30 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
Your misunderstanding is in thinking that the pure land is ultimate reality or ultimate truth (paramarthasatya). It is in fact still a conventional truth, albeit a very subtle and important conventional truth created as a skillful means by the Buddha. But in all pure land traditions, the pure land with its forms like trees and lakes and so on is never considered to be the ultimate Dharmakaya.
Also, all the forms in the pure land are not separate objects that truly exist, they are simply manifestations of the Buddha's vow power or "other power"[1]. As such, it's not like the pure land is some different thing apart from the Buddha's own body and mind.
1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_power
Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu both taught the pure land methods, hence they are known as patriarchs in pure land Buddhism. If they taught this Dharma door then they clearly did not see any conflict between it and the Prajñaparamita teachings. Likewise the Dazhidulun (Great Prajñaparamita Treatise), the earliest existing commentary on the Prajñaparamita sutras, also extensively discusses pure lands / buddhafields.
There is no contradiction.
Comment by Magikarpeles at 04/02/2025 at 06:01 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Do pure land buddhists follow the eightfold path and keep precepts?
Comment by hau4300 at 03/02/2025 at 23:08 UTC
-6 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Pure Land is Buddha field that is mentioned in Vimalakirti Sutra. But what "wisdom" does Amitayurdhyana Sutra want to give or clarify when it describes all the "different" contemplations of different "objects" that are nothing more than some human conceptions of our reality, but not reality itself? All the sounds of birds, colors of the world, .. are just vikalpa and has nothing to do with reality. I contemplate nature naturally, without reading the sutra. But all the descriptions of nature is unnecessary and I don't think it is even correct to contemplate nature like that, i.e., to look at our world as if it is a "collection of separable objects" that can be described by human perceptions and hence human vocabulary.