Oh, sorry !
I must have confounded the conversation with your signature. And although It made me thought about how one could become a peta, I felt it a bit ambiguous.
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.
I just wanted to say that citta is indeed a wondrous thing. However the last step to arrive to it, is samadhi; which has been wrongly translated as "concentration".
This is due to an old corruption coming from a very wrongly initiated group of beings.
Buddha was very clear about not making secrets in his Teaching.
There is no secretly initiated Mahakassapa in Early Buddhism.
This esoteric supposition just equals the loss of freedom that one falls into, out of curiosity.
Making things cryptic is the best way to have one lose his freedom out of curiosity.
If the Teaching had not been corrupted, many people would have escape the net of esoterism.
One should arrive to citta by the RIGHT steps, AND liberate it.
And yes, a once known and experienced citta - AND once LIBERATED - is the door to immortality (amṛtā), then to nibbana and the Ajo (unborn) - providing that one does not remain slave to the senses (like demons and their quislings).
For that matter, one should work on the right meaning of words in Pali; and leave aside petty points of grammar, suttas with no parallels to the passage in question, etc.
In this way, they will break the veil of corruption.
The rest is just red herring.
And sorry again, I am not versed in Zhiyi's work. Nor am I very interested in ambiguity.
Just thought that one of his sayings was interesting. Maybe the rest is.
Am I wrong ?
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
We are all possessed - more or less.
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”