阿彌陀經疏 1.21

1.21

二、辨體者，方等實相為經正體。方謂方廣，等謂平等，實相之體橫遍諸法故言方廣，豎該凡聖故言平等，是則圓融大乘悉名方等。但鹿園一向說小，十二年後創談斯理，故偏得其名。所以《無量義》云：次說方等摩訶般若。《涅槃》云：從酪出生生蘇，譬從修多羅出方等典，皆指第三時也。此經既屬生蘇，則宜用此名以釋其體。應知彌陀由究顯此體故依正莊嚴，眾生由理具此體故願生即得，方廣平等其在此乎。然則體義有三：謂主質義、底義、達義也。若乃為四章之所依、作三分之所趣，況四民之臣主、喻三光之麗天，此主質義也。若乃大乘因果無非實相，智度大海唯佛窮底，此即體是底義也。若乃般若是一法，佛說種種名，實相亦爾，多諸名字號，此即體是達義也。釋體竟。

Second, identifying the substance: the true nature of reality (*dharmatā*) of the Vaipulya teachings is the primary substance of the sūtra. 'Vai-' means broad and vast; '-pulya' means equal. Because the substance of the true nature of reality horizontally pervades all dharmas, it is called 'broad and vast'; because vertically it encompasses both ordinary beings and sages, it is called 'equal'. Thus, the perfect and harmonious Mahāyāna teachings are all named Vaipulya. However, at the Deer Park only the Hīnayāna was taught, and this principle was first proclaimed only after twelve years, so that period especially received this name. Therefore the *Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings* says: 'Next he preached the Vaipulya and the Mahāprajñā.' The *Nirvāṇa Sūtra* states: 'From milk is produced curds; this is an analogy for the emergence of the Vaipulya scriptures from the sūtras'—both referring to the third period. Since this sūtra belongs to curds, it is proper to use this term to explain its substance. One should understand that Amitābha, through having fully manifested this substance, produced the circumstantial and primary fruitions of adornment; and that sentient beings, through being endowed with this substance in principle, obtain rebirth as soon as they vow to be reborn. Does 'broad, vast, and equal' not reside in this? However, there are three senses of 'substance': the sense of sovereign basis, the sense of bottom, and the sense of mastery. If it serves as that upon which the four chapters rely and as the goal toward which the three divisions tend—compared to the lord and sovereign of the four classes of people, and analogized to the three luminaries adorning the heavens—this is the sense of sovereign basis. If the causes and effects of the Mahāyāna are nothing other than the true nature of reality, and the vast ocean of prajñā can only be fathomed to the bottom by a Buddha, this is the sense of the substance as bottom. If prajñā is a single dharma, yet the Buddha speaks of it by diverse names, and the true nature of reality is likewise given many names and titles, this is the sense of the substance as mastery. The explanation of the substance is concluded.