阿彌陀經疏 1.24

1.24

五、判教者又二：一、教味區別；二、經疏因起。初文此經既對告聲聞弟子，驗非初乳頓說，而談眾生作佛，豈是酪味小乘；不說諸法皆空，則非熟蘇般若；又不開會二乘，故異《法華》、《涅槃》，教文貞實當第三生蘇方等大乘也。詳其所勸，該乎人天及四教初心，比乎《觀經》，則彼乃定業、此唯散善，彼被圓機、此通偏漸。論得生則但云心不顛倒即得往生，豈與夫乘金剛臺證無生忍同耶？語莊嚴則但云華如車輪，豈與夫華葉小者縱廣二十五由旬同耶？以此觀之優劣可知矣。

Fifth, classifying the teaching has two parts: first, distinguishing the flavors of the teachings; second, the circumstances giving rise to this sūtra commentary. Under the first section: since this sūtra is addressed to śrāvaka disciples, it is proven not to be the sudden preaching of the initial milk; yet in speaking of sentient beings becoming Buddhas, how could it be the curd flavor of the Hīnayāna? Since it does not state that all dharmas are empty, it is not the clarified butter of prajñā; nor does it open and integrate the two vehicles, so it differs from the *Lotus Sūtra* and the *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*. The text of the teaching is steadfast and true, corresponding to the third period: the curd Vaipulya Mahāyāna. Examining what it exhorts, it covers humans, devas, and beginners in the four teachings. Compared to the *Contemplation Sūtra*, that text concerns concentrated karma while this text concerns only dispersed goodness; that text accommodates faculties of the perfect teaching, while this text accommodates those of the biased and gradual teachings. Regarding attainment of rebirth, it merely says that if one's mind is not deranged one will immediately attain rebirth—how could this be compared to mounting a diamond platform and realizing the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas? Regarding the adornments, it merely says that the flowers are like chariot wheels—how could this be compared to the smaller petals being twenty-five yojanas in breadth and length? Viewed from this perspective, the relative superiority and inferiority can be known.