西方合論 10.8

10.8

一、剎土遠近者，問：「大小本經，皆云西方去此十萬億剎，《觀經》獨云：『阿彌陀佛，去此不遠。』二說誰正？」釋：「以遠近無定故，故言亦遠亦近。何故？凡言某方者，某方至某方，至某方幾城幾剎者，是從色身建立；身相虛故，是故所計方向道里，亦皆不實，不得言誰近誰遠。如滇人言燕地遠，是從滇計故，燕實無遠；齊人言燕地近，是從齊計故，燕實無近。又如十步之地，蟻子即遠，大象即近，不應言遠是實。何故？是地不當從蟻計故。亦不應言近是實。何故？是地不當從象計故。又則計十步者，亦非是寔，何故？是地既不從蟻不從象，亦不當從人計故。《智度論》曰：『隨世俗所傳，故說有方，方實不可得。』問曰：『何以言無方是方，亦有亦常？如經中說日出處是東方，日沒處是西方，日行處是南方，日不行處是北方。日有三分合，若前合，若今合，若後合，隨方日分，初合是東方，南方西方亦如是，日不行處是無分。』答曰：『不然。須彌山在四域之中，日繞須彌照四天下。欝怛羅越日中，是弗婆提日出，於弗婆提人是東方；弗婆提日中，是閻浮提日出，於閻浮提人是東方，是實無初。何以故？一切方皆東方，皆南方，皆西方，皆北方。汝言日出處是東方，日行處是南方，日沒處是西方，日不行處是北方，是事不然。』問曰：『我說一國中方相，汝以四國為難。以是故東方非無初。』答曰：『若一國中日與東方合，是為有邊，有邊故無常，無常故是不遍，以是故但有方名而無實。是則方所尚不可得，豈有程途？然亦不廢方所及程途故，何故？以不當從閻浮提計，亦可即閻浮提計故。如日雖非東西出沒，亦可言東出西沒故。』」

First, regarding the distance and proximity of the land: Question: 'Both the larger and shorter sūtras state that the Western Land is one hundred thousand koṭis of lands away from here, yet the Guan Wuliangshou jing alone states: "Amitābha Buddha is not far from here." Which of the two statements is correct?' Explanation: Because distance and proximity are not fixed, it is said to be both far and near. Why is this? Whenever one speaks of a certain direction, going from one direction to another direction, reaching a certain direction after so many cities and so many lands, this is established based on the physical body. Because the physical characteristics are empty, the directions and distances calculated based on them are also entirely unreal; one cannot say which is near and which is far. For example, when a person from Dian says the region of Yan is far, this is calculated from Dian, so Yan is not truly far; when a person from Qi says the region of Yan is near, this is calculated from Qi, so Yan is not truly near. Furthermore, as with a space of ten paces, to an ant it is far, while to a large elephant it is near; one should not say that 'far' is real. Why? That ground should not be calculated from the ant. Nor should one say that 'near' is real. Why? That ground should not be calculated from the elephant. Moreover, calculating ten paces is also not real. Why? Since that ground is neither calculated from the ant nor from the elephant, it should also not be calculated from a human. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'In accordance with worldly convention, directions are said to exist; directions in reality cannot be apprehended.' Question: 'Why do you say that directionlessness is direction, and that it is both existent and permanent? As the sūtras say, where the sun rises is the east; where the sun sets is the west; where the sun travels is the south; where the sun does not travel is the north. The sun has three divisions of conjunction: whether it conjoined before, conjoins now, or will conjoin later. Following the solar division of the direction, the initial conjunction is the east; the south and west are also like this; where the sun does not travel is without division.' Answer: 'This is not so. Mount Sumeru is in the middle of the four regions, and the sun circles Sumeru, shining upon the four continents. When it is noon in Uttarakuru, it is sunrise in Pūrvavideha, and to the people of Pūrvavideha, this is the east; when it is noon in Pūrvavideha, it is sunrise in Jambudvīpa, and to the people of Jambudvīpa, this is the east. Thus there is really no beginning. Why is this? Every direction is the east, is the south, is the west, and is the north. When you say where the sun rises is the east, where the sun travels is the south, where the sun sets is the west, and where the sun does not travel is the north, this is not so.' Question: 'I was speaking of the directional signs within a single country, but you challenge me with the four continents. Therefore the east is not without a beginning.' Answer: 'If within a single country the sun conjoins with the east, this is to have a limit; because it has a limit, it is impermanent; because it is impermanent, it is not all-pervasive. Therefore there is only the name of direction, but no reality. Thus locations cannot even be apprehended, so how could there be a route of travel? Yet it does not do away with locations and routes of travel either. Why is this? Because while it should not be calculated from Jambudvīpa, it may also be calculated precisely from Jambudvīpa. Just as although the sun does not truly rise in the east and set in the west, one may still speak of it rising in the east and setting in the west.'