; they are divided out within the one path to meet the capacities of the five turbidities; the dividing meets capacities and is not a superiority or inferiority of the Dharma.

38. Amitābha and Akṣobhya are not born in the five turbidities—why do they too have the three vehicles? The objector at once turns this very sentence back in a counter-question: 「若爾，阿彌陀佛、阿閦佛等不於五濁世生，何以復有三乘？」 tr. "If so, Amitābha Buddha, Akṣobhya Buddha, and others are not born in an age of the five turbidities; why do they also have the three vehicles?" This objection is very precise—since it was said that the three vehicles are divided because of the five turbidities, lands without the five turbidities should not have the three vehicles, and yet in fact they have them. The treatise-author's answer does not speak from the side of the land but from the side of the original vow: 「諸佛初發心時，見諸佛以三乘度眾生，自發願言：「我亦當以三乘度眾生。」」 tr. "The buddhas, at the time of their first arousing of the mind, saw the buddhas delivering beings by the three vehicles, and themselves made the vow, saying: ‘I too shall deliver beings by the three vehicles.’" The three vehicles exist in those lands not because of the turbidity of capacities but because of what the vow established. This answer and the previous answer stand side by side without obstructing each other: one speaks of meeting capacities, the other of the original vow; one matter has two causes and conditions, and in places of this kind this treatise usually keeps both.

39. No name of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, or non-self—without disease there is no need of medicine. The treatise-author explains the sūtra text's clause 「耳不聞有無常、苦、空之聲」 tr. "the ear does not hear the sound of impermanence, suffering, or emptiness": 「亦無無常、苦、空、無我之名者，以眾生深著常、樂等顛倒故，為說無常等苦法。」 tr. "As for ‘nor is there the name of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, or non-self’: because beings cling deeply to the inversions of permanence, pleasure, and so on, impermanence and the other dharmas of suffering are taught to them." First he says why they exist—they are set up to counteract inversion. Next he says why they are absent: 「是中無常、樂等倒故，不須無常、苦」 tr. "within this land, because there are no inversions of permanence, pleasure, and so on, there is no need of impermanence and suffering", and he completes it with a simile: 「若無病，則不須藥。」 tr. "If there is no disease, there is no need of medicine." At the end he infers the remaining items by analogy: 「亦無我所有，乃至無諸煩惱結使亦如是。」 tr. "‘Nor is there what is mine’, and so on up to ‘there are none of the various afflictions and fetters’, are likewise." The teaching of this passage is: every provision of a dharma exists in order to counteract something; once the sickness to be counteracted is absent, the name of that dharma is absent too—it is not that the people there do not understand impermanence, it is that there, there is no need to speak of impermanence. Reading this resolves a doubt: if in the pure land there is no sound of suffering and emptiness, is the Dharma not lacking? The answer lies in the one sentence ‘without disease there is no need of medicine’.

40. Because there are no two vehicles there are no fruits—the trees of the seven jewels bring out the sound of the Dharma according to those to be delivered. The treatise-author goes on to explain two clauses. The first carries on from the above: 「無二乘故，亦無須陀洹等諸果，但一向著諸法實相。」 tr. "Because there are no two vehicles, there are also none of the various fruits such as srota-āpanna; they only tend wholly toward the real mark of all dharmas." Since the names of the two vehicles are absent, the names of their fruits are absent of themselves; what remains is only tending wholly toward the real mark. He adds a sentence on the progress in that land: 「先得無生法忍者，得諸三昧、陀羅尼門，轉復增益諸地等功德。」 tr. "Those who have already obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas obtain all kinds of samādhis and dhāraṇī gates, and further increase the merits of the grounds and so on." The second explains the jewelled trees bringing out sound: 「風吹七寶之樹，隨所應度而出聲者，是菩薩欲使眾生易聞法故，七寶之樹出法音聲。」 tr. "As for ‘the wind blows on the trees of the seven jewels and, according to those to be delivered, brings out sound’: this bodhisattva wishes to make it easy for beings to hear the Dharma, and therefore the trees of the seven jewels bring out the sound of the Dharma." He further speaks of how pervasive it is: 「寶樹遍滿國土故，眾生生便聞法，餘心不生，但生法心。」 tr. "Because the jewelled trees fill the land everywhere, as soon as beings are born they hear the Dharma; other minds do not arise, only the mind of the Dharma arises." The four Chinese characters 「餘心不生」 tr. "other minds do not arise" are the fruit of this clause—it is not that they are forcibly kept from arising; it is that, constantly hearing the Dharma, there is no gap for any other mind.

41. The buddhas have supernormal powers—why do they not manifest immeasurable bodies, instead of needing the sound of trees? The objection: 「諸佛有無量不可思議神通力，何以不變化作無量身說法度眾生？何須樹木音聲？」 tr. "The buddhas have the immeasurable, inconceivable power of the supernormal powers; why do they not transform themselves into immeasurable bodies to teach the Dharma and deliver beings? Why must they use the sound of trees?" This objection is asked very naturally—would not the Buddha's body teaching the Dharma surpass the sound of trees? The treatise-author's answer is set up from the side of beings, in three sections. The first says that many bodies would on the contrary invite disbelief: 「眾生甚多，若佛處處現身眾生不信，謂為幻化，心不敬重。」 tr. "Beings are very many; if the Buddha manifested his body everywhere, beings would not believe, taking it for conjuration and transformation, and their minds would not revere it." The second says that the capacities for hearing the Dharma differ: 「有眾生從人聞法，心不開悟；若從畜生聞法，則便信受。」 tr. "There are beings who, hearing the Dharma from a person, are not awakened in mind; if they hear the Dharma from an animal, they then believe and accept it." And he cites a sūtra as proof: 「如《本生經》說：菩薩受畜生身，為人說法；人以希有故，無不信受。」 tr. "As the Jātaka Sūtra says: the bodhisattva received the body of an animal and taught the Dharma for people; people, because it was rare, all without exception believed and accepted it." He further says why they believe: 「又謂畜生心直不誑故。」 tr. "And again, because they held that an animal's mind is straight and does not deceive." The third then advances to trees: 「有人謂畜生是有情之物，皆有欺誑；以樹木無心而有音聲，則皆信受。」 tr. "Some people hold that animals are sentient things and all can deceive; since trees have no mind and yet have sound, all believe and accept it." The order is plain—the Buddha's body, a person, an animal, a tree: the less mind, the more clearly it does not deceive; the less it deceives, the more easily it is believed and accepted. The principle of this answer lies not in the height of the Dharma but in whether the receivers believe.

