觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 3.2

Second, determining the substance. The preceding text explained that the one who speaks and what is spoken, that which contemplates and that which is contemplated, are all expressive names; now we determine the substance expressed by these names, wishing to enable students to catch the fish through the trap and to discover the substance by following the name. The intention in following the name lies in forgetting the name; in discovering the substance, one knows there is no separate substance. This is the wondrous intention of our master in explaining the name and determining the substance. Furthermore, one should understand that explaining the name is the general, because it gathers the three dharmas; the [other] three sections are the particular, because they distinguish the three dharmas. Therefore, in explaining both the general and particular names, every aspect implicitly possesses the three of teaching, practice, and principle. Since the Buddha who speaks is endowed with the three bodies, and the contemplative objects that are spoken each possess the three, it is said that explaining the name gathers the three dharmas, the section on substance is specifically in the dharmakāya, the [sections on] main doctrine and function specifically correspond to the other two, and the single section on the characteristics of the teaching distinguishes the general and the particular. Although the present determination of substance is within a single dharma, the one necessarily contains the three; hence the three meanings of 'substance as propriety' (tǐ lǐ), 'substance as bottom' (tǐ dǐ), and 'substance as thorough penetration' (tǐ dá) are clarified. Although three meanings are discussed, they are merely the three within the dharmakāya, and have not yet clarified the three within each of the other two. Thus the Xuan of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Proclaiming the secret treasury in general serves as its name. The dharmakāya subsumes all dharmas without being vertical or horizontal, serving as its substance; prajñā subsumes all dharmas like the three eyes on a face, serving as its main doctrine; liberation subsumes all dharmas like the three dots of the letter "i", serving as its function. Expounding in this manner is its teaching; not only is the meaning of the sūtra's substance established, but the other meanings are also revealed.' (End of text.) Now to bring out its meaning: since emptiness and the conventional are both the middle, the three belong to substance; since the conventional and the middle are both empty, the three belong to the main doctrine; since the middle and the empty are both conventional, the three belong to function. Function is liberation, specifically illustrated by the three dots, because the dots are letters; the main doctrine corresponds to prajñā, specifically illustrated by the three eyes, because the eyes can illuminate; the three of the dharmakāya specifically eliminate the vertical and horizontal, revealing the transcendence of conceptual thought. Therefore we know that explaining the name gathers nine dharmas, while determining the substance specifically resides in the three within the dharmakāya. Yet the nine are not too many, nor are the three too few; only this constitutes the meaning of general and particular in the Perfect Teaching. This section naturally divides into two: first, raising the topic and briefly indicating it. The name is secondary and is the guest; the substance is primary and is the host. The name is a provisional designation; the substance is the real entity. Beneath every name, there is its entity. Second, from 'The Commentary' downward, directly explaining the host-entity, in four parts: first, fixing the substance based on two texts. All dharmas, right where they are, are unarising and unperishing, neither existent nor empty, devoid of subject and object, free from the marks of verbal expression, free from the marks of names, and free from the marks of mental conditioning. Being free from these marks is called the real mark—the mark of marklessness. Who does not possess it? What dharma is not so? If we speak of verifying and knowing it, only the Buddhas can do so. Hence the Lotus Sūtra says: 'Only a Buddha and a Buddha can exhaustively fathom the real mark of all dharmas.' Those who receive the perfect teaching use Buddha-wisdom to illuminate objects from the very first thought of aspiration, and therefore they can believe and understand the real mark of all dharmas. Having understood the real mark, they also understand the real nature, real substance, real power, real activity, real cause, real condition, real fruit, real retribution, and real ultimate equality from beginning to end of all dharmas. Since the ten dharmas are real, there are real sentient beings and real Buddhas, real environmental reward and real primary reward; not a single color or a single scent fails to be the middle way, and all dharmas are the Buddha-dharma. Since all are real, and outside the real there is nothing left, how can one say that the rest are all works of Māra? One should know that this explanation uses principle to eliminate passions. If being free from the marks of mental conditioning, subject, and object is called the real mark, then the slightest presence of marks is a work of Māra; therefore, from the Separate Teaching down to the dharmas of the six paths, all have the marks of subject, object, and mental conditioning, and since Māra can preach them, they are all called works of Māra. Hence we know that all are Māra and all are Buddha: when distinguished through passions, all are heterodox; when free from passion-driven discrimination, all are orthodox. Now, eliminating passions and grasping principle to serve as the sūtra's substance, one should know that the entire substance of the real mark is brightly illuminating, called the true mind and also called original awakening. Because the substance of awakening is all-pervading, all dharmas are real. If we point to its essential, it is not apart from the present discriminatory thought: this thought is itself original awakening, and awakening is itself the sūtra's substance, with no other sūtra substance serving as what is expressed. When one contemplates environment and self with this awakening mind, subject and object are instantly severed, and duality is forgotten; the main doctrine of wondrous contemplation is established from this. If it were not so, why would one need to obtain the substance before establishing the sūtra's main doctrine? As for the 'seal of the real mark,' a seal is a tally-mark; it also means faith, and also carries the meaning of definitive determination. That is, by means of what is expressed, one definitively determines the Great or Small [Vehicles] as well as the heterodox or orthodox; only when the principle tallies with the Buddha's intent can it be faithfully followed. In the three seals of the Small Vehicle, the two seals of impermanence and non-self seal saṃsāra, while the single seal of quiescent cessation seals nirvāṇa. In the Small Vehicle, nirvāṇa and saṃsāra are different, so each is sealed separately. When what is expressed tallies with these, it can be faithfully accepted as a Small Vehicle sūtra, not the preaching of Māras or non-Buddhists. The single seal of the Great Vehicle is the one real mark: the two kinds of saṃsāra and the nirvāṇa of the three virtues are one in substance, ultimately real. When the meaning tallies with this, it can be faithfully accepted as a Great Vehicle sūtra, neither Small [Vehicle] nor non-Buddhist. Now, relying on this sūtra, the perfect and real is considered great. If we follow that treatise in contrasting the Tripiṭaka [Teaching] with the Mahāyāna, the Shared and Separate Teachings are also called the single seal. Now we do not take those two; only the perfect real mark is called the single seal. Thus the person who preaches, the environment and self contemplated, the four kinds of pure and defiled, the five heinous sins, and so forth are non-dual in their nature. We take this single seal as the correct substance of the sūtra. Second, from 'immeasurable' downward, [it shows that] this is where the four sections converge. 'Immeasurable merits and virtues' and so forth is where the function of the sūtra converges. The power and function of the sūtra are also called merit and virtue: power has the merit of extinguishing evil, and function has the virtue of generating good. It extinguishes all evils and generates all goods; therefore, merits and virtues receive the name 'immeasurable.' Such merits and virtues together adorn the real substance, just as an emperor regulates disorder and nourishes the people. Using these merits and virtues to adorn the sacred person, the various manifold practices are the main doctrine of the sūtra. Arising into practice from principle, full principle becomes cultivated practice, just as water becomes waves, and waves return to water. The main doctrine must converge with the substance; hence it says 'converge.' Generally speaking, it refers to the myriad practices; specifically speaking, it refers to the sixteen contemplations; hence it is called 'manifold practices.' 'Words, questions, and answers' are the name of the sūtra; the expressive name resides in words. Since the meaning of the words is profound and esoteric, it further requires questions, answers, and various explications to establish the sūtra's name and manifest the real substance. Question: The title is the name; how can it ever be questions and answers? Answer: The name can express the substance, and the sentences throughout the entire text are all expressive names. Just as the ten subtleties of the root and traces in the Lotus Sūtra constitute its name, but because the title is the general, the name is explained in terms of the title; the other four meanings pervade from beginning to end, and hence they are the name of the entire sūtra. 'Questions, answers, and explications' and so on proceed from the back to the front to show the dharmas that converge. The teaching is not mentioned separately, as it is included within the name.

