[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751) › 6.2 # 觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 6.2 觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 6.2 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6.2) 故荊谿云「勝兼兩處，劣唯鹿園」。若其似位全不見者，法華四信何故見於實報土邪？有餘那見圓滿相海？通教案位受接之人為見何相？若非尊特，合身不成。今經明說無量壽佛身量無邊，與《大論》云色像無邊，有何異邪？彼云無邊既稱尊特，此何獨非？況疏專引彼論此文以證身量無邊之義，驗今佛身的是尊特。不須疑也。問：若是尊特，合是常身。何故《法華疏》中判觀無量壽佛經云「實有量而言無量」？答：此乃《刊正鈔》中錯引彼疏。彼疏並云「實有量而言無量，如《阿彌陀》與《金光疏》及此疏同。」蓋以小大二彌陀經不專尊特被於頓機，故彼佛現三十二相通被眾機。大機雖見尊特常身，其慣習小人洎諸凡夫，雖因迴向得生彼土，未宜尊特說常住理，故以應化說無常法，成其小果。是故佛壽雖不可數，終歸有量。娑婆生彼多是此機，以別圓似位人難及故。三疏約此，故判彌陀在有量中。若《觀無量壽佛經》純被圓人，明說佛身全法界起。應既有本，生即同法，的類《釋論》法性尊特，正當無量之無量也。故《釋籤》云「教分二身，為機劣故，暫現生身」。今機不劣，豈對生身？問：《大本》中云「生我國者身皆具足三十二相」。彼國人民既具此相，佛身理合超勝於人，故知常身有八萬相。《般舟經》云「三十二相」，蓋借釋迦為初心觀境耳。答：《般舟經》云「菩薩用是念佛，故當得生阿彌陀佛國。當念如是佛身，有三十二相悉具足，光明徹照端正無比，在比丘僧中說經」。經指彌陀有三十二相，何文言借釋迦為境？況《止觀》無文、《輔行》不說，豈得自言成於己見？又彼人民三十二相，故佛常相須八萬者，其義不然。以同居土佛應同人，只淨由土人皆有於三十二相，故佛常身須現此相，但於同中相相皆勝。穢土佛身雖異凡鄙，亦同上人，故應此方所有相法，故三十二同輪王相，亦於同中而分明昧。三十二相既同彼人，驗是彼土常身常相。是知八萬別為大機現尊特相，更何所疑？問：一等尊特，以何因緣相分三品？答：悉檀因緣故。蓋一類機應以藏塵尊特之相得四益者，故佛稱機而為現之。應以八萬尊特之相、應以三十二尊特之相得四益者，佛皆稱機而為現之。仍須了知此之相海，別教則用別修緣了成就此相，即修成之尊特，故名報身。圓教能了二修即性修德無功，乃性具之尊特，故名法身。已在此觀開章中說。須知《華嚴》華藏塵數之相雖多，此以兼別故猶帶修成。此論八萬既唯圓頓無非性具，故三聖觀疏皆示云「觀於法身」。行者當須以教定理、就理明觀、於觀顯相，無得但以多數斥少、使勝成劣。實在精學然後勤修，欲罷不能故茲辯析。 > Therefore Jingxi said: 'The superior embraces both realms, while the inferior is confined to the Deer Park.' If those at the stages of similarity did not see it at all, why would the four faiths of the Lotus Sūtra behold the land of real reward? How could those in the remainder see the ocean of fully perfected marks? What form do those of the Shared Teaching who receive accession according to their stage see? If it were not the noble and extraordinary \[body\], it would fail to correspond to their bodily status. The present sūtra explicitly states that the bodily measure of the Buddha Amitāyus is boundless; how does this differ from the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa's statement that his form and features are boundless? Since that treatise's 'boundless' refers to the noble and extraordinary \[body\], why should this alone not be so? Furthermore, the Commentary specifically cites that passage from that treatise to corroborate the meaning of boundless bodily measure, which verifies that this Buddha's body is definitely the noble and extraordinary \[body\]. One must not doubt this. > > Question: If it is the noble and extraordinary \[body\], it should properly be a permanent body. Why does the Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra judge the Sūtra on the Contemplation of the Buddha Amitāyus by saying, 'It is actually limited, yet called immeasurable'? > > Answer: This is due to the Kanzheng chao mistakenly citing that commentary. That commentary actually states: 'It is actually limited, yet called immeasurable, as in the Amida \[Sūtra\], the Suvarṇaprabhāsa Commentary, and this commentary.' Because the shorter and longer Sukhāvatīvyūha Sūtras do not exclusively use the noble and extraordinary \[body\] to reach faculties of sudden realization, that Buddha manifests the thirty-two marks to universally respond to diverse capacities. Although great capacities behold the noble and extraordinary permanent body, those habituated to the Small Vehicle along with ordinary beings—even though born in that land through dedication of merit—are not yet suited for the noble and extraordinary \[body\] to preach the principle of permanence to them; hence, he employs the response and transformation \[body\] to preach impermanent dharmas and bring them to the small fruition. Therefore, although the Buddha's lifespan is beyond counting, it ultimately remains limited. Most who are born there from the sahā world possess such capacities, for it is difficult to attain the level of those at the stages of similarity in the Separate and Perfect Teachings. Drawing upon this point, the three commentaries classified Amida among those with a limited \[span\]. If the Sūtra on the Contemplation of the Buddha Amitāyus exclusively receives persons of the Perfect Teaching, it explicitly states that the Buddha's body arises completely from the dharmadhātu. Since the response has its source, birth is identical to the Dharma; this definitely belongs to the noble and extraordinary \[body\] of dharma-nature in the Expository Treatise, truly matching the immeasurable of the immeasurable. Hence the Xiqian says: 'The teaching distinguishes two bodies; for the sake of inferior capacities, he temporarily manifests a physical body.' Here, the capacities are not inferior; how could