Direct in its approach and omitting expedient means, the Amitabha Sutra talks
exclusively about recitation of Amitabhas name, describing the support voiced by the
Buddhas in all ten directions. It constitutes the summation of Pure Land practice.
It can be said that the Longer Sutra is the source, the Contemplation Sutra the
extension and the Amitabha Sutra the conclusion.
After him came the highly virtuous and influential Master Daochuo (562-645) of
the Sui-Tang period. Consciously following Master Tanluans footsteps, he composed
the Collection on the Land of Peace and Joy, which expounded the notion of the Sacred
and the Pure Land paths. Harmonizing his teaching with the conditions of the time,
Daochuo encouraged people to seek rebirth in Amitabhas Pure Land.
He was followed by Master Shandao (613-681) of the Tang Dynasty, who was
widely regarded as an incarnation of Amitabha Buddha. A personal disciple of Master
Daochuo, he wrote the Five Works in Nine Fascicles, consisting of the Commentary on
the Contemplation Sutra, Dharma School of Contemplation and Recitation, In Praise of
Dharma Practices, In Praise of the Rite of Rebirth and In Praise of Pratyutpanna (in the
presence of the Buddhas). These writings definitively set out the teachings and
practices of the Pure Land tradition. Pure Land emerged as an independent school, and
recitation of Amitabhas name was thenceforth enshrined as a luminous practice.
The heritage continued with the Japanese master, Honen (1133-1211). Basing his
teachings on the thought of Shandao, he composed the Collection on Choosing BuddhaRecitation According to the Fundamental Vow and founded the Pure Land school of
Japan.
The above lineage masters all centered their treatises and commentaries on the
Fundamental Vow of Amitabha Buddha. They advocated other-power and the Easy Path.
Drawing on a common source, they promoted the same teachings and practices. This is
the lineage of the commentaries; it is also known as the Path of the Great Vow.
Amitabhas Pure Land, it is not possible to do so outside the two paths. Besides the 13
patriarchs, all prominent advocates of Pure Land can be put into one or the other
category. Tanluan and Daochuo, for instance, promoted the Great Vow, while Cimin
taught the Path of Importance.
QUESTION: Since Master Shandao spoke of the two paths and explained the Path
of Importance (seeking rebirth by dedicating merit from good deeds) according to the
Contemplation Sutra, surely he emphasized both paths? Why do you say Shandao
advocated the Path of the Great Vow exclusively?
ANSWER: The Tiantai school classified the Dharma into four paths: Pitaka,
Common, Distinctive and Round (perfect). But they promoted only the Round teaching.
Likewise, Master Daochuo explained both the Sacred Path and the Pure Land Path, but
advocated Pure Land alone.
Consider also a large tree, whose branches and leaves give shade to everything
around it. The tree itself, however, is rooted in the earth; it is grounded in a specific
space or realm. Similarly, Master Shandao roots himself in the Path of the Great Vow.
Though he explicated the meditative and non-meditative virtues of the Path of
Importance, he was using them to shed light on the workings of the Great Vow. As he
noted in his Commentary on the Contemplation Sutra: The passages in the
[Contemplation] Sutra on meditative and non-meditative virtues are meant only to
highlight the point that rebirth is achieved through recitation of Amitabhas name. The
Commentary also said, Though preceding passages spoke of the merits of the
meditative and non-meditative virtues, the Buddhas underlying wish is that sentient
beings recite Amitabhas name single-mindedly.
QUESTION: Yanshou and other masters achieved the status of Pure Land
patriarchs, but were not included in your lineage. Why is that?
ANSWER: They were designated patriarchs because of their great contributions
to propagation of the Pure Land tradition. As their teaching inclined towards the Path of
Importance, they are not a part of our lineage. In classifications relating to any Dharma
school, there is always a distinction between primary and secondary elements. The
lineage of a school is based solely on the primary factors, not the secondary ones.
Within the Pure Land school, the Path of the Great Vow is the root (primary) and the
Path of Importance are the branches and leaves (secondary). Therefore we make
reference only to the Path of the Great Vow while determining lineage.
QUESTION: The Amitabha Sutra is a core (primary) sutra of the Pure Land school,
especially as it speaks solely of recitation of Amitabha Buddhas name. Masters Lianchi
and Ouyi both wrote commentaries on it. How can they be classified among the
branches and leaves of the Path of Importance?
ANSWER: Though the sutra they explicate is a primary text, their expositions
remain entirely within the Path of Importance. Such works as Master Lianchis
Commentary on the Amitabha Sutra and Master Ouyis Explication of the Amitabha
Sutra were influenced by the classifications of other schools; they do not thoroughly
illuminate the purpose of Amitabha Buddhas Fundamental Vow. Therefore they remain
within the confines of the Path of Importance. As for Master Shandao, not only is his In
Praise of Dharma Practices explicating the Amitabha Sutra a part of the Great Vow
Path, but so is his treatise on the Contemplation Sutra. Though that work speaks of the
meditative and non-meditative virtues, its core focus is on name-recitation according to
Amitabhas Fundamental Vow.
QUESTION: Are the branches and leaves of the Path of Importance of little
significance then?
ANSWER: The teachings of the various patriarchs all have their particular
timeliness and special circumstances. So long as they are in harmony with prevailing
historical conditions, they are significant, even indispensable. If not for the Path of
Importance, we would not have all schools converging with the Pure Land school. But
without the Path of the Great Vow, the situation of Pure Land dominating the other
schools would not exist. The two paths complement and complete each other, working
together to teach sentient beings. As in the case of a tree, the root gives rise to the
branches and leaves, which in turn enhance the root. They constitute a single entity.
QUESTION: Why are masters such as Fazhao, who was both a patriarch and an
advocate of the Great Vow Path, not included in the lineage?
ANSWER: The meaning of lineage is such that those selected for inclusion not
only promoted the Path of the Great Vow exclusively, but also made great contributions
to Great Vow thought, leaving important writings to posterity. Accordingly, there are
only Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu in India, and Tanluan, Daochuo and Shandao in China.