Self-received, it is called 'title'; transforming others, it is 'teaching'. Though self and other differ, both are that which expresses; hence we know the four chapters together return to the single substance. Third, from 'As all [stars]' onward, two analogies are adduced to reveal its supreme status. Substance is to the four chapters as the Northern Star to which the multitude of stars circle in reverence; it is also like the Eastern Sea, to which myriad waters flow in homage. Because the four chapters do not leave the substance for an instant, none of all phenomena can be established without noumenon. Since this is so for the substance of the sūtra, how could it not be distinguished? Fourth, from 'Therefore by' onward, a single seal concludes and indicates it. Third, from 'Secular scholars' onward, the virtues of the substance are fully elucidated. In contrast to explaining the title, the substance lies in only one virtue: namely, the dharmakāya. For in explaining the title, the three dharmas are shown collectively; though those of sharp faculties understand, the dull have not yet realized it. Why is this? Because the text showing them collectively carries the crux and the application; the substance is mingled among them, emotional conceptions cannot be forgotten, and the fundamental nature is difficult to reveal. Therefore, following the collective presentation, the spiritual source is shown separately, eternally distinct from the four Māras, with all dharmas being real. In the perfect [Sanskrit letter] I, it corresponds to the upper dot: thought-transcending, discussion-transcending, neither application nor crux. Yet its nature is harmonious, unity is not fixed as merely one; like the dot of I, a dot does not exist in isolation. Hence, dharmakāya alone is not dharmakāya—dharmakāya must possess prajñā and liberation; thus, in separately revealing the substance, three meanings are discussed. Though three virtues are manifested, the intent lies in the dharmakāya; because emptiness and provisionality are both the middle, elucidating the three is therefore called the 'virtue of the substance'. Within this there are three parts: first, clarifying the dharmakāya in terms of the meaning of propriety (lǐ/tǐ). Since secular writings explain propriety by means of substance (tǐ), we now explain substance by means of propriety. Propriety distinguishes high and low, its intention being to exalt ruler and father. The previous clarification of Māra affairs already eliminated the biased and deviant; now, the minister and son eliminate only the crux and application, so the substance of the ruler and father is precisely the dharmakāya. It is that which all Buddhas take as their teacher and the confluence of myriad dharmas; its substance is not cultivated realization, its noumenon transcends speech and thought. Desiring to cause one to fix one's mind upon it, it is forcibly praised as the utmost nobility. This is original awakening, neither quiescent nor illuminating; it is also dharma-nature, neither deep nor wide. The truth of the supreme meaning is termed the inherent virtue of the dharmakāya. Tracing the expressing name, one desires to recognize this substance; the substance being revealed, practice is aroused, causing the practitioner of contemplation to substantiate those environments and selves with this virtue of the substance, each and every one becoming noble to the utmost, thereby accomplishing the wondrous doctrine. Second, from 'Furthermore' onward, prajñā is clarified in terms of the meaning of 'bottom' (dǐ). Because the virtue of emptiness is precisely the middle, the virtue of prajñā is the bottom of all dharmas, also called the fundamental source, the deep treasury, and the limit of reality. If one attains the middle substance, one can fathom it to the bottom. The treatise says 'prajñāpāramitā', which is precisely real-mark prajñā. By means of contemplative-illumination prajñā, the Buddha realizes this wisdom-substance within all phenomena; hence it says 'fathoms the bottom'. Yet the dharma-nature is profoundly deep and has no bottom limit; the statement that it fathoms the bottom is because the Buddha realizes it in accordance with its nature by means of bottomless wisdom, which is figuratively called fathoming the bottom. People of the seven expedients possess wisdom with a bottom, and therefore cannot reach the source and bottom of all dharmas. If a person of the Perfect Teaching, from the stage of identity in name, with a mind of faith and understanding, they fathom the bottom of prajñāpāramitā; in the five grades of meditative practice, they fathom the bottom; in the ten faiths of resemblance, they fathom the bottom; in the forty-one ranks of partial realization, they fathom the bottom; only Buddha with Buddha ultimately fathoms the bottom. Distinguishing the substance of the sūtra by this meaning of 'bottom' manifests the profound emptiness of the supreme meaning of dharma-nature, which is termed the virtue of prajñā. Tracing the name to recognize the substance, the substance being revealed, practice is aroused, causing the practitioner of contemplation to use this virtue of the substance to fathom those environments and selves to the very bottom, each and every one, thereby accomplishing the wondrous doctrine. Third, from 'Furthermore' onward, the virtue of liberation is clarified in terms of the meaning of 'penetration' (dá). Because provisionality is precisely the middle, the virtue of liberation is the sovereign substance of all dharmas, and furthermore possesses all real names and meanings. If one recognizes this substance, one then penetrates sovereignly through all dharmas, and furthermore, regarding all distinct names in the mundane and supramundane worlds, understands the many within the one and understands the one within the many. The treatise says 'prajñā', which is also real-mark prajñā. Prajñā and liberation have different names but the same meaning, hence they are cited interchangeably. Earlier, in clarifying the meaning of bottom, contemplative-illumination prajñā was used to fathom the bottom of the real mark; now, in clarifying the meaning of penetration, written-word prajñā is used to speak of the various names of real-mark prajñā. Because people of the seven expedients are deluded about this substance, they are blocked and hindered regarding diverse names. Practitioners of the Perfect Teaching achieve penetration into the substance in name, penetration into the substance in practice, penetration into the substance in resemblance, and penetration into the substance in partial reality. The treatise now cites the Buddha's ultimate penetration into the substance; using the meaning of penetration to distinguish the substance manifests the boundless meaning of the Tathāgatagarbha of dharma-nature, which is termed the virtue of liberation of true nature. This causes the practitioner of contemplation, by means of this virtue of the substance, to penetrate those environments and selves without any obstruction, each and every one, thereby accomplishing the wondrous doctrine. Third, elucidating the crux (zōng). 'Crux' means the essential purport. The crux of this sūtra lies in practicing the wondrous mind-contemplation to resonate with the Pure Land. Mind-contemplation is precisely the threefold contemplation in a single mind, whose features have already been detailed in explaining the title. The features of resonating with the land are thoroughly discussed in this text. The wondrous doctrine of the present sūtra lies in this cause and effect. This is provisionally divided into two: first, an outline list. Second, from 'Some say' onward, explaining in sequence, which has two parts: first, distinguishing and indicating crux and substance. Because people are often confused about the characteristics of identity and difference between crux and substance, they must be distinguished and indicated. The text has two parts: first, distinguishing, which has two parts: first, dismissing that crux and substance are identical, which has two parts: first, citing the claim and briefly refuting it. Crux is cause and effect, which pertains to phenomena; substance is the one nature, which pertains to noumenon. Though they do not abandon each other, the two meanings must be distinguished. Insisting that they are identical truly contradicts the meaning; hence it says 'not accepted'. Second, from 'Why is this' onward, extensive refutation based on meaning, which has three parts: first, refuting according to meaning. Crux is the trend and destination: tending toward fruit, tending toward noumenon. Tending toward fruit necessarily requires a cause; if tending toward noumenon, one must cultivate contemplation. Contemplation has brightness and obscurity, noumenon has realization or lack thereof; both constitute cause and effect, hence it says 'since the crux is twofold'. Substance is fundamentally noumenon; though contemplation tends toward noumenon, noumenon is neither bright nor obscure. Cause and effect rely on noumenon, but noumenon is not cause and effect. Like waves relying on water: waves have a thousand differences, but water is always one. Hence it says 'the substance is non-dual'. If one does not speak of all dharmas sharing the same noumenal nature, it cannot be called the substance of a Mahāyāna sūtra; hence it says 'the twofold is not the substance'. If one does not discuss the two dharmas of cultivation and realization, cause and effect, it is not the crux and destination realized by the Buddha's sūtra. Second, from 'Like a beam' onward, establishing an analogy to refute it. Although the open space of a house and its beams and pillars are not separate, if one claims they are identical, there would be no distinction between empty and solid. Third, from 'Crux and substance' onward, citing the error to conclude. Second, dismissing that crux and substance are different, which has two parts: first, citing the claim to refute it. Although we refute their identity, one must not grasp at their being different. If they are fixed as different, then the two things are isolated and alienated. If the crux differs from the substance, then cultivation is not aroused entirely from nature, and the practice of contemplation would be conditioned, belonging to the eight inversions.

