Great Master Zhuhong
Great Master Zhuhong, courtesy name Fohui and dharma name Lianchi, lived in the Ming dynasty. He was born into the Shen family in Renhe, Hangzhou. At age seventeen he was already appointed as an instructor and became known as one who excelled in both learning and conduct.
There was an elderly woman in his neighborhood who made a daily practice of reciting the Buddha’s name several thousand times. During a leisure visit, he asked her why. She replied: “While my husband was alive, he devoted himself to Buddha-recitation. When he was about to die, he had no painful illness, joyfully folded his hands, bid farewell to everyone, and passed away. Because of that, I know the merit of Buddha-recitation is inconceivable.”
Deeply moved, he began from then on to pay constant attention to the Pure Land path. He also wrote four words, “Birth and death are a great matter,” and posted them on the wall above his desk to remind himself.
At age thirty-two, he left home and became a monk, then traveled to study with renowned masters. Finally he studied under Chan Master Xiaoyan Yuexin and investigated the huatou: “Who is reciting the Buddha’s name?” One day, while walking in contemplation, he suddenly awakened and composed this verse:
For twenty years this doubt remained unresolved.
Three thousand miles away, what a strange encounter!
Burning incense, casting spear and halberd – all like a dream.
Mara and Buddha, empty disputes of right and wrong.
In the fifth year of Longqing, the Great Master was on alms rounds and passed by Yunqi Peak. Seeing the scenery there extraordinarily serene and elegant, he resolved to build a hut and practice there. In those mountains there were many tigers. He performed the Yoga Feeding Rite, and from then on the fierce animals no longer caused harm.
Several years later, during a long drought, local people came to the hermitage and asked him to pray for rain. He said, “I only know how to recite the Buddha’s name; I have no other ability.” But the people kept imploring him. Moved by their sincerity, he came out of the thatched hut, struck a wooden fish, walked along the rice-field embankments, and recited the Buddha’s name. Wherever his footsteps reached, heavy rain followed.
The people rejoiced and revered his virtue. Together they built monastery halls. Monks from many places gradually came to settle there. Before long, that place became a large and solemn monastic community, pure and dignified.
Although the Great Master had already penetrated Chan insight, he observed that people in the Dharma-ending age had weak capacities. Many could talk about principle, but very few truly realized it. For the benefit of self and others, he therefore advocated Pure Land and strongly refuted “mad Chan.”
His work Commentary and Notes on the Amitabha Sutra skillfully integrated principle and practice and embraced all three levels of capacity. Its explanations were deep and profound. Earlier eminent Buddhist masters had transmitted Pure Land but still did not set aside Chan. In the Great Master’s case, although he had received authentic mind-seal transmission from Chan Master Xiaoyan of the Linji lineage, he promoted only Pure Land. Because of this, many Chan scholars of the time were displeased.
Mr. Cao Luchuan, a Buddhist scholar, wrote twice to question him at Yunqi. The Great Master replied twice. Some sections related to Pure Land are excerpted below.
In daily life, the Great Master also cultivated many supportive merits for Pure Land practice: transmitting precepts, opening ponds for life release, revising the Water-Land ritual, performing the Yoga Flaming-Mouth rite to relieve suffering in the unseen realms, and spreading anti-killing precepts. Through this, many people were transformed toward goodness.
In the fortieth year of Wanli, at the end of the sixth month, the Great Master entered the city to bid farewell to disciples and old acquaintances, saying: “I am about to go elsewhere.” Then he returned to the monastery and offered tea to take leave of the community. No one understood why.
By the evening of the first day of the seventh month, he entered the monks’ hall and said: “Tomorrow I will leave.”
The following evening, he said he was tired and entered his room, sat in full lotus, and closed his eyes. Monks, lay disciples, and old acquaintances from the city all gathered. He opened his eyes, looked at everyone, and said: “All of you should sincerely recite the Buddha’s name. Do not do anything strange, and do not break my regulations.” After speaking, he faced west, joined his palms, recited the Buddha’s name, and passed away at age eighty-one.
Supplementary Questions and Answers
(Abridged Excerpts)
Letter of Inquiry:
“For a long time I have lived in Eastern Lu. For forty years I have studied both Confucian and Buddhist scriptures like a bookworm. I have also received teachings from learned people and gathered some understanding. Now, through Master Duanfan’s visit to Yunqi, I send these words hoping for correction from you, a good spiritual friend.