they be faced with a physical body? > > Question: The Larger Sūtra states: 'Those born in my land all have bodies fully endowed with the thirty-two marks.' Since the people of that land are endowed with these marks, the Buddha's body should properly surpass that of humans; thus we know his permanent body has eighty thousand marks. When the Pratyutpanna Sūtra mentions 'thirty-two marks,' it merely borrows Śākyamuni as the object of contemplation for beginners. > > Answer: The Pratyutpanna Sūtra states: 'The bodhisattva uses this buddhamanasikāra, and therefore shall attain birth in the land of Amitābha Buddha. One should contemplate such a buddha-body, fully endowed with the thirty-two marks, its light thoroughly illuminating, upright and peerless, preaching the sūtra among the saṅgha of bhikṣus.' The sūtra points out that Amida has the thirty-two marks; what text says it borrows Śākyamuni as the object? Furthermore, the Zhiguan has no such passage, nor does the Fuxing say so; how can one assert this merely on the basis of personal views? Moreover, to say that because the people there have thirty-two marks, the Buddha's permanent body must have eighty thousand, is not correct. For in the land of common residence, the Buddha should be identical with the people; precisely because the people of the pure reward land all possess thirty-two marks, the Buddha's permanent body must manifest these marks, though within this similarity every single mark is supremely superior. In an impure land, although the Buddha's body is distinct from common, coarse beings, it also conforms to superior persons, and thus responds in accordance with all the physical marks found in this realm; hence the thirty-two marks are identical with those of a wheel-turning king, though clarity and dullness are distinguished even within this similarity. Since the thirty-two marks are identical with those of the people there, this proves they are the permanent body and permanent marks of that land. Thus one knows that the eighty thousand \[marks\] are specifically manifested as noble and extraordinary marks for great capacities; what further doubt can there be? > > Question: As all are equally noble and extraordinary, for what causal condition are the marks divided into three grades? > > Answer: It is due to the causal conditions of the siddhāntas. Because a class of capacities should attain the four benefits through the noble and extraordinary marks vast as the dust motes of the treasury, the Buddha manifests them in accord with those capacities. For those who should attain the four benefits through the eighty thousand noble and extraordinary marks, or through the thirty-two noble and extraordinary marks, the Buddha manifests them in accord with those capacities. One must also understand that regarding this ocean of marks, the Separate Teaching utilizes distinct cultivated conditional and illuminating \[wisdoms\] to accomplish these marks; these are the noble and extraordinary accomplished through cultivation, and are therefore called the reward body. The Perfect Teaching is able to understand that the two cultivations are identical to inherent nature, where cultivated virtue entails no deliberate effort; these are the noble and extraordinary inherently possessed by nature, and are therefore called the dharmakāya. This has already been explained in the opening chapter of this contemplation. One must realize that although the marks numbering like dust motes in the Flower Treasury of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra are manifold, because they blend with the Separate Teaching they still carry the connotation of being accomplished through cultivation. The eighty thousand discussed here are exclusively of the perfect and sudden, none being other than inherently possessed by nature; hence the commentaries on the three sages' contemplations all state 'contemplate the dharmakāya.' Practitioners must use the doctrine to establish the principle, rely on the principle to clarify contemplation, and through contemplation reveal the marks; they must not simply dismiss the lesser by means of the greater number and thereby cause the superior to become inferior. It truly lies in precise study followed by diligent practice; unable to leave it unaddressed, I have analyzed it here. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6.1) - [Next: 6.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6.3) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751~en-mt.6.2) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1751.6.2) · Pramāṇa