Since it does not accord with noumenon, it is truly not the Perfect doctrine; hence it is said: “perverse and inverted, lacking a seal.” If the essence were different from the doctrine, then noumenon would not be identical with phenomena, and an essence outside of phenomena would not be all-pervading. If the essence of the Dharma-nature were different from cause and effect, then all phenomena would become separate and external. Second, from “Doctrine and essence” onward, he raises the error to conclude. Second, from “Now to speak” onward, he reveals it. Now, relying on the *Samantabhadra Contemplation Sūtra*, we examine its doctrine and essence as being neither definitively identical nor different. Thus that sūtra states: “The cause of the Great Vehicle is the true mark of all phenomena. The fruit of the Great Vehicle is the true mark of all phenomena.” Cause and effect of the true mark are not different yet different, not inverted and possessing the seal—this is the wondrous doctrine; the true mark of cause and effect is not one yet one, not a noumenon outside of phenomena—this is the wondrous essence. How could it be like others who establish a definitive identity or definitive difference? Others have not heard this; what can be done about their one-sided teachings? When lecturing on this commentary, one should know doctrine and essence. Merely contemplating phenomenal objects while the threefold contemplation is never applied is precisely identical to the next master’s perverse inversion without a seal, which is extremely lamentable! Second, from “Now this” onward, he clarifies the doctrine with respect to the essence, in three parts: first, he directly shows it relying on the sūtra. The essential point of the Great Vehicle’s Dharma lies in the mind. That the mind possesses [all things] is easy to know; that form possesses [all things] is difficult to comprehend. Therefore *Stopping and Contemplation* states: “Because the cause is common, it is easy to recognize; because the fruit is separated, it is difficult to know.” Hence, whether contemplating oneself or contemplating others, one always cultivates the mind-contemplation. Now, in contemplating the Pure Land, one must seek it in the mind, because the mind can possess it and the mind can create it. When the mind is defiled, the land is defiled; when the mind is pure, the land is pure. This is still a general indication, not yet the definitive exposition. The definitive exposition consists in頓 cultivating the threefold contemplation in a single mind. This contemplation contemplates the environment and self of Anyang as ultimately pure, which is called purity of mind-contemplation. This contemplation can purify the four Buddha lands; only such is the doctrine and purport of this sūtra. Second, from “Four kinds” onward, he broadly clarifies them with respect to the lands, in three parts: first, he lists the four lands. Second, from “Each has” onward, he establishes the pure and defiled. If one explains the meaning merely following the words, teaching and contemplation will both sink; if one uses the doctrine to interpret the text, understanding and practice can arise. The preceding text explaining the word “contemplation” clearly indicated the threefold contemplation in a single mind, and the text repeatedly indicated mind-contemplation as the doctrine, culminating in the conclusion on doctrine stating that cultivating the wondrous contemplation of the mind can resonate with the Pure Land. Now, in interpreting this text's purity and defilement of the four lands, one must base oneself on this contemplation as the cause of the four purities. If one follows various passages, pursuing their four lands and separately discussing the cause for each land, how could one connect the preceding and subsequent texts, and how could one cause listeners to realize the anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti? First, regarding “where the five turbidities are light, it is the purity of [the land of] common residence”: this purity is very broad, and one must know the special meaning. For instance, those with precepts and goodness, or ordinary beings of the four teachings, are all able to lighten the five turbidities and resonate with the purity of common residence. Yet when the perfect contemplation lightens the turbidities to resonate with the purity of common residence, its environment and self are the purest. As this sūtra explains, from the ground contemplation onward, each and every feature, compared to other sūtras’ cultivating various good deeds to resonate with the land of Anyang, is vastly different. Regarding the features of “purity and defilement of [the land of] remainder, through skillfulness or clumsiness in embodying or analyzing”: the purity features of the beings of this land are also broad. The analytic contemplation resonates with defilement in the Tripiṭaka Teaching; the embodied contemplation resonating with purity is not exclusive to the Shared Teaching. The three teachings of the Mahāyāna, contrasted with the Tripiṭaka Teaching’s analysis, all explain embodying phenomena: the Shared Teaching embodies only emptiness, the Separate Teaching embodies successively, and the Perfect Teaching embodies non-successively. When these three kinds of persons are born there, they all resonate with pure marks. The person of the Perfect Teaching is the purest, as in the *Commentary on the Avalokiteśvara [Sūtra]*: from the Separate [Teaching's] Dedications cultivating the Perfect, and from the Perfect [Teaching's] seventh stage of faith onward, they see the environment and self there as identical to the land of real reward, whereas