“In Buddhism there are the Three Baskets and twelve divisions of teachings. The World-Honored One once spread many nets in the vast sea of birth and death, rescuing beings of various capacities and guiding them to the shore of nirvana. Yet should we not speak broadly to include all, rather than raise one and discard many?
“Recently I heard some people say that Buddhahood attained over many kalpas is gradual, not sudden. But gradual teaching is also taught by the Buddha and is not wrong. Still, if one uses gradual teaching to reject sudden teaching, is that not mistaken?
“Venerable Sir inwardly conceals sudden perfect realization, yet outwardly displays the Pure Land method. This too has precedent among Buddhas, so no suspicion is needed. But your students esteem only Amitabha and abandon all else, wanting to honor one Pure Land sutra while setting aside the Three Baskets and twelve divisions. This is what I cannot accept.
“Although this is the Dharma-ending age, are there only dull capacities and no sharp ones? Shakyamuni taught one method to Kasyapa and Kaundinya, and another to Sudhana and the Dragon Girl. The Buddha’s teaching changes according to capacity, perfectly adaptable like a gourd rolling on water. If one stakes down one point and waits for rabbits, how can one benefit humans and gods?
“I deeply hope you teach according to capacity. When meeting those of sharp faculty, teach the supreme vehicle so they can realize perfect non-obstruction and avoid one-sided attachment. Then both great roc and little swallow could rejoice in hearing the Dharma. Would this not be excellent?
“The Avatamsaka Sutra is the One Vehicle Perfect Teaching, king among sutras. In your Commentary on the Amitabha Sutra, you compare Amitabha Sutra with Avatamsaka; this seems improper. Worse, some people use this to elevate Pure Land while suppressing Avatamsaka, mixing purple with vermilion. Please teach Pure Land to Pure Land capacities, Avatamsaka to Avatamsaka capacities. Do not denigrate one another or confuse one another; only then is Buddhism properly propagated.”
Reply Letter:
“I received your noble letter and know your vast intention is to bring all beings of the Dharma realm into the ocean of One Vehicle nature. This is Great Samantabhadra’s vast vow. I sincerely revere it.
“You said I should teach according to capacity. That is an excellent view. But guiding countless capacities is the work of Buddhas appearing in the world; this humble one cannot do that. When the Sixth Patriarch at Caoxi taught, was he not aware of other doctrinal systems? And when Master Huiyuan at Mount Lu established the White Lotus Society, including eminent monks and famous scholars, was he only guiding dull capacities?
“Likewise, among the five Chan houses – Yunmen, Fayan, Caodong, Guiyang, Linji – though sharing one source, each had different methods of guidance. Such distinctions among lineages are natural and not surprising. The patriarchs were all like this – how much more this ordinary person?
“If I fail to know my limits and imitate Buddha – today teaching this, tomorrow that – I become vague, with no authentic lineage, seemingly helping people but actually misleading them. Why? Because Buddha is Dharma King, free with all dharmas. But when an ordinary subject presumptuously claims to be emperor, danger follows. Should we not be careful?
“It is true Avatamsaka is One Vehicle Perfect Teaching and includes immeasurable gates. Seeking rebirth in Pure Land is one of those immeasurable gates within Avatamsaka. According to today’s capacities, one should enter Avatamsaka through Pure Land. I do not raise Pure Land in order to discard Avatamsaka.
“You said because I compared Amitabha Sutra with Avatamsaka, others wrote essays exalting Pure Land and suppressing Avatamsaka. Please tell me: where is that essay, and who wrote it? I have never made Amitabha equal to Avatamsaka. In my commentary I only said: ‘Avatamsaka is supremely complete; Amitabha Sutra partakes of a little of that completeness.’ This means Amitabha belongs to one branch of Avatamsaka’s Dharma family. How could that imply equal rank?
“Furthermore, speaking Avatamsaka already includes Pure Land; speaking Pure Land also communicates with Avatamsaka. Thus one may expound Avatamsaka and another Pure Land – they proceed together without conflict.
