[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) › [念佛三昧寶王論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967) › 3.23 # 念佛三昧寶王論 3.23 念佛三昧寶王論 3.23 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3.23) 對曰：「夫論供養法界海者，萬行之中，能淨三業，皆名供養也，況浪思真境，而非供養哉？《理趣》曰：『觀一切法，若常、若無常，皆不可得。』於諸如來，廣設供養，不亦明焉？又如來在世，嚴薦表誠，皆言華雲香海，遍微塵剎，猶恨其少。大士所以入觀用想，須彌為燈炷，大海為油盞，未展殷敬，故焚金色之僻，獻淨明之塔，金身火焰洞照十方，則喜見菩薩其例矣。而今之人，但推於自心，或遙指華樹，乖奉獻之儀，何慢之深也？子問：『佛在、滅後，獻福何多？』者，試為明之。且丁蘭刻木於堂，溫清如在，名光青史，人到于今，稱之為真孝子也。若如來在世，金山晃耀，嚴相赫然，誰有覩之，不發道意？獻華伸懇，不亦易哉？洎世雄晦迹，月隱重山，不奉真儀，但傳貝葉。對之形像，發無上意，能獻一華，此志、此心，足可嘉尚！有如是者，不亦難哉？《涅槃》云：『乃至獻一華，則生不動國。』是則一香、一華、一燈、一樂，及以飲食，盡心樂得奉薦三世諸佛者，淨土妙因，成聖元始，安得輕易其事而不遵之哉？若離於此行，而聽無稽之言，獻心華、點心燈，焚心香、禮心佛，而欲求於正覺者，亦何異騁猿猴之巧、守梅林之望歟？及令彼衣心衣、飯心飯，則困拒不已，至於六度萬行，何乃排於空見之心哉？指心、指空之言，其過若此，不可不慎也！真言門中瑜伽觀行，亦約事門表相，不一向推心，常嚴薦香華六時無廢也。」 > I replied: "Now, when discussing making offerings to the ocean of the dharmadhātu, purifying the three karmas throughout the myriad practices is in every case called an offering; how much more so when wandering thoughts contemplate the true realm—how could that not be an offering? The Nayamukha says: 'Contemplate all dharmas: whether permanent or impermanent, neither can be apprehended.' Widely making offerings to all tathāgatas—is this not clear? Furthermore, while the Tathāgata was in the world, solemn offerings expressing sincerity were all described as clouds of flowers and oceans of incense pervading realms as numerous as fine dust motes, yet were still regretted as too few. That the Great Beings entered contemplation and employed visualization—taking Mount Sumeru as the lamp wick, the great ocean as the oil dish, and, still not having fully unfolded their deep veneration, burning their golden bodies to offer to the stūpa of Pure Brightness, the flames of the golden body illuminating the ten directions—Sarvasattvapriyadarśana Bodhisattva is an example of this. Yet people today merely defer to their own minds, or point from afar to flowering trees, violating the etiquette of making offerings—how deep is their arrogance! You asked: 'When the Buddha was in the world and after his passing, which presentation brings greater merit?' Let me try to clarify it. Consider Ding Lan, who carved wood in his hall, serving it with warmth and care as if his parents were present; his name shines in the historical records, and down to this day people call him a truly filial son. When the Tathāgata was in the world, radiating like a golden mountain with magnificent marks blazing, who that beheld him would not give rise to the intention toward the Way? To present flowers and extend devotion—was that not easy? But once the Hero of the World concealed his traces and the moon sank behind layered mountains, people no longer behold his true countenance, only transmitting the palm leaves. Before his sculpted and painted images, to give rise to the unsurpassable intention and to be able to present a single flower—such resolve and such a mind are truly worthy of praise! Having such devotion as this—is it not difficult? The Nirvāṇa \[Sūtra\] says: 'Even presenting a single flower brings rebirth in the Akṣobhya realm.' Thus, a single incense, a single flower, a single lamp, a single tune of music, and food and drink—for those who with all their heart delight in presenting them to the buddhas of the three times, these are the wondrous cause of the Pure Land and the very beginning of attaining sageliness; how could one make light of this matter and not abide by it? If one abandons this practice and listens to groundless talk—offering mind-flowers, lighting mind-lamps, burning mind-incense, and bowing to a mind-buddha—seeking right awakening in this way, how is it any different from displaying a monkey's clever tricks, or holding on to the longing for a plum grove? When told to wear mind-clothes and eat mind-food, such people endlessly refuse; yet when it comes to the six perfections and myriad practices, why do they banish them into a mind of emptiness-view? The fault of speech that points merely to mind and emptiness is like this; one cannot fail to be cautious! In the True Word school (mantranaya), the yoga contemplative practices are also based on the phenomenal gate to manifest outward forms, not solely deferring to mind, always solemnly presenting incense and flowers throughout the six periods without omission." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3.22) - [Next: 3.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3.24) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967~en-mt.3.23) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [法苑珠林](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2122.20.21) — 道世, Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1967.3.23) · Pramāṇa