the Abodes, Practices, and the Shared Teaching see inferior marks. The wondrous essence of this sūtra must differ from these three persons; therefore, the pure marks clarified in common residence and remainder are general in text but specific in intention. One must use the preceding and subsequent texts of sudden contemplation and the phrases of wondrous doctrine to interpret this general text and bring it to its definitive focus. Regarding “gradual and sudden entry into the purity and defilement of [the land of] real reward”: in terms of actual realization, this land is inhabited solely by sages of the Perfect Teaching. When a person of the Separate Teaching at the first bhūmi realizes the same as the Perfect Teaching, resonating with the reward in accordance with reality, what superiority or inferiority could there be? Now, in terms of the pedagogical path, the ten stages are not interpenetrating, causing the land resonated with to differ from that of the person of the Perfect Teaching; hence purity and defilement are distinguished in terms of gradual and sudden. Regarding “partial realization and ultimate purity and defilement of [the land of] quiescent light”: if one considers the person of the Separate Teaching as realizing reality identically with the Perfect Teaching, then discussing quiescent light distinguishes purity and defilement solely with respect to the true cause contrasted with the ultimate fruit of the Perfect Teaching. Now, discussing the pedagogical path’s exposition of the ultimate fruit, it severs only twelve grades of ignorance, so quiescent light is still defiled; the Perfect Teaching knows that one must sever forty-two grades, which is called ultimate purity. Furthermore, one must realize that from beginning to end, the person of the Perfect Teaching can use the principle of the upper grade of constantly quiescent light as the essence of contemplation. In discussing the ultimate here, the intention is to fulfill the practitioner's wondrous contemplation of the mind. Third, from “Sa-” onward, he explains the names and marks. He merely explains the names of the lands, briefly pointing to purity and defilement. If one strictly discusses the causes capable of resonating with the four purities, it is exclusively the single perfect contemplation, as stated above. The text has four parts: first, he explains common residence. “Common residence” is with respect to persons; “purity and defilement” is with respect to the lands; that is to say, ordinary persons and sages commonly reside in the defiled land. The pure land also has ordinary persons and sages commonly residing: the ordinary persons in both places are real, while the sages include both provisional and real—those newly realized are real, while those who respond and come are provisional. Regarding “next to nirvāṇa”: *nidu* [nihuan] and *nirvāṇa* are merely new and old Sanskrit transcriptions. Those born in Anyang have their afflictions subdued and are close to nirvāṇa, hence it is called “next.” Regarding “all in the group of correct determination”: this is judged by the three groups. Ordinary beings bound to the ground in this land belong to the group of wrong determination; those who have aroused the aspiration and practice but have not reached non-retrogression belong to the group of indeterminate determination; those who have attained non-retrogression belong to the group of correct determination. If born in Anyang, regardless of high or low, even those who committed the five grave offenses who at the point of death attain rebirth through ten recitations also attain non-retrogression; hence it says “all in the group of correct determination.” The *Treatise on the Arousing of Faith* explains that those with the initial mind born there abide in correct determination. Therefore the *Shorter Amitāyus Sūtra* states: “All who are born there attain avaivartika.” Among the purities of common residence, Sukhāvatī corresponds to its highest-grade land. If one cultivates the perfect and wondrous according to the sixteen contemplation gates of this sūtra, even if common delusions still remain, when born in that land, one constantly beholds superior marks, just like what was seen by the capacities present at the assemblies of the *Avataṃsaka* and other Mahāyāna sūtras in this land. Second, he explains remainder, in three parts: first, he explains the name with respect to cultivation and severance. Nine kinds of practitioners are eligible to be born in that land: two of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching], three of the Shared [Teaching], and the Abodes and Practices of the Separate [Teaching], which make two. Since they cultivate emptiness and provisionality, these are all paths of expedients. Although what is cultivated in the Separate [Teaching's] Dedications and the Perfect [Teaching's] Faiths is real, they still reside in the path of resemblance and are judged as belonging to expedients. Not being born into mortal existence [is because] they have eliminated the four abodes; with respect to this cultivation and severance, it receives the name “expedients.” Having severed common [delusions] while the separate remain, it is called “remainder.” Second, from “The commentary states” onward, he explains the marks relying on sūtras and treatises. Although the Lesser Vehicle speaks of entering the Dharma-nature together, it grasps the essence of Dharma-nature as resembling empty space; once causes and fruits are forgotten, there is never any body or land. The Mahāyāna Dharma-nature intrinsically possesses form and mind; once causes and fruits are forgotten, body and land are vast and great.