“People today know only that Avatamsaka is broader than Sukhavati, but do not realize Amitabha is precisely Vairocana Buddha. Nagarjuna transmitted Avatamsaka and yet vowed for rebirth in Ultimate Bliss. Manjushri and Samantabhadra, attendants of Vairocana and called the Three Sages of Avatamsaka, also vowed for the Lotus Land. You advised me to teach Pure Land to Pure Land capacities and Avatamsaka to Avatamsaka capacities. May I ask: what kind of beings are Manjushri, Samantabhadra, and Nagarjuna? If such Bodhisattvas recite Buddha and seek Pure Land rebirth, are they Pure Land capacities or Avatamsaka capacities?
“You have long promoted Avatamsaka, yet oppose Manjushri, Samantabhadra, and Nagarjuna. This I truly cannot understand.
“In truth, you and I are both good companions in the Lotus Treasury World. Now this old man wishes to invite you as a brother in the Lotus Land. Please reflect and do not regard me as an outsider.”
Second Letter of Inquiry:
“Venerable Duanfan delivered your response. I read it and was deeply moved by your careful concern. Yet some private doubts remain:
“In the Lotus Sutra, in praising merit of upholding, it says a woman who upholds that chapter will leave the female body and be reborn in Ultimate Bliss. Does that mean Pure Land rebirth is merely a woman’s karmic result?
“Also, in the Surangama Sutra section selecting perfect penetration, Manjushri rejects Mahasthamaprapta’s Buddha-recitation method as impermanent and arising-ceasing. What is your view?
“When students read Master Shandao’s verse ‘Only one shortcut of practice: recite Amitabha Buddha,’ Chan Master Teji shouted, ‘Still circling old roads – what is there to recite?’ He also said, ‘As before, abandoning father and wandering abroad – pitiable, Amitabha Buddha!’ Such words from an awakened master – do they not carry meaning?
“Thus wise people say: many kalpas of hard practice do not equal one thought realizing Non-arising Dharma Patience. The wise should transcend provisional Triple Vehicle learning and go beyond self and possessions. In Pure Land rebirth, there is still a reciter and a place of rebirth – subject and object remain distinct. How can this be ultimate?
“If one says, ‘When lotus blooms and Buddha is seen, one realizes non-arising,’ then one must wait until rebirth and seeing Amitabha before awakening. Is this not too delayed and remote?
“In my previous letter I advised you: teach Pure Land to Pure Land capacities and Avatamsaka to Avatamsaka capacities. I truly spoke from my full concern. Yet you did not heed it. Recently listeners from your Dharma assembly in Hangzhou came to Suzhou, and all were eager only for the nine grades. When I mentioned supreme teaching, they stared in alarm. Is this the fault of teacher or students?
“A great man should have towering scope. Since you have entered the world, opened Dharma hall, and ascended the seat, why not display great strategist capacity, but imitate old village men and women who keep vegetarian diets and rituals? If one day questioned by sharp and penetrating people, will you hide in the North Star or conceal yourself in Iron Enclosure Mountain?
“To invite me as lotus companion in Ultimate Bliss is like asking me to carry thorns and discard gold, chasing objects into delusion. Have you not heard: the golden-winged roc spreads wings and soars nine layers of clouds; the divine horse lifts a hoof and passes ten thousand miles? Such beings do not follow ordinary feeding lines, nor bury themselves casually. The ancients said: to consummate this great matter, one must stand atop the highest peak and descend to the ocean floor. If one cannot abandon bedroom comfort, where can one be of use?
“Therefore Buddhism is a great matter, not ordinary. I hope you reconsider.”
Reply Letter:
“Your kind guidance is eloquent, layered, and admirable. But I humbly think: though your concern for me is deep, your many words are regrettably wasted.
“If you truly wish to promote Chan and suppress Pure Land, there is no need for so many words. Why not simply say: ‘All Buddhas of three times are swallowed by my mouth. If not even one Buddha is established, who is Amitabha?’ Why not also say: ‘If one knows mind, the great earth has not an inch of land. If not an inch exists, where is Ultimate Bliss?’ Those two lines alone already contain all you want to say.
“Now, if I reply point by point, I may fall into argumentative conflict. If I do not reply at all, since this concerns the Dharma, I also cannot remain silent. So I offer this brief clarification:
“You cited Lotus Sutra and said Pure Land rebirth is women’s cause and effect. Then is the Dragon Girl becoming Buddha also women’s cause and effect?
“You cited Surangama saying Manjushri criticized Buddha-recitation as impermanent, arising and ceasing, not perfectly penetrating. Then why was Kaundinya’s awakening through the two words ‘guest dust’ – which directly reveals impermanence and accords with non-arising and non-ceasing – also not selected as perfect penetration? If truly Avalokitesvara passed and Mahasthamaprapta failed, have you not heard the village saying about striking Dragon Gate with one’s forehead?
