漢藏彌陀極樂淨土法門之比較=A Comparison of the Pure Land Methods Pertaining Amitabha Buddha’s World of Ultimate Bliss as Taught in Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism
阿彌陀佛=Amitabha Buddha; 淨土法門=Pure Land method; 依正莊嚴=splendor and solemnity of both the direct and circumstantial rewards; 漢傳佛教=Chinese Buddhism; 藏傳佛教=Tibetan Buddhism
This paper will focus on the comparison between Chinese and Tibetan Buddhist traditions in terms of the Pure Land methods, and illustrate the teachings in the two traditions, enabling general Buddhist practitioners to better and more clearly understand the essence of their teachings, as well as clarify their misconceptions in this regard. First, it starts with the historical background of the Pure Land method for rebirth in the World of Ultimate Bliss to introduce the origin and development of the method in both Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism, and their respective significant points in this regard. Then it investigates textual passages related to the Pure Land, or the World of Ultimate Bliss, in Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism, to explore the sutras and scriptures often used for the Pure Land methods in Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism, in order to help readers understand the fundamental materials of the theme of the paper. Furthermore, based on the descriptions of the splendor and solemnity of the World of Ultimate Bliss in various Buddhist texts as the theme, this paper investigates and explores what the saints and sages (the direct reward) and the environment (the circumstantial reward) of the World of Ultimate Bliss are like, to help readers understand Amitabha Buddha’s compassionate deeds and vows, as well as the sublime qualities of the World as an ideal environment for practice. Next, based on the principles of practice in the Pure Land method, this paper discusses and describes the essential points in the Pure Land methods in both the Chinese and Tibetan Buddhist traditions. Finally, it makes a comparison and analysis of the Pure Land methods in the two traditions about the differences and similarities between the two teachings, to illustrate their respective yet related teachings developed as a result of differences in history, society, and culture, although they both originated from the Buddhism in ancient India. Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism have a subtle relationship that in the midst of their sameness there is difference and in the midst of their differences there is sameness. This indicates the Pure Land method is more diverse than other methods, and can more meet the needs of all sentient beings, reflecting the fact that the multitudes of Dharma methods in Buddhist practice are all conveniently designed and developed to accommodate all sentient beings as an expedient means, to help them achieve their aspirations to “learn all the Dharma methods, though they are innumerable; and accomplish the Buddha Path, though it is ultimate and supreme.”