The Commentary uses the Great [Vehicle] to refute the Hīnayāna notion that there are no lands beyond the realm [of desire, form, and formlessness], specifically stating, 'Going beyond the realms, there are pure lands.' In Hīnayāna the dharma-nature possesses neither form nor mind; hence it specifically states, '[They] receive a body of dharma-nature.' Furthermore, the citation from the Lotus Sūtra regarding 'meeting other Buddhas' refers precisely to the Buddhas of the Land of Expedient Remainder. This concerns those who, after [the Buddha's] parinirvāṇa, do not encounter the four reliances and do not generate true faith, considering themselves to have attained permanent extinction and thus being reborn in the [Land of Expedient] Remainder; when they receive the Buddha's opening of the expedient, they are immediately able to resolve [their doubts].

Third, from 'Within this' onward explains sharp and dull [faculties] and purity and defilement. Sharp and dull faculties in that land are explained solely with reference to the Mahāyāna. If one has already cultivated the middle contemplation in this land, upon being born there one has sharp faculties, and the Buddha then expounds for them the non-gradual teaching. If one has not yet cultivated the middle contemplation in this land, upon being born there one has dull faculties, and the Buddha then expounds for them the gradual teaching. Those of sharp faculties abide above, hence it says 'pointing to the upper.' 'Pointing to the lower' follows this example. What those of sharp faculties perceive is identical to that Real Reward [Land], hence it is called 'pure.' What those of dull faculties perceive has marks inferior to the upper, hence it is called 'defiled.' Using the present sharp and dull [faculties] to test the preceding embodiment and analytical [contemplations]: only the Perfect [Teaching] is called embodiment; the preceding three are all analytical; the contemplation of the [Ten] Directions in the Separate [Teaching] slightly resembles the embodiment of the Perfect [Teaching].

