釋淨土群疑論 1.41

1.41

Question: Sūtras such as the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra speak of internal emptiness, external emptiness, internal and external emptiness, and so forth. Now, the pure land is external emptiness, and sentient beings are internal emptiness. This being so, what sentient being is there to be born, and what pure land is there to be born into? Furthermore, the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: 'The lands of the buddhas are also all empty.' It also asks: 'By what are they empty?' and answers: 'They are empty through emptiness,' and so on. It also says: 'How should a bodhisattva view sentient beings? Vimalakīrti said: Like a fifth great element, a sixth aggregate, a seventh sense-faculty, a thirteenth sense-base, a nineteenth realm, and such dharmas.' The Lotus Sūtra says: 'All dharmas from the beginning / Are ever of the mark of quiescent extinction.' The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: 'What the Tathāgata speaks of as the adornment of buddha-lands is non-adornment,' and it also says: 'In truth, there are no sentient beings who attain extinction and deliverance.' Ultimate, definitive teachings of such various Mahāyāna sūtras all say that all dharmas are empty and quiescent. Why do you now speak of a Western Pure Land as the land to be born into, and sentient beings as the persons who are to be born, encouraging people to attach to marks and initiate practices relying on sūtras of non-definitive meaning (neyārtha)? This fails to grasp the profound meaning of the Buddhas; clinging to existent marks cannot be called studying the Mahāyāna Dharma.