[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) › [樂邦遺稿](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b) › 1.86 # 樂邦遺稿 1.86 樂邦遺稿 1.86 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1.86) 事有難見則有疑，紛疑委感不唯干眾人，雖其鶖子，猶且在小乘而懷以厭、趨大乘而疑以難。其居淨穢則疑混。混也者，隱而有以不能辨者也。疑也者，似而有以不能決者也。以鶖子最大之智，不能決疑混之理，是豈有所未思哉？佛道之難思，所未至也。故曰四果之明不能測如來之奧，十地之聖不能窮極果之妙。矧籍凡夫生無慧目，陷三界，有必因之妄；指淨土，膠難轉之疑。疑之於身，知五蘊之未滅；疑之於心，知萬惑之未遣；疑之於行，知六度之未濟。由漂流未濟之行，期濟于己濟之域，在於其己猶惑之，況他人哉。此物情難信，為道俗所共疑也。隋智者大師，心與物冥，智將神會，乘時翼教，異跡尤著。因其所異，考其所證，不知其三賢之人乎？十聖之人乎？其為應正等覺妙神化于難思乎？蓋亦思之不能知也。但大師念定總持昭晣行業，期生淨土間無容髮。發大師之所有存者，其《十疑》之文乎。然其文，遠取諸經、近取諸論，去就其意以取諸傳，無離經以備事、無飾辭以增巧，審辭達意，能極九品之所生，乃見大師之用心也。見大師之心者，其於淨土有疑乎？所謂高天無雲、群星列彩，經紀之所相殊、躔次之所相異，粲粲然無一而隱者也。余得其文，載念能仁所稱淨土者累焉，諸佛證而成之者，或舌相以覆大千、或潮音而可梵說。余與大師遐年相隔，不得一時以相輝映，烏有今日尚無言哉？故於論首略陳一二，以慶于所懷。雖辭膚理淺，不足起大師之化，在其先佛證成之義且有歸矣。 > When matters are difficult to discern, doubts arise. Tangled doubts and pressing perplexities affect not only the common multitude; even Śāriputra, while still in the Hinayana, harbored revulsion, and when advancing toward the Mahayana, harbored doubt at its difficulty. Dwelling between purity and defilement, he doubted their mixture. What is 'mixture' is hidden and such that one cannot distinguish it. What is 'doubt' resembles \[truth\] yet is such that one cannot resolve it. If with Śāriputra's supreme wisdom he could not resolve the principle of doubt and mixture, could this be because there was something he had not reflected upon? It is that the inconceivability of the Buddha's path was beyond his reach. Therefore it is said that the clarity of the four fruits cannot fathom the Tathāgata's profundity, and the sages of the ten stages cannot exhaust the marvel of the ultimate fruit. How much more so for ordinary beings, born without the eye of wisdom, trapped in the triple realm, having delusions that inevitably bind them! Pointing toward the Pure Land, their doubts are stubbornly fixed and hard to turn. Doubting their own bodies, they know the five aggregates are not yet extinguished; doubting their own minds, they know the myriad afflictions are not yet dispelled; doubting their own practices, they know the six perfections are not yet crossed over. By means of practices adrift and unferried, they hope to cross over into a realm that is already crossed over. When they themselves are still perplexed, how much more so others! These sentiments of beings are difficult to believe, and are doubted by monastics and laypeople alike. Master Zhizhe of the Sui dynasty, his mind merged with things, his wisdom joined with the divine, availed himself of the times to assist the teaching, and his extraordinary traces were exceedingly renowned. Examining his realizations through his extraordinary traces, one knows not whether he was a person of the three worthies, or of the ten sages, or whether he was an Anuttarasamyaksaṃbuddha whose wondrous spiritual transformations were inconceivable—one cannot know even through reflection. Yet the Master's mindfulness, samādhi, dhāraṇī, and luminous cultivation of practice aspired to rebirth in the Pure Land without a hair's gap of interruption. What brings forth all that the Master preserved is surely the text of the Ten Doubts. Yet that text draws from sūtras for what is remote and draws from treatises for what is near, discerning their purports to select from historical accounts, never departing from the sūtras to set forth phenomena, nor adorning words to add cleverness. Examining words to convey meaning, it fully articulates rebirth in the nine grades; therein one sees the Master's dedication of mind. When one sees the Master's mind, how could one still have doubts about the Pure Land? It is like a high sky free of clouds, where constellations display their brilliance, differing in their paths and distinct in their stations, radiantly shining without a single one concealed. Having obtained this text, I repeatedly reflect on what the Sākya Sage praised concerning the Pure Land; as for all the Buddhas who testified and confirmed it, some extended their tongue-mark to cover the trichiliocosm, and some used the tide-like voice for brahma-speech. Separated from the Master by many years, I could not reflect brilliance together with him in the same era; how could I remain silent today? Therefore, at the head of this treatise I briefly set forth one or two points to express joy in what I cherish. Although my words are superficial and my reasoning shallow, insufficient to raise up the Master's transforming influence, in terms of the meaning of the ancient Buddhas' confirmation, it at least finds its home. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1.85) - [Next: 1.87](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1.87) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b~en-mt.1.86) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [廬山蓮宗寶鑑](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1973.5.10) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1969b.1.86) · Pramāṇa