Contra a Popular Misconception: The Pure Land is not a Bodhisattva "Training Ground"

[Zhen Li]

I'm just going through the Sanskrit Longer Sutra, and just went over the 28th vow.

It occurred to me that it is often claimed that the Pure Land is a training ground or school for bodhisattvas. I think this explanation helps people to overcome the misconception that the Pure Land is a paradise or heaven. As a skilful means that is fine, but the Pure Land scriptures do not support that claim.

28. sacenme bhagavan bodhiprāptasya tatra buddhakṣetre kasyacitsattvasyoddeśo vā svādhyāyo vā kartavyaḥ syāt, na te sarve pratisaṃvitprāptā bhaveyuḥ, mā tāvadahamanuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhimabhisaṃbudhyeyam.

If, O Bhagavān, having attained bodhi, instruction or learning should have to be done by any being in that buddha land, and they should not all be possessed of perfect and complete knowledge, then may I not fully awaken to anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

[Kamshan]

I'm just going through the Sanskrit Longer Sutra, and just went over the 28th vow.

It occurred to me that it is often claimed that the Pure Land is a training ground or school for bodhisattvas. I think this explanation helps people to overcome the misconception that the Pure Land is a paradise or heaven. As a skilful means that is fine, but the Pure Land scriptures do not support that claim.

28. sacenme bhagavan bodhiprāptasya tatra buddhakṣetre kasyacitsattvasyoddeśo vā svādhyāyo vā kartavyaḥ syāt, na te sarve pratisaṃvitprāptā bhaveyuḥ, mā tāvadahamanuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhimabhisaṃbudhyeyam.

If, O Bhagavān, having attained bodhi, instruction or learning should have to be done by any being in that buddha land, and they should not all be possessed of perfect and complete knowledge, then may I not fully awaken to anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

Forgive my ignorance, as I can't read Sanskrit and I'm not familiar with whichever text you are quoting from. But I personally read this passage as indicating that a certain sentient being, upon actually attaining bodhi in that Buddhafield, would not have to do any further work in order to be fully enlightened. To me it is affirming that full enlightenment can indeed be reached within that Buddhafield / Pure Land; the person don't need to be reborn somewhere else for a "graduation ceremony" bestowing full enlightenment in a different realm, so to speak.

I would enjoy seeing more input from yourself and others.

[Zhen Li]

I'm just going through the Sanskrit Longer Sutra, and just went over the 28th vow.

It occurred to me that it is often claimed that the Pure Land is a training ground or school for bodhisattvas. I think this explanation helps people to overcome the misconception that the Pure Land is a paradise or heaven. As a skilful means that is fine, but the Pure Land scriptures do not support that claim.

28. sacenme bhagavan bodhiprāptasya tatra buddhakṣetre kasyacitsattvasyoddeśo vā svādhyāyo vā kartavyaḥ syāt, na te sarve pratisaṃvitprāptā bhaveyuḥ, mā tāvadahamanuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhimabhisaṃbudhyeyam.

If, O Bhagavān, having attained bodhi, instruction or learning should have to be done by any being in that buddha land, and they should not all be possessed of perfect and complete knowledge, then may I not fully awaken to anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

Forgive my ignorance, as I can't read Sanskrit and I'm not familiar with whichever text you are quoting from. But I personally read this passage as indicating that a certain sentient being, upon actually attaining bodhi in that Buddhafield, would not have to do any further work in order to be fully enlightened. To me it is affirming that full enlightenment can indeed be reached within that Buddhafield / Pure Land; the person don't need to be reborn somewhere else for a "graduation ceremony" bestowing full enlightenment in a different realm, so to speak.

I would enjoy seeing more input from yourself and others.

Yes, I think that is the idea.

I am more specifically responding to this idea that there is a training process through the bhūmis that takes place in the Pure Land. I.e., that one goes from the 1st up to 10th bhūmi through an instruction and training process.

Shinran (I think relying on Shandao) suggests that there are no stages in the Pure Land. The ten stages are a kind of manifestation required of beings in our world, but it is no longer applicable in the Pure Land. Likewise, stages of birth exist only from the perspective of beings in our world, but once there (and not in a borderland birth), they cease to exist.