42. The sound of the Dharma that the trees bring out—emptiness, the signless, non-action, constantly brought out day and night. Having said why trees can make people believe, the treatise-author then states the Dharma they bring out: 「所謂空、無相、無作，有佛、無佛，一切法常空，空故無相，無相故無作、無起。」 tr. "Namely emptiness, the signless, non-action: whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, all dharmas are always empty; because empty, therefore signless; because signless, therefore without making and non-rising." These three sentences follow one from another: from emptiness to the signless, from the signless to without making and non-rising—exactly in accord with the 「空中無有相，無相中則無作」 tr. "in emptiness there is no mark; in the signless there is then no making" that the sūtra text cites. At the end he attaches the time: 「如是等法，晝夜常出。」 tr. "All such dharmas as these are constantly brought out day and night." That they are constantly brought out day and night is precisely the sūtra text's 「若晝、若夜，若坐、若臥、若立、若行，常聞此法」 tr. "whether by day or by night, whether sitting, lying down, standing, or walking, they constantly hear this Dharma".

43. Other lands transform by supernormal power and the power of the mouth; here there is always sound that comes of itself. The treatise-author makes a concluding contrast in one sentence: 「餘國土以神通力、口力種種變化，此中常自然音聲。」 tr. "Other lands make all kinds of transformations by the power of the supernormal powers and the power of the mouth; here there is always sound that comes of itself." In other lands the teaching of the Dharma must be raised by intention; in this land the sound of the Dharma is of itself and constant—the one made, the other of itself: this is precisely where the difference between the pure and the mixed lies. Though this sentence is short, it is the summing up of the two passages before.

44. The Buddha is constantly praised by the buddhas—hearing the name of the Buddha of a pure land one is assured of becoming a Buddha; why is it obtained by merely hearing a name? The treatise-author first states the fruit in the sūtra text: 「淨佛國土，佛常為諸佛所讚，大作功德故，能得如是淨國；若聞淨國佛名，則畢定作佛。」 tr. "Within the pure Buddha-land, the Buddha is constantly praised by the buddhas; because he has made merit on a great scale, he is able to obtain such a pure land; if one hears the name of the Buddha of a pure land, one is assured of becoming a Buddha." At once he poses an objection: 「餘佛種種勤苦說法，眾生尚不得道，何以但聞佛名便得道？」 tr. "The other buddhas teach the Dharma in all kinds of ways with toil and bitter effort, and beings still do not obtain the path; why is it that merely hearing the Buddha's name one then obtains the path?" The sharpness of this objection lies in the contrast—with much teaching they still do not obtain it, while with little hearing they obtain it; this does not follow in principle. The treatise-author's answer falls into two sections. The first does not belittle the other buddhas: 「餘處佛種種說法，眾生或得道、或得善根，終不空說」 tr. "when the buddhas of other places teach the Dharma in all kinds of ways, beings either obtain the path or obtain roots of goodness; in the end it is not empty speech"—first establishing that the other buddhas' teaching of the Dharma always has real benefit, so that the objector does not wrongly think this is being denied. The second corrects the measure of what is granted: 「若聞是佛名，畢至阿鞞跋致，不言今得。」 tr. "As for hearing this Buddha's name, one will surely reach avaivartika; it is not said that one obtains it now." The joint lies in the four Chinese characters 「不言今得」 tr. "it is not said that one obtains it now"—what the sūtra text says is 「必至」 tr. "will surely reach", not ‘obtains at once’; by asking with 「便得道」 tr. "then obtains the path", the objector has already shifted the measure of the sūtra text. The method of this answer is first to calibrate the measure under discussion, and then to discuss its principle.

45. For all buddhas, hearing the name one will become a Buddha—why speak only of the Buddha of a pure land? The objector asks further on the basis of a sūtra: 「一切佛，若人好心聞名，皆當至佛，如《法華經》中說，福德若大、若小，皆當作佛。何以獨說淨國佛？」 tr. "For all buddhas, if a person hears their name with a good mind, he will reach buddhahood, as is said in the Lotus Sūtra: whether merit be great or small, all will become buddhas. Why speak only of the Buddha of a pure land?" What this objection rests on is the general teaching of another sūtra, and the objection carries great weight. The treatise-author's answer does not deny the general teaching; it only says that the hearers' minds are shallow or deep: 「人聞餘佛名字，謂：「受生與人無異，但有一切智得道為異。」」 tr. "When people hear the names of the other buddhas, they think: ‘Their taking birth is no different from that of people; only in having omniscience and obtaining the path are they different.’" Once one thinks this way, then 「心不敬重故，雖種善根亦不能深」 tr. "because the mind does not revere them, although they plant roots of goodness, these cannot be deep". The reason the Buddha of a pure land alone is spoken of lies not in buddhas being superior or inferior, but in the shallowness or depth of the mind the hearer gives rise to—the next passage speaks of what gives rise to the deep mind.

