Can Individuals with Dementia or Amnesia Attain Rebirth in the Pure Land?

Individuals suffering from dementia or amnesia bear relatively heavy karmic obstacles, primarily manifesting as impairments in brain function. Although this hinders cognitive faculties, if one has previously cultivated the practice of Buddha-recitation to the point of purifying the manas (mental faculty) and eliminating a significant portion of karmic obstacles—attaining the Buddha-recitation samadhi and constantly recollecting Amitabha Buddha—how could they develop dementia or amnesia? How could a person of great merit and virtue, with minimal karmic obstacles, develop dementia or amnesia?

During states of dementia or amnesia, if an individual cannot even recognize their closest son or remember their own surname, it becomes even less likely for them to recollect the Buddha. How could they recite the Buddha's name? Compared to the Buddha, who is closer to them? Naturally, it is their son. If they cannot even recall their closest son, how could they recollect the Buddha? The very fact that they developed dementia or amnesia indicates that Amitabha Buddha was not present in their mind. They failed to reduce their karmic obstacles through Buddha-recitation; the recitation did not penetrate and purify the manas. Hence, they became afflicted. Had the Buddha-recitation purified the manas, filling their mind with Amitabha Buddha, how could they become demented? Nor could they suffer amnesia. With their mind wholly focused on the Buddha, a large portion of karmic obstacles eliminated, and blessed by the Buddha's power, how could they suffer amnesia? Since they cannot recollect the Buddha, how could they attain rebirth in the Pure Land? Even for normal individuals or those with meditative attainment, rebirth is not guaranteed. Attaining rebirth is extremely difficult, no simpler than realizing the fruition of enlightenment or attaining awakening.

Only the Dharma spoken from one's own direct experience is reliable. Without personal experience, relying solely on textual interpretations or one's own imaginings about how things should be—without having actually accomplished it—how can there be any guarantee? That is unreliable. If I were to speak about the Pure Land and rebirth, I would have to adhere strictly to the principles laid out in the Buddhist scriptures; I would not dare to speak beyond them. Since I have not attained rebirth myself and do not know the specific conditions required, I can only rely on the scriptures. Unless I recite the Buddha's name to the point where the Buddha himself gives assurance, stating that regardless of circumstances at the time of death, I will surely maintain right mindfulness and assuredly attain rebirth—only then is it credible. Everything else is unreliable.

Therefore, within the Pure Land school, if one seeks to expound the Dharma and guide others to rebirth, the most qualified and suitable person is solely the school's founding patriarch, Master Huiyuan. He led everyone in cultivating the Pure Land path. Every Dharma method he taught was credible and trustworthy. When he stated that such practices assuredly lead to rebirth, or that reciting the Buddha's name in such a way assuredly leads to rebirth, his words were entirely credible. The teachings of all others are unreliable. Why are the words of Pure Land Patriarch Huiyuan credible? Because he personally practiced the Pure Land method and succeeded. While cultivating the Pure Land, his body and mind constantly abided in samadhi. Amitabha Buddha personally appeared before him several times within his samadhi, and the realm of the Western Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss manifested before him multiple times within his samadhi. He constantly remained in the state of samadhi without leaving absorption. For him, rebirth was undoubtedly assured.

Therefore, based on his cultivation of meditation and wisdom, his experience, his statements on how to attain rebirth are definitive and credible, because he had cultivated to that level; he had the experience. Those without experience are not credible. Similarly, some people speak of realizing the mind and attaining enlightenment. Because they have not experienced genuine enlightenment, their explanations about realizing the mind and enlightenment are also unreliable. Their theories about realizing the mind and enlightenment might be correct or incorrect, but even if the theory is correct, actual enlightenment cannot be truly attained in practice without personal experience. If the practice is incorrect, what is said is unreliable. Anyone who propagates the Dharma must have personally practiced it and traversed that path; only then are their words reliable. All else is unreliable. Those who propagate the Pure Land, having not the slightest personal experience regarding Buddha-recitation and rebirth, therefore cannot be trusted when they claim that reciting in such and such a way assuredly leads to rebirth. Only the Buddhist scriptures are most credible. Any explanation of rebirth that departs from the Pure Land sutras is mere conjecture and fantasy.