Third, explaining [the Land of] Real Reward has three parts: First, explaining the name based on cause and effect. 'Those who practice the true path' refers to people of the Perfect [Teaching] from the initial [stages] onward, and people of the Separate [Teaching] from the Ten Directions onward, who are able to contemplate the middle in accord with reality regarding all phenomena. When the principle of the middle is now opened, it immediately brings about the wondrous reward. Form and mind are non-dual; a hair-pore and a world system mutually contain each other. It is inhabited purely by dharmakāya bodhisattvas, excluding even the semblance [stage] of the Perfect [Teaching], not to mention the seven expedients. The terminology of inclusion and exclusion is broad, so one should distinguish it well.

Second, from 'The Benevolent Kings' onward explains the marks based on sūtras and treatises. The Benevolent Kings [Sūtra] borrows [terms from] the Separate [Teaching] to designate the ranks of the Perfect [Teaching]: the 'three ranks of worthy sages and ten holy sages' borrows names from the Separate [Teaching]; 'abiding in the fruit of retribution' designates the ranks of the Perfect [Teaching]. Since the three ranks of worthy sages dwell in the fruit of retribution together with the ten holy sages, this proves it is Real Reward. If one does not realize the Middle Way, how could one abide in Real Reward? Hence we know that although the names are Separate, their meaning belongs to the Perfect. Here we take 'fruit of retribution' as evidence of the Land of Real Reward.

Question: Earlier it was explained that in the Real Reward [Land] there are no two vehicles; why then does it suddenly say that Kāśyapa danced? Answer: One must know that the four lands have horizontal and vertical aspects, yet also know that horizontal and vertical are within just a single locus. Just as any given place in the Land of Common Residence is itself Real Reward: if one breaks through ignorance and transforms one's body to enter it, this is the dharmakāya sharing the Buddha's essence and function, the wondrous reward conforming to reality. Even someone with the purification of the six sense faculties cannot take part in it; how could the two vehicles dwell there? This is discussing the Real Reward [Land] vertically within a single locus. If, without having broken through ignorance, one perceives it with this very body, this is because the Buddhas and great bodhisattvas bestow empowerment to enable those capable of seeing it to behold the Land of Real Reward. Because they have the requisite conditions, although they have not broken delusions, they have already cultivated the middle contemplation—just like the diverse assembly and capacities seated at the Avataṃsaka gathering who sympathetically resonated to behold the inconceivable body and land. Now, the citation from the treatise refers to the Vaipulya [period], where, in order to reprove [the śrāvakas], the supremely wondrous five dusts of the Real Reward Land were revealed, causing Kāśyapa and others to suddenly forget their modest desires and rise up dancing and playing. It was meant to make the śrāvakas know the wonder of the Great Dharma, giving rise to aspiration and scorning the lesser path. These are all horizontal discussions of the marks of the Real Reward Land in a single locus. Hence, when the capacities of the eight classes and two vehicles are mature, all behold it.

Now, to illustrate the superior land through an inferior analogy: it is like the ghost realm existing within the human sphere. If someone sheds their retribution and falls into that realm, they become identical with that class and do not share it with other humans. If someone with this very body can perceive that realm, it does not prevent others from also seeing its marks. Falling [into it] is an analogy for vertically entering the Real Reward Land; seeing [it] is an analogy for horizontally discussing the Real Reward Land. Since the Real Reward is like this, discussing Expedients and Quiescent Light as horizontally sharing the same locus is also like this. In the locus of Common Residence, one discusses the horizontal and vertical of three lands; in the locus of Expedients, one discusses the horizontal and vertical of two lands; in the locus of Real Reward, one discusses the horizontal and vertical of one land; arriving at the locus of Quiescent Light, there is neither horizontal nor vertical, nor is there any 'this very locus.'

Question: The treatise states, 'Kāśyapa felt such intense attachment toward the bodhisattvas' supremely wondrous five desires that he could not keep still and rose up dancing.' Yet in the Lotus Sūtra, Kāśyapa recounts that in the past, upon hearing of the bodhisattvas' dharmas and their playful mastery of supernatural powers, not a single thought of fondness or delight arose in his mind. Both instances concern the bodhisattvas' dharmas; why were attachment and aversion suddenly so contradictory? Answer: One should know that both minds are delusions of the Separate [Teaching]. Attachment to the wondrous desires is identical with the desire of identical essence; aversion to saving sentient beings is dust-and-sand [delusion] outside the realms—just like an unworthy son who only loves wealth and rank while neglecting cultivation and study. This is like the Vimalakīrti Reproving Śāriputra: 'Because habitual propensities are not yet exhausted, the flowers stick to your body.' Because he feared birth-and-death, the five desires found an opening. Since he feared birth-and-death, it refers to dust-and-sand [delusions] as habitual propensities. Furthermore, the citation of the immeasurable clouds of incense from the Avataṃsaka refers precisely to what was explained earlier: horizontally revealing the marks of Real Reward within Common Residence.

Third, from 'Within this' onward explains the gradual and sudden, purity and defilement.

Fourth, explaining Quiescent Light has three parts: First, establishing the name based strictly on the essence. The previous three lands pertain to phenomena; hence their land names are established according to the cause and effect of the resident beings' cultivation and eradication. This land pertains to principle; hence it is named after the threefold virtue of the fundamental essence.