46. The Buddha of a pure land is the Dharma-nature body—buddhas issue from his pores; because of deep faith and reverence the roots of goodness planted are assured of becoming a Buddha. This passage is the direct answer to the previous objection; its text is the richest and its principle runs through as one. First it establishes the body: 「是中是法性身，佛身無量無邊」 tr. "What is here is the Dharma-nature body; the Buddha's body is immeasurable and boundless"—this is the 「法性生身」 tr. "a body born of the Dharma-nature" established in entry 12, and here its function is seen. Next it speaks of its virtue and function: 「光明、說法音聲遍滿十方國土，國中眾生皆是近佛道者，無量阿僧祇由旬眾中說法」 tr. "its light and the sound of its teaching of the Dharma fill the lands of the ten directions; the beings in the land are all people near the Buddha path; he teaches the Dharma within an assembly of immeasurable asaṃkhyeya of yojana"; it also speaks of its light: 「勝無量億阿僧祇日月光明，常從身出」 tr. "light surpassing that of immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya of suns and moons constantly issues from his body", with a limit attached: 「佛令眾生見則得見，若不聽則不見」 tr. "when the Buddha lets beings see it they can see it; if he does not permit it they do not see it"—the light does not shine blindly; it follows the Buddha's permission. Then it speaks of his transformations: 「是佛一一毛孔邊常出無量無邊阿僧祇佛，一一諸佛等無異，於化佛邊展轉復出。」 tr. "At the side of each single pore of this Buddha there constantly issue immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya of buddhas, each of the buddhas equal and without difference, and beside the conjured buddhas further ones issue in turn." Having spoken of conjured buddhas issuing in turn, and fearing that people will suspect there are superior and inferior among them, it at once cuts this off: 「隨應度眾生見佛優劣，根本真佛無有分別大小之異。」 tr. "According to the beings to be delivered, the Buddha is seen as superior or inferior; the root true Buddha has no distinction of great and small to be discriminated." Superior and inferior lie in those who see, not in the Buddha. At the end it returns to what was asked: 「如是等若見、若聞名、若聞如是功德，深信敬重故，所種善根，云何不畢定作佛？」 tr. "In all such ways, whether seeing, or hearing the name, or hearing of such merits, because of deep faith and reverence, how could the roots of goodness planted not be assured of becoming a Buddha?" The principle of the whole passage is only one sentence—the reason the Buddha of a pure land alone is spoken of is that his body is the Dharma-nature body, and those who hear of it cannot but have deep faith and reverence; because the reverence is deep the roots of goodness are deep, and because the roots of goodness are deep one is assured.

47. When this Buddha teaches the Dharma there is no one who doubts. The treatise-author takes up one clause of the sūtra text: 「復次，是佛說法時，無有疑者，乃至無一人言：「是法為非佛口所說！」悉皆是法。」 tr. "Further, when this Buddha teaches the Dharma, there is no one who doubts, and so on up to there being not a single person who says: ‘This Dharma is not spoken by the Buddha's mouth!’ All is Dharma." This sentence carries on from the above—since he is a Buddha of the Dharma-nature body, his teaching of the Dharma is of itself beyond doubt; the four Chinese characters 「悉皆是法」 tr. "all is Dharma" are the sūtra text's 「諸法實相中，皆是法，無有非法」 tr. "within the real mark of all dharmas, all is Dharma; there is nothing that is not the Dharma".

48. Many people hear the Dharma from Śākyamuni Buddha and give rise to doubt—how is this to be reconciled? The objection: 「人從釋迦文尼佛聞法生疑者多？」 tr. "Are there not many people who hear the Dharma from Śākyamuni Buddha and give rise to doubt?" This objection asks by raising a present fact—both are the Buddha's teaching, so why is there much doubt in this land? The treatise-author's answer is extremely direct: 「佛此中自說因緣：「有人薄福不種善根、不得善知識故生疑。」」 tr. "The Buddha here himself speaks the causes and conditions: ‘Some people, because of meagre merit, not planting roots of goodness and not obtaining the good friend, therefore give rise to doubt.’" He sets up no separate explanation, but points straight to the answer the sūtra text already has. This way of answering deserves attention: wherever the sūtra text has its own causes and conditions, the treatise-author only cites them without saying more—this is what is called explaining according to the sūtra, without placing a separate meaning outside the sūtra.

49. Covered by the view of self, extreme views, and wrong views—calling what is not the Buddha's word the Buddha's word, and the Dharma not the Dharma; in the pure land there are no such sinners. Carrying on from the above, the treatise-author speaks broadly of the sickness of those who give rise to doubt. It begins in views: 「著我見、邊見、邪見等諸煩惱覆故，非佛言是佛、是佛言非佛。」 tr. "Because they are covered by the various afflictions of clinging to the view of self, extreme views, wrong views, and so on, they call what is not the Buddha's word the Buddha's word, and what is the Buddha's word not the Buddha's word." Its root lies in two matters: 「不深種善根、不順善師」 tr. "not planting roots of goodness deeply, not following a good teacher". It breaks out all at once: 「三毒、邪見一時發起，無所依隨，任意自恣」 tr. "the three poisons and wrong views break out at one time; having nothing to rely on and follow, they give free rein to their own minds". It is verified in a one-sided taking and rejecting: 「若見邪見，順其意故，言是一切智見；諸佛說畢竟空，不順其意，便言非佛」 tr. "if they see a wrong view, because it accords with their minds, they say this is the view of omniscience; when the buddhas teach ultimate emptiness, it does not accord with their minds, and they then say it is not the Buddha's word", and thereupon 「非法言法，法言非法」 tr. "they call what is not the Dharma the Dharma, and the Dharma not the Dharma". Its fruit lies in remorse: 「如是人於諸佛所多生疑，多生疑故心悔。」 tr. "Such people give rise to much doubt in the presence of the buddhas; because they give rise to much doubt, their minds feel remorse." At the end it returns to the pure land: 「是淨佛國中無如是罪人，故不生疑。」 tr. "Within this pure Buddha-land there are no such sinners, and therefore no doubt arises." The vital point of the sickness spoken of in this passage lies in the three Chinese characters 「順其意」 tr. "accords with their minds"—to take and reject the Buddha's Dharma by one's own mind as the standard, what is taken will surely be wrong views, and what is rejected will surely be ultimate emptiness. This is not an insufficiency of knowledge; it is taking the self as the measure.