“As for Chan Master Teji’s words: since you study Chan, do you not know such sayings are expedient means to release attachment, with meaning beyond literal words? Why cling to literal text and die beneath those sentences?
“If taken literally, then old masters saying ‘Walk upon Vairocana Buddha’s head’ would mean literally trampling him. How could that be? Such Chan expressions in recorded sayings number in countless millions. Forty years ago this old man also used such high-flown language and forceful phrasing. Later, reflecting on it, I felt ashamed and no longer dared follow that old style; even now recalling it, I blush.
“If Teji says, ‘As before, abandoning father and wandering abroad – pitiable, Amitabha Buddha,’ then I can answer with a turning phrase: ‘Now truly like a child remembering mother, returning to old home – joyful, Amitabha Buddha.’ We may weigh these two sayings and see which carries more weight and how far apart they really are.
“You cited: many kalpas of bitter practice are inferior to one thought realizing Non-arising Dharma Patience. I ask: have you realized Non-arising Dharma Patience yet? If yes, you should not think, ‘I am one who is reborn, and Pure Land is where I am reborn.’ Why? Because mind is precisely realm – who is reborn? Realm is precisely mind – where is rebirth? Since subject and object are no longer seen, though rebirth occurs, there has never truly been birth. That is true non-arising.
“If one claims only ‘not being reborn anywhere’ is non-arising, that falls into annihilationist emptiness.
“You said waiting for lotus bloom and seeing Buddha to awaken is delayed and remote. But one who understands Chan should know: from delusion to awakening is like waking from a long dream. Buddha-reciters differ by capacity: some realize their nature in this very life – that is lotus blooming in an instant. Some realize only after rebirth – that is later blooming. Capacities differ in sharpness and diligence, so blooming may be early or late. How can one uniformly condemn it as delayed?
“You also mentioned some monks in some wilderness place who, upon hearing supreme teaching, stared in fear. Yet you advised me: teach Avatamsaka to Avatamsaka capacities and Pure Land to Pure Land capacities. Those people were dull capacity; they should precisely be taught Pure Land. Why not prescribe medicine according to disease, but instead discuss supreme teaching with them?
“You said that since I entered the world, opened Dharma hall, and ascended the seat, I lack the strategy of a great person. I have never dared claim such honor, so naturally I do not possess such strategy. Let that pass.
“But if you belittle Pure Land practitioners as old village men and women, you are not merely belittling them – you are belittling Manjushri, Samantabhadra, Asvaghosa, and Nagarjuna. Not only these Bodhisattvas, but also patriarchs such as Huiyuan, Shandao, Tiantai, Yongming, and many great good teachers and famous Buddha-reciters – according to you, are they all village folk?
“If village folk recite Buddha and attain rebirth to the stage of non-retrogression, should they really be despised? Those old men and women who keep vegetarian practice and recite Buddha deserve praise for keeping to their own plain discipline.
“But what of clever eloquent people who eat meat, drink wine, recklessly speak prajna, and morning and evening seek monks to debate Chan and doctrine?
“As for old men and women being questioned by sharp intellects, no need to ascend the North Star or hide in Iron Enclosure Mountain. They need only place a bed across those sharp people’s throats and set a seat upon their eyes. Why? So those people might, for once, close the mouth at the gate of samadhi and turn the light inward to examine themselves.
“You say advising Buddha-recitation and Pure Land rebirth is upside-down delusion, chasing objects, carrying thorns and discarding gold, and humiliating oneself. Yet those metaphors are still not intimate enough. Let this old man offer another:
“A simple old farmer sent an invitation to a wealthy magnate, asking him to visit his country home. Everyone laughed. The old farmer then cleaned the roads and invited again. The gatekeeper of the rich household laughed and said, ‘Your first visit was not rebuked, and that was already fortunate. Do you intend to be shameless?’
“The old man replied: ‘Among the rich, some become wealthy without benevolence. Some appear rich outwardly but are poor within. Some are not yet rich but already arrogant. Some merely keep ledgers and warehouses for the rich yet think themselves wealthy. And great fortunes like Jingu and Meiwu – where are they now?