[Könchok Thrinley]

I remember it being said that beings in Amitabha's pure land may manifest in our world to help guide sentient beings. I think Karma Chagme in his Aspiration towards Sukhavati mentions it. Maybe that is the origin of the idea that pure land is a "training ground"?

[Astus]

It occurred to me that it is often claimed that the Pure Land is a training ground or school for bodhisattvas. I think this explanation helps people to overcome the misconception that the Pure Land is a paradise or heaven. As a skilful means that is fine, but the Pure Land scriptures do not support that claim.

If, as you seem to suggest, birth in Sukhavati would magically turn beings into buddhas, then all the many vows would be meaningless, plus it would defy the basic doctrine that everyone has to attain liberation on their own.

28. sacenme bhagavan bodhiprāptasya tatra buddhakṣetre kasyacitsattvasyoddeśo vā svādhyāyo vā kartavyaḥ syāt, na te sarve pratisaṃvitprāptā bhaveyuḥ, mā tāvadahamanuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhimabhisaṃbudhyeyam.

If, O Bhagavān, having attained bodhi, instruction or learning should have to be done by any being in that buddha land, and they should not all be possessed of perfect and complete knowledge, then may I not fully awaken to anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

It is not 'perfect and complete knowledge', as Muller translated it. Pratisaṃvid is unhindered/analytical knowledge and it has four types, as given in the Dharmasaṃgraha and explained in the MPPS.

Saṃghavarman: 設我得佛，國中菩薩智慧辯才若可限量者，不取正覺。(T12n360p268c5-6)
In Inagaki's translation (The Three Pure Land Sutras, BDK ed, p 16):
'30. If, when I attain buddhahood, the wisdom and eloquence of bodhisattvas in my land should be limited, may I not attain perfect enlightenment.'

[Mirror]

I'm just going through the Sanskrit Longer Sutra, and just went over the 28th vow.

It occurred to me that it is often claimed that the Pure Land is a training ground or school for bodhisattvas. I think this explanation helps people to overcome the misconception that the Pure Land is a paradise or heaven. As a skilful means that is fine, but the Pure Land scriptures do not support that claim.

28. sacenme bhagavan bodhiprāptasya tatra buddhakṣetre kasyacitsattvasyoddeśo vā svādhyāyo vā kartavyaḥ syāt, na te sarve pratisaṃvitprāptā bhaveyuḥ, mā tāvadahamanuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhimabhisaṃbudhyeyam.

If, O Bhagavān, having attained bodhi, instruction or learning should have to be done by any being in that buddha land, and they should not all be possessed of perfect and complete knowledge, then may I not fully awaken to anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

[Zhen Li]

I remember it being said that beings in Amitabha's pure land may manifest in our world to help guide sentient beings. I think Karma Chagme in his Aspiration towards Sukhavati mentions it. Maybe that is the origin of the idea that pure land is a "training ground"?

That's within the Vows themselves, but doesn't mean the Pure Land is a training ground. Rather it means it allows this Saha world to be a kind of training ground.

If, as you seem to suggest, birth in Sukhavati would magically turn beings into buddhas, then all the many vows would be meaningless, plus it would defy the basic doctrine that everyone has to attain liberation on their own.

Buddhas, yes. But this also depends on the inclinations of the beings to whom they are manifesting.

As for the many vows, they actually all speak to this one fact—assurance of nirvāṇa, non-retrogression, attainment of all the powers and 32 marks, etc. There are no limitations or wants of beings upon birth.

As for attaining liberation on their own—this is where Pure Land as a Buddha-Nature practice comes into play. If we are thinking of things dualistically from the perspective of the Saha world, yes, there are stages and levels to birth and there are individual beings and selves—these cease to be of relevance or reality upon the fulfilment of birth. Besides, questioning this matter of self-liberation as being a "basic doctrine," actually the Mahāyāna sūtras frequently use the language of liberating other beings—the share of agency involved in fulfilling this is not thereby necessarily 100% one way or the other, and again, this only makes sense from a dualistic perspective.