50. The Buddha says those who break the Dharma fall into the evil destinies—the bodhisattvas by supernormal power pull them out and make them abide in the rightly assured assembly. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words to state the reverse-side layer of the sūtra text: 「佛言：「如是罪人，破諸法實相故，死墮地獄惡道中！諸菩薩得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，見諸罪人往來生死中，以佛神通力，拔出眾生令住正定聚中，不墮三惡趣，是名淨佛土。」」 tr. "The Buddha said: ‘Such sinners, because they break the real mark of all dharmas, after death fall into the evil destiny of hell! When the bodhisattvas obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, seeing these sinners going and coming in birth and death, by the Buddha's supernormal power they pull beings out and make them abide in the rightly assured assembly, not falling into the three evil courses—this is called purifying buddha-lands.’" The key to this passage lies in the last sentence—「是名淨佛土」 tr. "this is called purifying buddha-lands". Here the meaning of the pure land is pushed one step further: it is not only the absence of evil in one's own land; it is being able to pull out the sinners of other lands and make them abide in the rightly assured assembly. If the pure land were only one's own purity, having nothing to do with sinners, this sentence would have nothing to land on.

51. In this Buddha-land there are none of these faults—nothing incomplete; beings all ultimately reach awakening. The treatise-author concludes the section on the fruit: 「是佛土中無如是諸過。」 tr. "Within this Buddha-land there are none of these various faults." Next he speaks of its positive completeness: 「無不具足，於世間、出世間，有漏、無漏，有為、無為等中無有障礙」 tr. "there is nothing incomplete; within the worldly and the world-transcending, with outflows and without outflows, the conditioned and the unconditioned, and so forth, there is no obstruction at all"—this is the three pairs of the sūtra text's 「無雜穢心」 tr. "no mixed and defiled mind"; the treatise-author changes 「無雜穢」 tr. "nothing mixed and defiled" into 「無有障礙」 tr. "no obstruction at all", the same in meaning and smoother in wording. Then he lists its concrete marks: 「所謂國土七寶，眾生身端正，相好莊嚴，無量光明，常聞法音，常不遠離六波羅蜜乃至十八不共法。」 tr. "Namely, the land is of the seven jewels, the bodies of beings are upright and handsome, adorned with the marks and minor signs, with immeasurable light; they constantly hear the sound of the Dharma, and are constantly not far from the six perfections and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas." The seven jewels answer to the first vow, the upright body answers to the fruit of the vows' fulfilment, the sound of the Dharma answers to the sound of the jewelled trees, the six perfections and so on up to the unshared dharmas answer to the vow of the four dhyānas and the thirty-seven limbs—each one has where it comes from; it is not adornment spoken of at large. At the end he concludes: 「是中眾生皆畢竟至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The beings within this land all ultimately reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."

52. Hearing the Buddha's name one is assured of reaching buddhahood, and being unobstructed in all dharmas one will surely become a Buddha—what is the difference? The treatise-author poses the last objection himself, setting side by side the two places that speak of being 「畢定」 tr. "assured": 「上「聞佛名畢定至佛」，此「於諸法無礙必得作佛」，有何差別？」 tr. "Above, ‘hearing the Buddha's name, one is assured of reaching buddhahood’; here, ‘being unobstructed in all dharmas, one will surely become a Buddha’—what difference is there?" It is asked very finely—both speak of being assured; is there then no difference? The treatise-author answers: 「此中眾生常見佛、常聞法、深種善根、多集佛法故，疾得作佛；聞名者，雖俱畢竟定而小不如。」 tr. "The beings here constantly see the Buddha, constantly hear the Dharma, deeply plant roots of goodness, and gather many of the dharmas of the Buddha; therefore they quickly become buddhas. As for those who hear the name, although both are alike ultimately assured, they are slightly inferior." The joint lies in 「疾」 tr. "quickly" and 「小不如」 tr. "slightly inferior"—both are assured; the difference lies in slow and quick, not in whether it is accomplished. This answer protects both ends: it neither lets the assurance of those who hear the name fall empty, nor lets the surpassing place of those born in that land be effaced.

53. Summing up—such as these are called the marks of a pure land. The treatise section concludes with one sentence: 「如是等，名為淨國土相，如「十地中莊嚴菩提樹」說。」 tr. "All such as these are called the marks of a pure land, as is said in ‘adorning the bodhi tree within the ten grounds’." At the end it points to the place where this is spoken of in detail, the passage 「十地中莊嚴菩提樹」 tr. "adorning the bodhi tree within the ten grounds", showing that what is spoken of here is an outline, and that those who want it at length have elsewhere to go. The whole unit ends here.