Question: In partial realization of Quiescent Light, the three obstacles are not yet exhausted; how can the name be established solely with respect to principle? Answer: The aspect where obstacles are not yet exhausted naturally belongs to Real Reward. Here, with respect to the point where cause and effect are partially forgotten, it is named the intermediate and lower Land of Constant Quiescent Light.

Second, from 'All Buddhas' onward reveals the marks based on those capable of dwelling. The Golden Light [Sūtra] states: 'The Tathāgata roams in the immeasurable, extremely profound dharma-nature, the sphere of practice of all Buddhas, surpassing the purity of the sphere of practice of all bodhisattvas.' 'Immeasurable' is quiescent; 'extremely profound' is light; 'dharma-nature' is constant. Furthermore, the Samantabhadra Contemplation [Sūtra] states: 'Śākyamuni is named Vairocana; this Buddha's dwelling place is named Constant Quiescent Light: the place gathered and perfected by the pāramitā of constancy, the place established by the pāramitā of selfhood, the place free from the marks of body and mind through the pāramitā of bliss, and the place where marks of existence are extinguished through the pāramitā of purity.' Therefore, we know that this land is established from the ultimate point of the four virtues, using the four other shores to reveal the three virtues: constancy and selfhood are the dharmakāya; bliss is liberation; purity is prajñā. The three virtues mutually contain each other, each discussing the three; thus dharmakāya and the others each possess the four virtues. Although we speak of three and four, they are truly not twelve; students should understand that only this is called the secret treasury that is neither vertical nor horizontal.

Third, from 'Partially attained' onward explains partial and complete, purity and defilement. 'Partially attained' is termed defiled, discussed from the standpoint of the practitioner; the name 'Constant Quiescent Light' is established from the standpoint of the ultimate principle.

Third, from 'Therefore, using' onward concludes and demonstrates based on the meaning. Explaining the character 'contemplation' in the title clarified the perfect threefold contemplation, up to now clarifying the doctrine. First, it stated that taking the purification of the mind's contemplation as bringing about the purification of the Buddha lands is the doctrine and aim of the sūtra; next, it extensively clarified the purity and defilement of the four lands. Now it concludes by stating, 'Therefore, taking the cultivation of the wondrous contemplation of the mind as being able to stimulate sympathetic resonance with the pure land is the doctrine of the sūtra.'

