念佛鏡 1.9

1.9

Master Lianchi of Yunqi Monastery of the Great Ming dynasty wrote in *Zhuchuang erbi*: "The two masters Daojing and Shandao composed the *Nianfo jing*, taking buddhānusmṛti and setting it against various dharma gates, concluding in all cases: 'If you wish to compare them to the merit of buddhānusmṛti, a hundred thousand myriad kotis of parts cannot equal one.' They can truly be said to possess solid faith and clear discernment, rendering great service to the Pure Land!" Only regarding their chapter addressing the Chan school, which states: "Those who contemplate the mind and those who contemplate the non-arising also, when compared to the merit of buddhānusmṛti, cannot equal one part in a hundred thousand myriad kotis"—students have doubted this. I, however, consider it correct. What is referred to in the 'Fourfold Classifications' as "having Chan but lacking Pure Land" is precisely this. If one merely clings to contemplating the mind and does not believe there is a pure land of Sukhāvatī, or merely clings to non-arising and does not believe there is rebirth in the pure land, one has not comprehended that mind itself is the land and does not know that birth itself is non-arising; this biased view of emptiness is not the Chan of the perfect and sudden. That it is not even as good as someone who, though their understanding of principle is not yet greatly illuminated, has already achieved samādhi through buddhānusmṛti—how is that surprising? As for those who contemplate the mind and wonderfully awaken to their own mind, or contemplate non-arising and attain anutpattika-kṣānti, this is of the very same rank as those who attain the highest level of the highest grade among practitioners of buddhānusmṛti; who then could place one above the other?