“I am only an old farmer, content in peaceful simplicity. Forgetting my low status, I invited you out of pity. Very well – from now on I know my fault.’
“Then both sides laughed heartily and parted.”
Great Master Zhu Hong, courtesy name Fohui and Dharma name Lianchi, lived in the Ming dynasty. He was born into the Shen family in Renhe, Hangzhou. At seventeen, he was already appointed as a teaching scholar and became known as one who combined learning and conduct.
There was an elderly woman in his neighborhood who recited the Buddha’s name several thousand times daily as her regular practice. During a free moment, he visited her and asked why. She replied:
“My husband, while alive, devoted himself to Buddha-recitation. When he was near death, he had no illness or pain. Joyfully, with folded hands, he bid everyone farewell and passed away. From this I know the merit of Buddha-recitation is inconceivable.”
Deeply moved, he from then on paid constant attention to the Pure Land Dharma gate. He also wrote four words – “Birth and death: the great matter” – and posted them on the wall above his desk as a daily warning.
At age thirty-two, he left home to become a monk and traveled to study with renowned masters. Finally, he learned under Chan Master Xiaoyan Yuetxin and investigated the huatou: “Who is reciting the Buddha’s name?” One day, while walking in contemplation, he suddenly awakened and composed this verse:
For twenty years this question remained unresolved;
Beyond three thousand li, what a strange encounter!
Burning incense, throwing the halberd – all like a dream;
Demons and Buddhas argue emptily over right and wrong.
In the fifth year of Longqing, the Great Master was on alms round and passed by Yunqi Peak. Seeing the landscape’s extraordinary purity and elegance, he resolved to build a hut there and practice. That mountain had many tigers, so he performed the Yoga Feeding Rite; afterward, wild beasts no longer caused harm.
A few years later, during a long drought, local residents came to his hut and asked him to pray for rain. He answered: “I only know how to recite the Buddha’s name; I have no other skill.” Yet they earnestly persisted. Moved by their sincerity, he left his grass hut, struck the wooden fish, walked along the field banks reciting the Buddha’s name. Wherever his feet reached, heavy rain followed. The people rejoiced, revered his virtue, and together built temple halls. Monks from many places came one after another to reside there, and before long it became a great, solemn, and pure monastic center.
Although the Great Master had awakened to Chan, he observed that people in the Dharma-ending age had weak capacities: many spoke doctrine, but very few truly realized it. For the sake of benefiting self and others, he advocated Pure Land and strongly refuted Wild Chan.
His Commentary and Notes on the Amitabha Sutra (Buddha-Spoken Amitabha Sutra, Commentary and Notes) harmonized principle and practice and embraced practitioners of all three capacities, with profound and learned explanation.
Before him, eminent Buddhist teachers promoted Pure Land yet did not leave Chan. But this Great Master, though he had received authentic mind-seal transmission from Master Xiaoyan of the Linji lineage, chose to promote only Pure Land. Therefore many Chan scholars of the time were displeased. Cao Luxuan, a Buddhist scholar, sent letters twice to Yunqi questioning him; the Master replied twice as well. Some Pure Land-related passages are excerpted below.
In daily life, the Great Master also practiced many supporting merits for Pure Land cultivation, such as transmitting precepts and opening life-release ponds. He also revised the Water-and-Land rite, performed the Yoga Flaming-Mouth rite to relieve beings in the unseen realm, and spread teachings against killing, transforming many people toward wholesome conduct.
In the fortieth year of Wanli, at the end of the sixth month, the Great Master entered the city to bid farewell to disciples and old acquaintances, saying: “I am about to go elsewhere.” He then returned to the monastery and hosted tea to part from the assembly. No one understood why.
On the evening of the first day of the seventh month, he went to the monks’ hall and said: “Tomorrow I will depart.” The next evening, he said he was tired, entered his room, sat in full lotus, and closed his eyes. Monks, lay disciples, and old acquaintances from the city all gathered.
He opened his eyes, looked at them, and said: “All of you should recite the Buddha’s name sincerely. Do nothing strange, and do not break my regulations.” Having said this, he faced west, joined palms, recited the Buddha’s name, and passed away at age eighty-one.
Supplementary Questions and Answers
(Abridged excerpts)
Question Letter:
“This humble one has long lived in Eastern Lu and has studied Confucian and Buddhist scriptures for forty years like a bookworm. I have also often received instruction from learned people and accumulated a little understanding. Now, as Master Duanfan comes to Yunqi, I send these words in hopes of correction from you, a good spiritual friend.