Do Not Misread

Do not read the coarse deed of 「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks" as meaning that one may not apply the mind. What the sūtra text lists, from form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness up to the conditioned and the unconditioned, all speak of 「相」 tr. "mark" and not of 「法」 tr. "dharma"—what is dismissed is grasping at the mark as definitely real, not abolishing the dharma. The treatise-author explains it clearly: 「能觀色等、善法如幻、如化，不取定實相，得厭心，則捨戲論常、無常等，是不名為取相。」 tr. "To be able to contemplate form and the rest, and wholesome dharmas, as like an illusion, like a conjuration, not grasping at a definitely real mark, obtaining the mind of weariness, and then relinquishing such idle discourse as permanent and impermanent—this is not called grasping at marks." The mind of weariness is still there, wholesome dharmas are still accomplished; what is removed is only the two Chinese characters 「定實」 tr. "definitely real". If it is read as not permitting one to apply the mind, then the six vows below have nowhere to be applied.

Do not read ‘unconditioned dharmas too may not be grasped’ as meaning that suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are empty of reality. The treatise-author's words are 「以不取相是無為法，無相名為無為法門；若取相，便是有為」 tr. "because not grasping at marks is the unconditioned dharma, and the signless is called the gate of the unconditioned dharma; if one grasps at marks, it is then the conditioned"—what is broken is the manner of grasping. The unconditioned is the unconditioned precisely in its being ungraspable; once grasped, what is grasped is already conditioned and has nothing to do with the unconditioned. To doubt the reality of suchness and the limit of reality on the strength of this sentence is to mistake ‘cannot be grasped’ for ‘does not exist’.

Do not read the six vows as vows to seek birth in a pure land. The six vows of the sūtra text are all tied to 「我國土」 tr. "my land" (five say 「令我國土」 tr. "may my land", one says 「願我國土中」 tr. "may … within my land")—the bodhisattva makes his own land; it is not beings seeking to go to his land. Offerings are made to the Three Honoured Ones, the Buddha's stūpas, and the Buddha and the Saṅgha, with the sixth vow also including all beings; what is vowed is the marks of my land, what is dedicated to is purifying buddha-lands. This chapter speaks from beginning to end of the practice of the one who purifies, not of the seeking of those who go there. The two matters must not be confused.

Do not read 「令我國土眾生常得隨意五欲」 tr. "may the beings of my land always obtain the five desires at will" as a permission to indulge desire. The treatise-author states his own intention: 「菩薩不欲令眾生著故以五欲施，但欲令一時捨故與之。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not give the five desires wishing to make beings cling; he gives them only wishing to make them relinquish at one time." He also sets up his own boundary: beings gone forth use 「隨佛所聽出家五欲」 tr. "the five desires that the Buddha permits to those gone forth"; it is not a blanket permission. And he settles it with the Buddha's words: 「捨苦樂，用智慧，處中道。」 tr. "Relinquish suffering and pleasure, use wisdom, abide in the middle way." Taking the three places together, what is permitted is to be free of the suffering of poverty and of the one-sidedness of austerities, not to be permitted clinging.

Do not read the affair of the bhikṣu Alizha as the Buddha's Dharma contradicting itself. The treatise-author judges that its sickness lies not in the sūtra cited, but in the moving of it: 「佛為白衣故說，此比丘持著出家法中說。」 tr. "The Buddha said it for the sake of the white-robed; this bhikṣu took it into the dharma of those gone forth and said it there." His sins too are two: 「自誓而犯，是一罪；知佛所制而故違犯，是二罪。」 tr. "Himself taking the oath and breaking it: this is the first sin; knowing what the Buddha established and deliberately violating it: this is the second sin." One and the same fact is true for the white-robed and an error for the bhikṣu. For reading the sūtras without asking what capacity is addressed, this passage is a clear mirror.

Do not read 「無三惡道之名」 tr. "no name of the three evil destinies" as the Buddha abandoning the beings of the evil destinies. The treatise-author plainly says 「憐愍一切眾生，平等無異」 tr. "his compassion for all beings is equal and without difference", and also says 「此中說清淨業因緣」 tr. "what is spoken of here is the causes and conditions of pure deeds"—what is spoken of is the marks of deed and retribution of this one land, not a partiality in the Buddha's mind. Moreover the last passage of the sūtra text says precisely that the buddhas 「見此眾生往來五道，令離邪聚，立正定聚中」 tr. "seeing these beings going and coming in the five destinies, make them leave the wrongly assured assembly and establish them in the rightly assured assembly", and the treatise-author too cites it and concludes 「是名淨佛土」 tr. "this is called purifying buddha-lands". The purity of the pure land contains within it the meaning of pulling out sinners.

Do not read 「耳不聞有無常、苦、空之聲」 tr. "the ear does not hear the sound of impermanence, suffering, or emptiness" as the pure land not teaching the truth of suffering. The treatise-author's explanation is 「以眾生深著常、樂等顛倒故，為說無常等苦法。是中無常、樂等倒故，不須無常、苦」 tr. "because beings cling deeply to the inversions of permanence, pleasure, and so on, impermanence and the other dharmas of suffering are taught to them; within this land, because there are no inversions of permanence, pleasure, and so on, there is no need of impermanence and suffering", completed by 「若無病，則不須藥」 tr. "if there is no disease, there is no need of medicine". What is not needed is the medicine; it is not that the disease is gone while the medicine has become false—the provision of medicine is from the first for the disease, and when the disease is gone, the name of the medicine is gone too. This and ‘the pure land does not permit suffering to be taught’ are not at all the same matter.

