[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) › [淨土或問](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972) › 1.20 # 淨土或問 1.20 淨土或問 1.20 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1.20) 問曰：偏指獨推之說，旨哉言乎。欣厭取捨之方，至哉教矣。敢問欣厭取捨得無愛憎能所之過乎？答曰：汝不知言也。此非世間之愛憎能所也，此乃十方如來轉凡成聖之通法也。若非厭捨，何以轉凡？若非欣取，何以成聖？故自凡夫預乎聖位，由聖位以至等覺，其間等而上之，無非欣厭，極乎妙覺取捨始亡。故先德云「取捨之極，與不取捨無有異也。」況此淨土之法只一化機，而釋迦、彌陀之所共立者也。此指其往、彼受其來，倘非厭捨，離此無由；倘非欣取，生彼無分。既捨此矣，又生彼矣，藉彼勝緣直至成佛。然愛憎能所功莫大矣，何過之有故？ > Question: The explanation of specific pointing and exclusive promotion is profound in meaning! The method of rejoicing and revulsion, taking and abandoning, is supreme teaching! May I venture to ask whether rejoicing and revulsion, taking and abandoning, incurs the fault of love and hate, subject and object? Answer: You do not understand what is said. This is not worldly love and hate, subject and object; this is the universal method of the Tathāgatas of the ten directions for transforming ordinary people into sages. If not for revulsion and abandonment, how could one transform ordinary status? If not for rejoicing and taking up, how could one accomplish sagely status? Thus, from ordinary beings entering the sagely positions, and from the sagely positions up to equal enlightenment, rising step by step, all of it is nothing other than rejoicing and revulsion; only when reaching marvelous enlightenment are taking and abandoning finally obliterated. Hence the former virtuous ones said: “The utmost of taking and abandoning is no different from non-taking and non-abandoning.” How much more so when this Pure Land method is a single teaching mechanism jointly established by Śākyamuni and Amitābha! The one points to going there, and the other receives their coming. If not for revulsion and abandonment, there is no way to leave this place; if not for rejoicing and taking up, one has no part in being born there. Having abandoned this and been born there, one relies on those superior conditions straight through to Buddhahood. Thus the merit of \[this\] love and hate, subject and object, could not be greater; what fault could there be? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1.19) - [Next: 1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1.21) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972~en-mt.1.20) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1972.1.20) · Pramāṇa