“In Buddhism there are the three baskets and twelve divisions of teachings. The World-Honored One cast many kinds of nets over the vast sea of birth and death, rescuing beings of all levels to the shore of nirvana. One should speak broadly to include all – how can one select one and abandon many?
“Recently, I hear some say that becoming Buddha over many kalpas is gradual, not sudden. Yet gradual teaching is also taught by the Buddha and is not wrong. But to use gradual teaching to reject sudden teaching – is that not mistaken?
“You inwardly conceal sudden and perfect realization, but outwardly present the Pure Land Dharma gate. This itself is no cause for suspicion, since Buddhas too have done so. But your students honor only Amitabha and neglect all else; they wish to exalt one Pure Land sutra and discard the three baskets and twelve divisions. This I cannot approve.
“Though this is the Dharma-ending age, are there only dull capacities and no sharp ones? Shakyamuni taught one Dharma to Kashyapa and Kaundinya, and another to Sudhana and the Dragon Girl. The Buddha’s teaching changes according to conditions, perfectly adaptive like a gourd rolling over water. If fixed like stakes and pegs, waiting for rabbits at a stump, how can one benefit gods and humans?
“Please teach according to capacity: when meeting sharp faculties, teach the supreme vehicle so they realize perfect non-obstruction without one-sided attachment; thus eagles and swallows alike can delight in hearing. Is this not most excellent?
“The Avatamsaka Sutra is the One Vehicle Perfect Teaching, king of sutras. Yet in your Amitabha Commentary and Notes, you compare the Amitabha Sutra with Avatamsaka; this seems inappropriate. Some then use this to elevate Pure Land and suppress Avatamsaka, confusing purple with vermilion. Please teach Pure Land for Pure Land capacities and Avatamsaka for Avatamsaka capacities. Do not disparage each other, nor mix them improperly. Only then is Buddha-Dharma truly propagated.”
Reply Letter:
“Receiving your cloud-letter, I see your vast intent to lead all beings of the Dharma realm into the ocean of One Vehicle nature. This is the great vow of Samantabhadra; I deeply admire it.
“You say I should teach according to capacity – an excellent view. But guiding limitless capacities is the work of Buddhas appearing in the world. This humble one cannot do that.
“Did not the Sixth Patriarch at Caoxi refrain from teaching many other systems? Did not Master Huiyuan at Mount Lu establish only the White Lotus Society, including eminent monks and scholars – not merely dull capacities? Even among the five Chan schools – Yunmen, Fayan, Caodong, Guiyang, Linji – though from one source, their methods of guidance differ. This is each lineage’s legitimate expedient and nothing strange.
“Past patriarchs were like this; all the more so for an ordinary person like me. If, without measuring myself, I imitate Buddha by teaching one method today and another tomorrow, I become confused and rootless, without transmission. Though called helping others, it actually misleads them. Why? Buddha is Dharma King, sovereign over all dharmas. A commoner pretending to be Son of Heaven is dangerous – should we not be cautious?
“Avatamsaka is indeed One Vehicle Perfect Teaching and contains immeasurable gates. Seeking rebirth in Pure Land is one of those immeasurable gates within Avatamsaka. For present capacities, one should enter Avatamsaka through Pure Land – not raise Pure Land while abandoning Avatamsaka.
“You say because I compared Amitabha Sutra with Avatamsaka, people wrote treatises exalting Pure Land and suppressing Avatamsaka. Where is this treatise, and who wrote it? I have never equated Amitabha Sutra with Avatamsaka. In my commentary I only wrote: ‘Avatamsaka is supremely complete; Amitabha Sutra contains a small part of that completeness.’ That means Amitabha Sutra is a branch-family within Avatamsaka – how is that equal rank?
“Moreover, speaking Avatamsaka includes Pure Land, and speaking Pure Land also connects to Avatamsaka. So Avatamsaka teachers teach Avatamsaka, Pure Land teachers teach Pure Land; they proceed together without conflict.
“People today know only that Avatamsaka appears broader than Ultimate Bliss, but do not know that Amitabha is precisely Vairocana Buddha. Nagarjuna propagated Avatamsaka yet vowed for rebirth in Ultimate Bliss. Manjushri and Samantabhadra, attendants of Vairocana and called the Three Avatamsaka Sages, also vowed for rebirth in the Lotus Land.