Do not read 「若聞淨國佛名，則畢定作佛」 tr. "if one hears the name of the Buddha of a pure land, one is assured of becoming a Buddha" as obtaining the path at once on hearing the name. The treatise-author calibrates it very clearly: 「若聞是佛名，畢至阿鞞跋致，不言今得。」 tr. "As for hearing this Buddha's name, one will surely reach avaivartika; it is not said that one obtains it now." Surely reaching is necessarily reaching; obtaining now is obtaining at once; the two cannot stand in for each other. Moreover the last passage further distinguishes slow and quick: 「雖俱畢竟定而小不如。」 tr. "Although both are alike ultimately assured, they are slightly inferior." The assurance is the same and the quickness and slowness differ; this boundary too must not be effaced.

Do not read 「一一毛孔邊常出無量無邊阿僧祇佛」 tr. "at the side of each single pore there constantly issue immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya of buddhas" as meaning that there are buddhas great and small, superior and inferior. The treatise-author has already cut this off: 「隨應度眾生見佛優劣，根本真佛無有分別大小之異。」 tr. "According to the beings to be delivered, the Buddha is seen as superior or inferior; the root true Buddha has no distinction of great and small to be discriminated." Superior and inferior lie in the capacity of those who see, not in the Buddha's body. To make high and low among the conjured buddhas is to fall into precisely the sickness this passage guards against.

Do not read 「樹木無心而有音聲」 tr. "trees have no mind and yet have sound" as the Buddha being unwilling to manifest his body. The treatise-author's principle is spoken from the side of the receivers—「若佛處處現身眾生不信，謂為幻化，心不敬重」 tr. "if the Buddha manifested his body everywhere, beings would not believe, taking it for conjuration and transformation, and their minds would not revere it", whereas trees 「無心而有音聲，則皆信受」 tr. "have no mind and yet have sound, and so all believe and accept it". What is taken is the one point of being easily believed; it is not saying the Buddha's body is inferior to a tree. Similes and skilful means both take one point; drag in the rest and it is lost.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「取相生著心」 tr. "grasping at marks and giving rise to a clinging mind" and examine the places where you apply yourself. In a single day the hardest thing to detect is not grasping at evil but grasping at the wholesome—having kept the precepts, there is a mark ‘I keep the precepts’; having stilled the mind, there is a mark ‘I am still’; once this mark is set up, one has already entered the coarseness this passage speaks of. The way of examining is very simple: see whether, after this wholesome thing is done, one extra thing has appeared in the mind.

Take 「不取定實相，得厭心」 tr. "not grasping at a definitely real mark, obtaining the mind of weariness" and tell true weariness from false. Seeing form and wearying of it—if it is taking form as real and loathing it, then weariness and craving are alike grasping at marks, and some day it will surely reverse; if it is contemplating it as like an illusion, like a conjuration, not grasping it as definitely real, weariness comes of itself. So whether the mind of weariness is true or false is seen not by how heavily one wearies, but by what the thing wearied of is taken to be.

Take 「共清淨因緣故，則佛土清淨」 tr. "because of shared causes and conditions of purity, the Buddha-land then becomes pure" and change the measure by which you apply yourself. If practice reckons only one's own personal purity, it will never reckon its way to a land. What this sentence reminds one of is: the surroundings one lives in are shared deeds, so when applying oneself one must carry along the side 「亦教他人令行」 tr. "also teaches others and makes them practise"—not waiting until one is pure oneself before going to teach others; practising oneself and teaching others are from the first one matter.

Take 「持是福德與一切眾生共之」 tr. "he shares this merit with all beings" and handle what comes after each wholesome deed. Having done a wholesome deed, share it at once, dedicate it at once; do not let it stop under one's own name. What stops under one's name becomes the retribution of merit; what is shared and dedicated becomes a land. This need not wait for great good; it can be done with the small goods of daily use.

Take 「天上、人中五欲是福德果報」 tr. "the five desires of the heavens and of the human world are the retribution of merit" and regard your own favourable circumstances. In favourable circumstances there is no need to reproach oneself, in adverse ones no need to be proud; what must be seen is whether, within favourable circumstances, there is the real effect of 「所欲隨意，則不行十不善」 tr. "whatever he desires is at his will, and he does not practise the ten unwholesome deeds". If favourable circumstances on the contrary increase craving and seeking, then it is not the retribution of merit this passage speaks of; it is a new want.

Take 「捨苦樂，用智慧，處中道」 tr. "relinquish suffering and pleasure, use wisdom, abide in the middle way" and correct the one-sidedness of your efforts. Austerities increasing anger, recollecting desire giving rise to vexation—both sicknesses have symptoms that can be checked: the former is easily angered, the latter has many thoughts. As soon as one of them is noticed arising, one knows where the one-sidedness lies; what is used is the illumination of wisdom, not doubled forcing.

Take 「佛為白衣故說，此比丘持著出家法中說」 tr. "the Buddha said it for the sake of the white-robed; this bhikṣu took it into the dharma of those gone forth and said it there" and examine your own habit of citing the sūtras. Whenever one reads a sūtra phrase that suits one's own mind and the heart relaxes, first ask one question: to whom did the Buddha say this? Am I that person? This one question can cut off the greater part of self-deception.

Take 「不深種善根、不順善師」 tr. "not planting roots of goodness deeply, not following a good teacher" together with 「若見邪見，順其意故」 tr. "if they see a wrong view, because it accords with their minds" and observe the one-sidedness of your own taking and rejecting. Is a teaching believed because it is right, or because it accords with me? Is a teaching rejected because it is wrong, or because it goes against me? Asked once, these two questions show the bottom; there is no need to probe the doctrine deeply.

