[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) › [釋淨土群疑論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960) › 2.23 # 釋淨土群疑論 2.23 釋淨土群疑論 2.23 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.23) 答：豈以中陰入彼花中，即令同彼生陰攝也？生彼淨土福德力勝，雖是中陰乘花往生，不同穢土中陰無花。雖中生陰同在花中，然勝劣別、明晦有殊，以分中生二陰差別，亦以趣生至生義有差別。分中生陰異，不約有花無花分中生別也。若謂同在花中難可差別，即令無有中陰者，亦可穢土中生，二陰同無有華，應言中生二陰不別。若謂中陰生陰雖俱無花，即有受胎等差別者，卵等三生可有差別，化生生陰如何得殊耶？以此故知有中陰也。又如地獄中陰已被火燒，豈與生陰即無差別？翻顯淨土善業，類同中生相似。然此所說中陰，然未見經論說生淨土者去身是中陰、非中陰文，不可定判說有無也。雖無經文，然取有義為勝。不爾，去身說是何耶？ > Answer: How could it be that just because the intermediate state enters that flower, it is immediately subsumed under that birth existence? Those born in that pure land have superior power of blessings and virtue; although it is an intermediate state, they mount the flower to go and be reborn, unlike the intermediate state of the defiled land which has no flower. Although both the intermediate and birth existences are within the flower, nevertheless their superiority and inferiority differ, and their brightness and darkness are distinct, thereby distinguishing the difference between the intermediate and birth existences; furthermore, there is a difference in meaning between heading toward birth and arriving at birth. The difference between intermediate and birth existences is distinguished in this way; it is not distinguished according to whether there is a flower or not. If one were to claim that because both are in the flower they are difficult to distinguish, and thus conclude that there is no intermediate state, then one could also say that since intermediate and birth existences in the defiled land both lack a flower, the two existences of intermediate and birth should not be distinguished. If one says that although intermediate existence and birth existence both lack a flower, there are distinctions such as entering the womb, then while distinctions may exist for the three modes of birth such as from an egg, how could the birth existence of apparitional birth be distinguished? By this we know that there is an intermediate state. Furthermore, just as the intermediate state of hell is already burned by fire, how could it be without distinction from the birth existence? Conversely, this clarifies that the wholesome karma of the pure land is similarly analogous to intermediate and birth existences. However, regarding what is expounded here about the intermediate state, since we have not yet seen any passage in the sūtras or treatises stating whether the body that departs when born in the pure land is or is not an intermediate state, it cannot be definitively determined as existing or not. Although there is no sūtra text, taking the view of its existence is superior. Otherwise, what could that departing body be said to be? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.22) - [Next: 2.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.24) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960~en-mt.2.23) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.23) · Pramāṇa