Zuiken’s saying and *George’s paraphrase

In a dharma sermon, by presuming that before you die in fact you have attained birth is considered as false shinjin or mi-anjin.

A person who says that he has been born in the Pure Land before dying is falsely settled. 

Nevertheless, if you feel 'now I am within the embrace of Amida’s light', and this is how you really feel, than it can make no difference from the reality that you have been dead and attained birth in the Pure Land. 

But if you know that you live within the embrace of the Buddha of Inconceivable Light then it is as though you are already in the Pure Land despite not having died. This is like attaining nirvana, although it is not so. This is what Shinran means in the Shoshinge when he says that on awakening shinjin we realise that birth-and-death is nirvana. 

Though it is not Nirvana but the resemblance of Nirvana and that is why it is written as 'birth-and-death is Nirvana'.

You must be able to conceive of this. It is not nirvana although it is like it. We realise nirvana only on being born in the Pure Land.


* Rev George Gatenby 

A relevant passage from Rennyo Shonin's Goichidaiki-kikigaki as follows:

(204) You will surely be saved:

Rennyo Shonin said, "It is wrong to say that when single-minded shinjin is settled, you

have been saved by Amida, because it would sound as if you have already been

enlightened. Although it is clear that you are saved at the moment you entrust yourself to

Amida, you should say that you will surely be saved. At the time of entrusting yourself to

Amida with singleness of mind, you dwell in the state of Non-retrogression. This is the

'unmanifested' benefit of the attainment of this state. We call this the 'partial realization of

Nirvana'."

[Note] In Rennyo's understanding, attainment of the state of Non-retrogression

remains 'unmanifested,' that is, it is not perceived with a clear consciousness.

Otherwise, it would mean that you have already attained enlightenment or Nirvana.