It is not 'perfect and complete knowledge', as Muller translated it. Pratisaṃvid is unhindered/analytical knowledge and it has four types, as given in the Dharmasaṃgraha and explained in the MPPS.

There is nothing unhindered in the prefixes prati or saṃ, and analytical never comes into the picture. Maybe special and complete, or well-rounded knowledge is more accurate, but Muller's is just an over translation—one reason why it needs revision. Thanks for pointing out the four types: the term is in a compound so could be singular or plural, but I'll treat it as plural from now on.

Saṃghavarman: 設我得佛，國中菩薩智慧辯才若可限量者，不取正覺。(T12n360p268c5-6)

It's best not to mix the recensions, as they are translating from different source texts (I regard the Sanskrit as a translation from something earlier as well).

[Astus]

As for the many vows, they actually all speak to this one fact—assurance of nirvāṇa, non-retrogression, attainment of all the powers and 32 marks, etc. There are no limitations or wants of beings upon birth.

How so? If upon birth one becomes a buddha, then talk of humans and gods, various abilities given to them, plus the qualities of the land itself are quite irrelevant and rather limited compared to a buddha's attributes.

As for attaining liberation on their own—this is where Pure Land as a Buddha-Nature practice comes into play.

What does 'Buddha-Nature practice' mean?

If we are thinking of things dualistically from the perspective of the Saha world, yes, there are stages and levels to birth and there are individual beings and selves—these cease to be of relevance or reality upon the fulfilment of birth.

If they were irrelevant, then why talk of them?

Besides, questioning this matter of self-liberation as being a "basic doctrine," actually the Mahāyāna sūtras frequently use the language of liberating other beings—the share of agency involved in fulfilling this is not thereby necessarily 100% one way or the other, and again, this only makes sense from a dualistic perspective.

Shakyamuni could not simply wish others to become even believers, much less liberated. On the contrary, he urged people to follow the teachings and put them into practice. Similarly, Lokesvararaja could not transform Dharmakara into a buddha, so he cultivated the paramitas for innumerable aeons.
Liberating beings means guiding them, providing them with the correct teachings, and it is for that reason that a bodhisattva masters all sorts of skilful means. Otherwise there should be only one method to master: wishing beings into buddhas. And even that one power could be granted by other buddhas.

[Zhen Li]

How so? If upon birth one becomes a buddha, then talk of humans and gods, various abilities given to them, plus the qualities of the land itself are quite irrelevant and rather limited compared to a buddha's attributes.

Then we're talking about the difference between the dharma body and the fulfilled and transformed land.

What does 'Buddha-Nature practice' mean?

It means that the practice is fulfilled by the Buddha's power, which is the innate nature of all beings, rather than the power of a limited being that relates to their illusory attributes like the skandhas.

If they were irrelevant, then why talk of them?

Skilful means are necessary for limited beings to grasp the path. Otherwise the Dharma dispensation would just start and end with the perfection of wisdom and no one would be any the wiser.

Shakyamuni could not simply wish others to become even believers, much less liberated. On the contrary, he urged people to follow the teachings and put them into practice. Similarly, Lokesvararaja could not transform Dharmakara into a buddha, so he cultivated the paramitas for innumerable aeons.

Yes, this is on the level of transformed and accomodated bodies. Manifestations. Ultimately, all attain liberation through "other power."

Liberating beings means guiding them, providing them with the correct teachings, and it is for that reason that a bodhisattva masters all sorts of skilful means. Otherwise there should be only one method to master: wishing beings into buddhas. And even that one power could be granted by other buddhas.

Yes, this is essential. That's why I have already said too much.

To make it simple, all can be born in the Pure Land through the power of Dharmākara's vows which he cultivated to fulfill over ten kalpas. All they need to do is entrust, aspire for birth, and recall his name in order to be born. Upon birth they will assuredly realise the Dharma body.

[Astus]

It means that the practice is fulfilled by the Buddha's power, which is the innate nature of all beings, rather than the power of a limited being that relates to their illusory attributes like the skandhas.

Since all have the Buddha's power as the innate nature, but it makes no difference in everyone's being trapped in birth and death, it is not a power that can liberate anyone.