If one does not use the perfect and wondrous threefold contemplation to evoke the four pure lands, then the passages setting forth the topic and concluding it would be utterly useless. For whose sake was the threefold contemplation explained in the title? Where would it be applied? If one says that to evoke the two pure lands of Real Reward and Quiescent Light requires the perfect threefold contemplation, but that for the pure [land] of remainder one needs only to cultivate the contemplation of phenomenal emptiness, and that for the pure [land] of common residence one only needs phenomenal practice without requiring the threefold contemplation, this doctrine is incorrect. Contemplating the emptiness of phenomena in a biased way and various phenomenal practices, although they are causes for these two kinds of pure land, are not the precise purports demonstrated by this sūtra. Because this sūtra was originally preached for Vaidehī, who reviled the defilement of common residence and sought the purity of common residence, it expounds the wondrous contemplation to contemplate that [land's] environment and self; how could one rashly say that evoking the pure [land] of common residence does not require the threefold contemplation? If the threefold contemplation is accomplished, coarse defilements will fall away first; if not the pure [land] of remainder, where else would one be reborn? Could the pure [land] of remainder not be [the result of] the wondrous contemplation? One must understand that it was precisely for rebirth in the pure [land] of common residence that the threefold contemplation was taught. Truly, because this contemplation is wondrous, it can shatter the three delusions; it does not solely evoke the pure land of common residence, but in accordance with the depth or shallowness of one's severance of delusions, it naturally evokes the three [higher lands] including the [land of] remainder. Just as a disease requires medicine primarily to bring peace to the body, when one seeks and obtains an immortal's recipe, compounds it, and takes it, it not only brings peace to the body but can also lighten the bones. Peace of the body can be compared to being reborn in the pure [land] of common residence, and lightening of the bones can be compared to evoking the upper three lands. It is merely a single medicine, yet its efficacy is profound and supreme, just as a single wondrous contemplation can purify the four lands. The Awakening of Faith states that when an initial practitioner cultivates the correct faith of the Mahāyāna, fearing that in this land one will not constantly encounter a Buddha and that faith will retrogress and be lost, he is taught to seek rebirth in the world of Sukhāvatī, causing him to contemplate that Buddha's tathatā dharmakāya, so that he will ultimately attain rebirth and abide in the correct determination. Without the perfect threefold contemplation, how could one illuminate the dharmakāya? How could one say that the cause of Sukhāvatī is only phenomenal goodness? Fourth, discussing the function. The substance (central theme) is the practice cultivated for one's own practice; the function is the practice applied to benefit others. Because one's own practice inclines toward the noumenon, the wondrous contemplation is illuminated; transforming others to gather faculties must encompass all good deeds. If others are suited to the wondrous contemplation, one must also teach them to cultivate it as an aid to their own practice; how could one discard all good deeds? Therefore, the teachings of the substance and the function are completely equal, differing only as one's own practice and the transformation of others. The text has two parts: first, stating the name and briefly indicating [the meaning]. Only when there is power is there function; hence it says "power and function." What do power and function do? They produce good and eradicate evil. Practitioners should understand the three [aspects of] essence, substance, and function. Explaining these three teachings distinctly, they arise from the single nature into two cultivations: essence is the nature revealed by the dharmakāya; substance is the wisdom that reveals, which is prajñā; and function is the power that arises, which is liberation. Although the two are accomplished through cultivation, one must know that they are inherently present; although the one is nature, it arises in its entirety to become cultivation. Therefore they are neither sequential nor horizontal, and are inconceivable. The two virtues in nature refer entirely to delusions and karma, which are the two cultivations of good and evil inherently contained in the nature. Now, when the inverted cultivations are realized as essence, since they are entirely inherently contained in the nature, being interfused and wondrous right there, they are the virtues for transforming others; hence these two are taken as the substance and function of the sūtra. Function pervades all things; it is not without the function of evil, but because it accords with the nature, it produces good and eradicates evil. Therefore, when defiled and evil functions accord with nature, using them is most able to eradicate evil. Under "eradicates evil," it explains extensively according to the meaning, in two parts: first, clarifying in full according to good and evil. Since power and function are applied, they must accomplish merit and virtue; therefore a single function has four names. Speaking biasedly, eradicating evil requires the application of power, and producing good lies in the virtuous function; this is a preliminary statement. If stated a second time, power, function, merit, and virtue can all eradicate evil, and power, function, merit, and virtue can all produce good. One must know that the eradication of evil reaches down to Avīci, and the production of good properly reaches up to wondrous awakening; only then are they the power, function, merit, and virtue of a perfect sūtra. Second, under "suffering is...," it explains biasedly with regard to eradicating evil, in two parts: first, no evil is not eliminated. Regarding the eradication of evil, one must eliminate the evil cause in order to remove the evil fruit. If practitioners of the two types—those experiencing karmic recompense and those cultivating causes—do not remove the three poisons, the root of all suffering, even if they temporarily avoid suffering, it is not an eternal cessation. Now, clarifying the transformation of others through cultivating the Pure Land contemplation causes all evil causes and fruits to be extinguished together. Even if delusions are not yet severed, upon rebirth there they will not arise, and their severance will not be long off; hence it can eternally eradicate evil causes and evil fruits. In short, the power and function of this sūtra eradicates the causes of the five entrenchments and removes the fruits of the two deaths. Second, under "therefore...," it reveals [it] distinctly based on the weightiest. Among evils, the heaviest does not exceed the five heinous offenses. The five heinous offenses are karma arising from upper-grade afflictions, incurring Avīci suffering. The great power of this sūtra can eradicate such extremely heavy three obstacles, immediately leading to rebirth in the Pure Land. If the nature of these three obstacles were not the three virtues, how could Avīci be transformed into Sukhāvatī? For the most dull-rooted, it discusses ten recitations to be reborn in the lowest grade; for the sharp-rooted, it is not impossible to be reborn in the upper eight grades. Because the essence of the five heinous offenses is Quiescent Light, one can thereby purify the four Buddha-lands. Fifth, classifying the characteristics of the teaching. The teaching consists of the words of the sage to guide those below. Characteristics are the appearances, which can be distinguished by inspection. The four meanings above are all verbal teachings; that is, the teachings that explain the name, the essence, the substance, and the function. If one distinguishes them by their characteristics, it will cause those who examine them to see them clearly; hence its characteristics are shown in terms of the five periods, the two piṭakas, and gradual and sudden. The text has two parts: first, directly classifying the teaching expounded, in three parts: first, classifying according to the five periods, in two: first, clarifying the division of the teaching. Between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, this belongs to Mahāyāna. In the sūtra there is also Bimbisāra realizing the small [vehicle], yet he was not the primary capacity for whom this teaching was intended. Now, taking [the fact that] it was primarily to preach the Pure Land contemplation for Vaidehī and others, it is not even the Common or Separate [Teachings], so how could it be Hīnayāna? Among the five periods, it is the third, the Vaipulya period. Second, under "responding to capacities...," clarifying broad and brief. This only differentiates the textual characteristics, without yet discussing focused and scattered [contemplation]. Second, classifying according to the two piṭakas. Classifying the teaching according to persons, this belongs to the Bodhisattva [Piṭaka]. Although sūtras such as the Āgamas speak of the three vehicles, based on the majority and the primary focus, they belong to the Śrāvaka Piṭaka. Although various Mahāyāna divisions contain the two vehicles, they are not the primary intent of the division; therefore the classification of the piṭaka returns to the Bodhisattva. Third, according to gradual and sudden. If one discusses gradual and sudden in terms of the converting ritual, the Avataṃsaka belongs to sudden, and the three periods are all gradual. This sūtra is in the Vaipulya [period], so it is not sudden in converting ritual. As for this sūtra being sudden, it takes the perfect as sudden within the converting teaching; therefore, judging from Vaidehī attaining the [anutpattika-dharma-]kṣānti in this very body, the teaching is classified as sudden. Now, the stage of anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti lies at the first bhūmi in the Separate Teaching, and at the first abidance in the Perfect Teaching. An ordinary person of the Separate Teaching must pass through countless kalpas before reaching this stage, whereas only in the Perfect Teaching can one enter it in this very life. If one takes the concluding benefit to classify the teaching, biased and perfect become most obvious; therefore the present text determines it according to the stage realized by the primary capacity: it is sudden, not gradual. Second, under "the title states...," parenthetically selecting the person capable of speaking. If spoken by four [types of] persons and certified by the Tathāgata, it may also be called a sūtra.