“You advise me to teach Pure Land for Pure Land capacities and Avatamsaka for Avatamsaka capacities. Then I ask: What kind of beings are Manjushri, Samantabhadra, and Nagarjuna? Those Bodhisattvas recited Buddha’s name seeking Pure Land rebirth – were they Pure Land capacities or Avatamsaka capacities?
“You have long promoted Avatamsaka, yet oppose Manjushri, Samantabhadra, and Nagarjuna – this I cannot understand.
“In truth, you and I are both good companions in the Lotus Treasury World. This old man now wishes to invite you as a brother in the Lotus Land. Please consider this and do not treat me as an outsider.”
Second Question Letter:
“Venerable Duanfan brought your poetic reply. Its sincerity and care deeply moved me. Yet some doubts remain; I ask to present several points:
“The Lotus Sutra, in praising merit of upholding, says: ‘If a woman upholds this chapter she will leave female body forever and be reborn in Ultimate Bliss.’ Is Pure Land rebirth then merely cause and effect for women?
“Also, in the Shurangama Sutra’s selection of perfect penetration, Manjushri criticized Mahasthamaprapta’s Buddha-recitation method as impermanent and arising-ceasing. What is your view?
“When students read Master Shandao’s verse ‘Only one shortcut in cultivation: recite Amitabha Buddha,’ Chan Master Ziji shouted: ‘Still circling old roads – what are you reciting?’ He also said: ‘Still like before – abandoning father and running away, wandering afar. Pitiful, Amitabha Buddha!’ Are not such words of an awakened master meaningful?
“Thus the wise have said: ‘Aeons of hard cultivation are not equal to one thought awakening to Non-arising Forbearance.’ The wise should transcend provisional Three-Vehicle learning and go beyond self and possessions.
“Now Pure Land rebirth speaks of ‘I’ who am reborn and ‘Ultimate Bliss’ as destination; subject and object remain distinct. How can this be ultimate?
“If one says ‘When lotus opens and Buddha is seen, one realizes non-arising,’ must one wait until after rebirth and seeing Amitabha to awaken? Is this not too delayed and remote?
“In my previous letter I urged you: ‘For Pure Land capacities teach Pure Land; for Avatamsaka capacities teach Avatamsaka.’ I spoke fully for your sake. Yet you did not heed. Recently listeners from your Hangzhou assembly came to Suzhou, all eager only for nine grades of rebirth. When I mentioned the Supreme Vehicle, they stared in shock and fear! Is this the teacher’s fault or the disciples’?
“A great man should have towering scope. Since you have appeared in the world, opened Dharma hall, and ascended teaching seat, why not display great strategy, but imitate old vegetarian men and women in village lanes?
“If one day questioned by the truly sharp and penetrating, will you hide above the North Star or in Iron Encircling Mountain?
“Your invitation for me to be lotus companion in Ultimate Bliss is like asking me to carry thorns and throw away gold, to chase objects into delusion. Have you not heard: the golden-winged great roc spreads wings and rises above nine heavens; the divine horse lifts hooves and crosses ten thousand li. Such beings do not follow ordinary feeding ranks nor bury themselves cheaply.
“The ancients said: ‘To settle this matter, stand atop highest peaks and dive to deepest seas. If one still clings to chamber comfort, how can one be of use?’ Buddha-Dharma is the great matter, not ordinary. Please reconsider.”
Second Reply Letter:
“Your generous care, elegant reasoning, and layered argument are truly admirable. Yet I privately think: your concern is deep, but your many words are sadly wasted.
“If you truly wish to exalt Chan and suppress Pure Land, no need for lengthy speech. Why not simply say: ‘All Buddhas of three times are swallowed by my mouth. Since not even one Buddha stands, who is Amitabha?’ Why not say: ‘If one knows mind, there is not an inch of earth. If not one inch exists, where is Ultimate Bliss?’ Those two statements alone contain everything you wish to say.
“If I answer every point, I risk contentious dispute. If I remain silent, Dharma concerns prevent that. So I will reply briefly:
“You cite Lotus Sutra and say Pure Land rebirth is woman’s cause and effect. Then Longnu becoming Buddha – is that also merely woman’s cause and effect?