Skilful means are necessary for limited beings to grasp the path. Otherwise the Dharma dispensation would just start and end with the perfection of wisdom and no one would be any the wiser.

Consequently it's not possible to just transform another being into an awakened one. Each has to work on their own liberation.

Ultimately, all attain liberation through "other power."

If by ultimately you mean on the level of ultimate truth, then there is neither liberation nor other to talk of. If you mean in the end, then what's the purpose of cultivating the path?

Upon birth they will assuredly realise the Dharma body.

There is a big difference between eventually realising through their own efforts, or realising it exclusively through the influence of somebody else.

[Miorita]

My intuition says that the formulation is a prerequisite for entry in a pure land.
Of course the professor can continue to philosophize, but why would Buddhism be more than what it is in its simplicity?
So many monks and nuns and lay people pray and practice and we speculate on texts? I think the question is a sign of a spiritual superiority complex.

[Zhen Li]

Since all have the Buddha's power as the innate nature, but it makes no difference in everyone's being trapped in birth and death, it is not a power that can liberate anyone.

Actually, everyone is liberated when they realise Buddha Nature. The point in Pure Land is that its power is manifested through Dharmākara's vows and brings people to a point where they can realise it themselves. Buddhānubhāvena (by the Buddha's power) is how many people achieve all sorts of things in the sūtra literature—the realisation, however, is for themselves alone and not forced upon them by the Buddha.

Consequently it's not possible to just transform another being into an awakened one. Each has to work on their own liberation.

Yes, I am not saying that this is a question of direct transformation. Birth is required first.

If by ultimately you mean on the level of ultimate truth, then there is neither liberation nor other to talk of. If you mean in the end, then what's the purpose of cultivating the path?

To overcome reliance on self power is to directly see one's true nature.

There is a big difference between eventually realising through their own efforts, or realising it exclusively through the influence of somebody else.

Birth is effected only by other-power. Realisation itself initially will appear to be something done on an individual basis, but then afterwards it will be seen to have only been the working of the Dharma-body as compassionate means.

The distinction between self-realisation and realisation based on the influence or power of another is one that is important when we are talking about liberation in the Saha World. From a higher perspective, the distinction and the selves that make it up it falls away.

[Zhen Li]

My intuition says that the formulation is a prerequisite for entry in a pure land.

That would contradict the vows of birth. It also runs counter to the Pure Land tradition.

As Shandao puts it, if profound attainments were required for beings to attain birth in the Pure Land, there would be no need for birth in the Pure Land in the first place. For bodhisattvas relying on self-power, on even the first bhūmi they already learn from buddhas in all directions, including Amitābha, so what need do they have of a method of birth if they have already attained it through self-power?

The great compassion of the Buddhas is for those that suffer most. It is greatly urgent to rescue those drowning in the water, but what need is there to save those who are already standing on the other shore?

[Malcolm]

The great compassion of the Buddhas is for those that suffer most. It is greatly urgent to rescue those drowning in the water, but what need is there to save those who are already standing on the other shore?

If this were true, all hell beings, pretas, and animals would immediately be liberated into Sukhavati, but they are not. Buddhas cannot liberate anyone, all they can do is show a path. Without a precious human birth, liberation is not possible.

[Astus]

The point in Pure Land is that its power is manifested through Dharmākara's vows and brings people to a point where they can realise it themselves. Buddhānubhāvena (by the Buddha's power) is how many people achieve all sorts of things in the sūtra literature—the realisation, however, is for themselves alone and not forced upon them by the Buddha.

In that case why wouldn't Sukhavati be a so called 'training ground'? It provides an optimal state of existence for beings to attain awakening.

To overcome reliance on self power is to directly see one's true nature.

Then no reason to talk of any other power, since, as you stated above: 'everyone is liberated when they realise Buddha Nature'.

[Malcolm]

The point in Pure Land is that its power is manifested through Dharmākara's vows and brings people to a point where they can realise it themselves. Buddhānubhāvena (by the Buddha's power) is how many people achieve all sorts of things in the sūtra literature—the realisation, however, is for themselves alone and not forced upon them by the Buddha.

