法華玄論 3.82

3.82

Answer: The Dàzhìdù lùn, explaining the chapter "Rebirth" in the Pañcaviṃśati, says: "Bodhisattvas go from one buddha-land to another buddha-land." Going to another buddha-land refers to pure lands beyond the three realms; how can you say it does not explain affairs beyond the realms? Furthermore, it explains that bodhisattvas abandon the fleshly body and receive a body born of the dharmatā, and the two vehicles do likewise; does this not explain affairs beyond the realms? Moreover, as for the Pañcaviṃśati and the Vimalakīrti not explaining affairs beyond the realms: this was because they were not yet able to open the provisional. If they had clearly spoken of affairs beyond the realms, delineating the place of rebirth for arhats would have amounted to opening the provisional; at that time their spiritual capacities and conditions were not yet capable of this, so it was not spoken. Merely directly explaining that bodhisattvas are reborn in pure lands beyond the three realms allowed bodhisattvas of sharp faculties to comprehend it from afar, while those of the two vehicles, having dull faculties, did not know that they would take further birth in bodies beyond the realms. Moreover, to object: if you say that because the Vimalakīrti and the Pañcaviṃśati do not explain the two vehicles attaining buddhahood, they also do not reveal the real, the Avataṃsaka states: "The roots of the great king of medicinal herbs do not grow in two places: namely, deep water and a pit of fire." Since it states that the two vehicles do not generate the bodhicitta, then according to this, the Avataṃsaka would also not have revealed the real. Furthermore, the chapter "Entering the Dharmadhātu" of the Avataṃsaka explains that the two vehicles have not entered the dharmadhātu, whereas the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka has already explained entering the one vehicle; yet the one vehicle and the dharmadhātu are merely different names. How could one say that because the Avataṃsaka does not explain the two vehicles attaining buddhahood, its revelation of the real is also inadequate?