“You cite Shurangama: Manjushri criticized Buddha-recitation as impermanent, arising-ceasing, not perfectly penetrating. Then why is Kaundinya’s awakening through ‘guest and dust’ – understanding impermanence and non-arising-ceasing – not selected as perfect penetration? If truly Avalokitesvara passed and Mahasthamaprapta failed, have you not heard the rustic saying of ‘striking the dragon gate with one’s forehead’?
“As for Chan Master Ziji’s remarks: since you study Chan, why not know that masters use such words to loosen attachments? Their meaning lies beyond words. Yet you cling to literal language and die under the sentence.
“If taken literally, then when old masters say ‘step on Vairocana Buddha’s head,’ is that literal stepping? In recorded sayings there are countless such devices.
“Forty years ago, this old one also used lofty and forceful rhetoric. Later I felt ashamed and no longer followed that old style; even now recalling it, I blush.
“If Ziji said, ‘still abandoning father, wandering afar – pitiful Amitabha,’ then let me answer with transformed speech: ‘Now truly as child remembering mother, returning to old home – joyful Amitabha!’ Weigh this against Ziji’s words and see which is heavier or lighter, and how far apart they really are.
“You quote: ‘Aeons of hard cultivation are not equal to one thought awakening to Non-arising Forbearance.’ I ask: have you realized Non-arising Forbearance yet? If realized, you should not think: I am one who is reborn; Pure Land is where I am reborn.
“Why? Mind is environment – who is the reborn one? Environment is mind – where is the place reborn to? Because subject-object are not seen, though one is reborn, there has never been birth. This is true non-arising.
“If you claim that ‘not being reborn anywhere’ is non-arising, that becomes nihilistic emptiness.
“You say waiting for lotus-opening to realize non-arising is too delayed. One versed in Chan should know: awakening from delusion is like waking from a long dream.
“Among Buddha-recitation practitioners, some realize their nature in this very life – this is lotus-opening in an instant. Some realize only after rebirth – this is later lotus-opening. Because capacities vary and effort differs, lotus-opening is early or late. One cannot blanketly call it mistaken delay.
“You also mention some monks from some remote mountain who, when hearing Supreme Vehicle, stared in fear. You advised me: for Avatamsaka capacities, teach Avatamsaka; for Pure Land capacities, teach Pure Land. Those people were dull capacities and should indeed hear Pure Land. Why did you not prescribe medicine according to disease, but discuss Supreme Vehicle with them?
“You say I have emerged in the world, opened Dharma hall, ascended teaching seat, yet lack great-man strategy. This old one never dares claim to be one who has emerged in the world, so naturally I have no such strategy. Let that pass.
“But if you belittle Pure Land practitioners as village old men and women who eat vegetarian food, then you are not merely insulting them – you are insulting Manjushri, Samantabhadra, Ashvaghosha, and Nagarjuna. Not only these Bodhisattvas, but patriarchs and teachers such as Huiyuan, Shandao, Tiantai, Yongming, and many eminent reciters – are they all rustic people too?
“Even if rustic people recite the Buddha and attain rebirth, they ascend the stage of non-retrogression. Why despise them? Those old men and women at least keep to their own plain discipline. But what of clever eloquent people who eat meat, drink wine, and idly speak Prajna, then morning and night challenge monks about Chan and Dao?
“As for when rustic practitioners are questioned by sharp intellectuals, no need to climb the North Star or hide in Iron Mountain. They need only set a bed across such intellectuals’ throats and a seat upon their eyes. Why? So those people temporarily close the mouth-door, shut their speech-samadhi, and turn the light inward to examine themselves.
“You say encouraging Buddha-recitation and Pure Land rebirth is upside-down delusion, chasing objects, carrying thorns while discarding gold, and self-humiliation. Yet those analogies are still not close enough. Let this old one offer another:
“A simple old farmer sincerely sent an invitation to a wealthy elder, inviting him to visit his rural home. People laughed. The farmer cleaned roads and invited again. The rich man’s gatekeeper laughed and said: ‘You were lucky the master did not scold you last time. Are you shameless?’
“The old farmer replied: ‘Among the rich are some wealthy but inhumane; some outwardly rich but inwardly poor; some not yet rich but already arrogant; some only keep ledgers for the rich and think themselves rich. And prosperous houses like Jingu and Miwu – where are they now? I am an old farmer enjoying peaceful joy. Forgetting my low status, I invited out of compassion. From now on, I admit my fault.’
“Then both laughed loudly and parted.”