In that case why wouldn't Sukhavati be a so called 'training ground'? It provides an optimal state of existence for beings to attain awakening.

To overcome reliance on self power is to directly see one's true nature.

Then no reason to talk of any other power, since, as you stated above: 'everyone is liberated when they realise Buddha Nature'.

There is no reason to talk about self power either, since self and other are just grasping dualistic extremes.

[Zhen Li]

The great compassion of the Buddhas is for those that suffer most. It is greatly urgent to rescue those drowning in the water, but what need is there to save those who are already standing on the other shore?

If this were true, all hell beings, pretas, and animals would immediately be liberated into Sukhavati, but they are not. Buddhas cannot liberate anyone, all they can do is show a path. Without a precious human birth, liberation is not possible.

Those [humans] that suffer most. Those who can hear the Dharma. One still needs roots of merit to hear the Dharma, this is a practical truth.

The point in Pure Land is that its power is manifested through Dharmākara's vows and brings people to a point where they can realise it themselves. Buddhānubhāvena (by the Buddha's power) is how many people achieve all sorts of things in the sūtra literature—the realisation, however, is for themselves alone and not forced upon them by the Buddha.

In that case why wouldn't Sukhavati be a so called 'training ground'? It provides an optimal state of existence for beings to attain awakening.

Because training is a dualistic conception and birth in the fulfilled land is beyond dualities. Granted, beings who are not yet ready to be born experienced a transformed land and birth and would experience what would appear to be a gradual unfolding. In this, I am simply summarising what Shandao, Honen, and Shinran explained in far more words.

Then no reason to talk of any other power, since, as you stated above: 'everyone is liberated when they realise Buddha Nature'.

That's putting the cart before the horse. The Primal Vow is manifested as the only thing solid in this world to which we can cling as limited beings with a guarantee of liberation. For this reason, Buddha Nature appears to us as Other Power until it is directly realised. As the Nirvāṇa Sūtra puts it, bodhisattvas never fully see Buddha Nature until the attainment of Buddhahood itself, even those on the 10th bhūmi see it like birds in the corner of one's eye: one isn't sure whether they might be a crane or some other bird.

As Rennyō put it:

Do not condemn the use of skilful means, for authenticity is gained by the use of skilful means and should be considered carefully. Authentic faith is reached by the skilful means of the activity of Amitabha, Sakyamuni, and the good friends.

This is returning to the core of the matter. Everyone wants to think they can be liberated through the realisation of non-dual reality, but when the nose is put to the grindstone, they still must rely on Amida at the end of their lives.

In essence, the Primal Vow is made for evil beings like us, who, though aspiring to do good, out of karmic habit have no other destiny than Avici hell. We need only rely on the Nembutsu, and thereby leap crosswise across the six realms and assuredly attain non-retrogression and birth in Sukhāvatī.

[Astus]

Because training is a dualistic conception and birth in the fulfilled land is beyond dualities.

Why would it be beyond dualities? The sambhogakaya ('fulfilled body' 報身) is within dualities in its functions, so its land (報土) should be as well, otherwise it'd be the dharmakaya and the dharmadhatu of no birth.

For this reason, Buddha Nature appears to us as Other Power until it is directly realised. As the Nirvāṇa Sūtra puts it, bodhisattvas never fully see Buddha Nature until the attainment of Buddhahood itself, even those on the 10th bhūmi see it like birds in the corner of one's eye: one isn't sure whether they might be a crane or some other bird.

So it is not how it was phrased above that one realises one's true nature when abandoning self-power, since only buddhas realise that.

In essence, the Primal Vow is made for evil beings like us, who, though aspiring to do good, out of karmic habit have no other destiny than Avici hell. We need only rely on the Nembutsu, and thereby leap crosswise across the six realms and assuredly attain non-retrogression and birth in Sukhāvatī.

That's not been the issue here, but rather the assumption that such evil beings transform into buddhas immediately out of no effort on their own just because they are born in Sukhavati.