Take 「不言今得」 tr. "it is not said that one obtains it now" and settle your expectations of the results of practice. Whatever one cultivates, its fruit is mostly 「畢至」 tr. "surely reaching" and not 「今得」 tr. "obtaining now"; mistake surely reaching for obtaining at once, and when no effect is seen a mind of retreat will surely arise. Knowing it to be surely reaching, the absence of effect for a time is not enough to shake one.

Take 「常見佛、常聞法、深種善根、多集佛法故，疾得作佛」 tr. "constantly seeing the Buddha, constantly hearing the Dharma, deeply planting roots of goodness, and gathering many of the dharmas of the Buddha, therefore they quickly become buddhas" and arrange your daily use. Whether one is assured is one matter, slow or quick is another; what can be changed is slow or quick, and the way of changing it the sūtra text has already listed in four items—seeing, hearing, planting, gathering. All four are matters that can be increased or decreased every day, not a remote state.

Take 「根本真佛無有分別大小之異」 tr. "the root true Buddha has no distinction of great and small to be discriminated" and regard the states seen in practice. States are superior or inferior because of the capacity of the one who sees; if one thinks oneself high because what one sees is surpassing, or thinks oneself retreating because what one sees is inferior, both are making high and low among the conjured buddhas. What should be looked at is the root, not the shadow presently before one.

Further Resonances

The line by which the Last Part carries on from the First Part is the splitting of the four Chinese characters 「淨佛國土」 tr. "purifying buddha-lands" from a general headrope into the two sections of cause and fruit. At the end of the First Part, Subhūti asks 「云何菩薩摩訶薩淨佛國土」 tr. "how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva purify buddha-lands", and the Buddha answers with, as the general headrope, himself removing the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind and also purifying the coarse deeds of body, speech, and mind of others, assigning killing and so on up to wrong views, and stinginess and so on up to delusion, to the coarseness of body, speech, and mind. The Last Part then, beyond these two layers, sets up separately a third layer—the coarseness of grasping at marks; with the third layer set up, the cause of the pure land no longer stops at removing evil, but lies further in not grasping. With the cause established, there are the six rounds of offering and six rounds of making vows as its practice, and the vow of the four dhyānas and the thirty-seven limbs as the practice of its direct retribution; when the vows are fulfilled the fruit appears, and the marks of the fruit are the land having no name of the three evil destinies, the jewelled trees bringing out the sound of the Dharma, being assured of becoming a Buddha on hearing the Buddha's name, and no one giving rise to doubt when the Dharma is taught. Between these two sections of cause and fruit the treatise-author inserts three great discussions—the discussion of grasping at marks and wearying of the wholesome, the discussion of the five desires and the robes of cast-off rags and begging for food, the discussion of hearing the name and teaching the Dharma with bitter effort; what the three discussions protect is one thing each: the first protects ‘without grasping at marks one can still cultivate’, the second protects ‘receiving the five desires one is still undefiled’, the third protects ‘hearing the name one is assured, yet does not obtain at once’. Seeing the First Part and the Last Part together, the four Chinese characters of the chapter's name are filled out: purifying buddha-lands is not the adorning of one realm; it is the overall name for purifying oneself, purifying others, not grasping, and accomplishing together.

The continued title at the head of the fascicle of this unit is handed down differently in the various editions; they are recorded side by side below without forcing a judgement. The base text reads 「大智度論釋淨佛國土品第八十二之餘」 tr. "The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's explanation of the chapter Purifying the Buddha-land, the eighty-second, the remainder"; the Palace edition lacks the two Chinese characters 「佛國」 tr. "Buddha-land" in the title, that is, it makes the short name ‘Pure Land chapter’, going the same way as the line of short names of the Song, Palace, and Ishiyama texts seen at the head of the chapter. For the two Chinese characters 「之餘」 tr. "the remainder", the Song edition reads 「一下」 tr. "one, lower", the Yuan and Palace editions read 「二下」 tr. "two, lower", the Ming edition reads 「二之下」 tr. "two, the lower part", and the base text alone reads 「二之餘」 tr. "two, the remainder"—four texts, three forms, all differing in the marking by fascicle order and by the upper and lower parts of the chapter, not a divergence of doctrine. The Shōgozō manuscript uses its own chapter numbering and reads 「大智度經論卷第九十三釋八十一品下訖第八十二品上」 tr. "Fascicle Ninety-three of the Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise: explaining the lower part of the eighty-first chapter, ending with the upper part of the eighty-second chapter", its boundaries of fascicle and chapter differing from the base text. The Ishiyama text at this place further 「不分卷及品」 tr. "does not divide fascicles or chapters", and so it also lacks the following marker 「【經】」 tr. "[Sūtra]". Further, the character 「取」 tr. "grasps" at the beginning of the sūtra text is absent in all five texts—Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Ishiyama; the expression 「國土」 tr. "lands" reads 「界土」 tr. "world-lands" in the four texts Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace, and 「世界」 tr. "worlds" in the Ishiyama text. All the above are recorded as they are; the choice among them belongs to the translator.

Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, explaining this chapter, sets out its name and meaning at the beginning of the chapter, saying: 「此下後文明淨佛土，故云淨土。」 tr. "From here on, the later text makes clear the purifying of buddha-lands; therefore it is called the pure land." When he reaches the sūtra text corresponding to this unit, Jizang sets up his own divisions, dividing the passage on purifying buddha-lands into the two gates of cause and fruit: 「白佛：云何淨土？第二、明淨佛土。文為二：初、明淨土因；二、明淨土果。因中有二：初、明無惡因；二、明有善因。」 tr. "‘He said to the Buddha: How is the land purified?’ Second, making clear the purifying of buddha-lands. The text is in two: first, making clear the cause of the pure land; second, making clear the fruit of the pure land. Within the cause there are two: first, making clear the cause that is without evil; second, making clear the cause that has the wholesome." Within the gate of the wholesome cause, he further divides general and specific, saying: 「自布施下，二、明善業，為二：初、總約六度明行善；次、別發願。」 tr. "From ‘himself gives’ onward: second, making clear wholesome deeds, in two: first, in general, by way of the six perfections, making clear the practice of the wholesome; next, specifically, the making of vows."—which corresponds exactly to the division made by the treatise-author's sentence 「上總相說，下別相說」 tr. "above, said by way of the general mark; below, said by way of the specific marks". On the objection about the five desires, Jizang's explanation shares the main meaning of the treatise-author's, in simpler words: 「答：有人貧窮故作十惡，今得五欲無所乏，不作十惡但有受慢之罪，而菩薩復為除之也」 tr. "Answer: some people commit the ten evils because of poverty; now, obtaining the five desires and lacking nothing, they do not commit the ten evils, but have only the sin of receiving and pride, and the bodhisattva further removes this for them"; and he also says 「淨土中受五欲，不過起貪著，不妨妨修道」 tr. "receiving the five desires within the pure land goes no further than giving rise to craving and clinging; it does not hinder—hinder the cultivation of the path"; on the affair of the bhikṣu in the Vinaya, he too judges the fault of moving it: 「答：佛言受欲不障道，為白衣說也。此比丘不解佛意，安置出家法中，故應呵也。」 tr. "Answer: the Buddha's saying that receiving desire does not obstruct the path was said for the white-robed. This bhikṣu did not understand the Buddha's meaning and placed it within the dharma of those gone forth; therefore he should be rebuked." On the objection about robes of cast-off rags and begging for food, Jizang gives another explanation, matching it with the four noble lineages: 「答：是惡眾生於四事貪著，為是人故說四聖種也。」 tr. "Answer: these evil beings crave and cling to the four requisites; for the sake of such people the four noble lineages were taught."—the treatise-author speaks in terms of 「宿罪因緣生在惡世」 tr. "through the causes and conditions of sins of former lives they were born in an evil age", Jizang speaks in terms of ‘the four noble lineages’; the two stand together without contradicting each other.

On the section on the fruit, Jizang's division is: 「是國土中無三惡名下，第二、明淨土果。」 tr. "From ‘within this land there is no name of the three evils’ onward: second, making clear the fruit of the pure land." His explanation of the clause on there being no three poisons and wrong views also records two explanations without judging: 「今是初無毒邪見者，一解云：有三毒但未發耳。二解云：此中皆是法性身菩薩，佛教化此人勝教餘人也」 tr. "Now, this first item, there being no poisons and wrong views: one explanation says: there are the three poisons, only they have not yet broken out. A second explanation says: here all are bodhisattvas of the Dharma-nature body, and the Buddha's teaching and transforming these people surpasses teaching other people"—in exactly the same order as the two 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" the treatise-author records, from which it can be seen that these two explanations have been handed down from of old. On the absence of the name of the two vehicles, Jizang too poses the same objection and answers: 「問：故淨土無二乘名。答：佛於五濁世故有二乘也」 tr. "Question: hence the pure land has no name of the two vehicles. Answer: it is because the Buddha is in an age of the five turbidities that there are the two vehicles"; as to why Amitābha's land has the three vehicles, his answer cites the Lotus and agrees with the treatise-author's explanation by ‘the original vow’: 「問：阿彌淨土何故二乘耶？答：法華云彼佛出時雖非惡世，以本願故說三乘法，此亦是未極淨土故有三世。」 tr. "Question: why does Amitābha's pure land have the two vehicles? Answer: the Lotus says that when that Buddha appeared, though it was not an evil age, because of his original vow he taught the dharma of the three vehicles; this too is a pure land not yet ultimate, and therefore there are the three times." On the names of impermanence, suffering, and emptiness, his explanation agrees in meaning with the treatise-author's ‘without disease there is no need of medicine’: 「無有無苦空名者，此中無有常病故，不須此二義也。」 tr. "As for ‘there are none of the names of non-, suffering, and emptiness’: here there is no sickness of permanence, and therefore these two meanings are not needed." On the clause on there being no fruits, he speaks separately of teaching and fruit: 「無諸果者，先明無教，今明無果修教之人也。」 tr. "As for ‘no fruits’: before, it made clear that there is no teaching; now it makes clear that there are none of the people of the fruits who cultivate the teaching." On the jewelled trees bringing out sound, Jizang's explanation continues the treatise-author's 「樹木無心而有音聲」 tr. "trees have no mind and yet have sound": 「風吹七寶樹下，第二、明有善十果。欲使眾生易聞，故樹枝於法音。又云奇特事樹木，能說人皆信，以木無欺誑以故也。」 tr. "From ‘the wind blows on the trees of the seven jewels’ onward: second, making clear the presence of the wholesome, the ten fruits. Wishing to make beings hear easily, therefore the branches of the trees give the sound of the Dharma. It also says: a wondrous matter—trees can speak, and people all believe, because wood has no deceit."

Huiying's Commentary lacks an explanation of this chapter—its extant text stops, incomplete, in the middle of the chapter it explains, "The Great Skilful Means", Chapter 69, far earlier than fascicles 92 and 93 to which this chapter corresponds, and so there is no commentary on this chapter to cite. Although the name 「淨土品」 tr. "Pure Land chapter" also appears in his work, what it refers to is the fifty-seventh chapter he explains—the same name as this chapter but a different chapter, and the two must not be drawn together. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises also has nothing fastened to this chapter. All of these are marked as lacking according to the facts, and are not filled with text from elsewhere.