[Zhen Li]

So, by this point I am pretty much only speaking from the Shin perspective—my intention was for this to be a broader claim about Pure Land, but that's my interpretative lens so bear with me:

Why would it be beyond dualities? The sambhogakaya ('fulfilled body' 報身) is within dualities in its functions, so its land (報土) should be as well, otherwise it'd be the dharmakaya and the dharmadhatu of no birth.

The fulfilled land or true and filfilled land (真実報土) is the dharmakāya, the transformed land (方便化土) is that of the saṃbhogakāya. Shinran takes this interpretation from Shandao, but explains it more fully in chapters 5 and 6 of the Kyogyoshinsho.

So it is not how it was phrased above that one realises one's true nature when abandoning self-power, since only buddhas realise that.

Right, you don't realise buddha nature until birth in the true and filfilled land. But abandoning self power is seeing that only other power can take you there. The Nembutsu is described by Shinran as being that which "alone is true and real." In this sense it is a portal by which we can get a glimpse in this world. So, yes one doesn't in this life attain buddhahood upon receiving Shinjin, but one attains non-retrogression while in this body:

But though light of the sun is veiled by clouds and mists,
Beneath the clouds and mists there is brightness, not dark.
When one realizes shinjin, seeing and revering and attaining great joy,
One immediately leaps crosswise, closing off the five evil courses.

There was a thread in the Pure Land forum a while ago about prolepsis. Shinran frequently talks about things as if they have already happened. So:

When the one thought-moment of joy arises,
Nirvana is attained without severing blind passions;
When ignorant and wise, even grave offenders and slanders of the dharma, all alike turn and enter shinjin,
They are like waters that, on entering the ocean, become one in taste with it.

But actually, Nirvana is attained upon birth.

This is partially because means and end are ultimately part of the same essence. But since we are ordinary beings, we can only interact with it by an expedient.

That's not been the issue here, but rather the assumption that such evil beings transform into buddhas immediately out of no effort on their own just because they are born in Sukhavati.

You say "just because they are born in Sukhavati" as if that is not itself an attainment that takes the coming about of the right causes and conditions.

This is the claim of the sutra, and has been the claim of the Pure Land tradition for over a millenium.

[Astus]

The fulfilled land or true and filfilled land (真実報土) is the dharmakāya, the transformed land (方便化土) is that of the saṃbhogakāya.

What about the palaces, trees, bodies of water, etc. in the Pure Land? Are they somehow equated with the dharmakaya? Or is it that there is no land at all where one can be born? If the former, then it is a very different view of the dharmakaya than what is found in Mahayana usually. If the latter, then why the need to die first?

But actually, Nirvana is attained upon birth.
This is partially because means and end are ultimately part of the same essence. But since we are ordinary beings, we can only interact with it by an expedient.

Same as above, if nirvana is attained immediately upon birth without any cultivation of the paramitas, why the need for birth in the first place?

You say "just because they are born in Sukhavati" as if that is not itself an attainment that takes the coming about of the right causes and conditions.
This is the claim of the sutra, and has been the claim of the Pure Land tradition for over a millenium.

The standard claim is that one is born in Sukhavati to then engage in the bodhisattva activities required for buddhahood.

'It is not that these acts are not effective. It is simply that it is too difficult for mortals in the period of the decline of the Dharma to fulfill the practice of holding and reciting the sutras. Therefore, they should first attain birth in the Pure Land through nembutsu while relying on the essential vow, be blessed to encounter Tathāgata Amida, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, and Bodhisattva Mahāsthāmaprāpta there, study various holy teachings, and then realize enlightenment.'
(An Outline of Nenbutsu, in The Promise of Amida, p 144)

'Strive to attain birth expeditiously in the Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss, and once there with Amida Buddha and Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara as mentors, try to learn and internalize the subtle principle of all holy teachings: the school of the realization of enlightenment through ascertainment of the profound principle of absoluteness and the equality of the ultimate reality taught in the Lotus Sutra, the concept of the ultimate principle of emptiness presented in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutra, and the theory of realization of buddhahood in your present body in the Shingon school.'
(Dialogue on the Essentials of Nembutsu, in The Promise of Amida, p 213)

See also this summary on The Process of Senchaku.