大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 8.19

8.19

The Commentary states: "From this it is known..." and below, which concludes and demonstrates the correct meaning. It means that an icchantika truly does not attain buddhahood. When it is currently said that an icchantika attains buddhahood, it is because they can attain buddhahood only after generating the [bodhi-]mind; they are termed icchantika only prior to generating that great aspiration. Thus it says: "because one who attains buddhahood is not an icchantika." This is just as a female body cannot attain buddhahood; yet when it is said that the dragon girl attains buddhahood, at the very moment she attains buddhahood she suddenly transforms into a man. How could it be that a female body attains buddhahood? An icchantika attaining buddhahood is also like this. This is spoken with respect to attaining buddhahood. If spoken with respect to Buddha-nature, the principle fundamentally exists. The Commentary says, "It was rather an expedient extolling or depreciating at that time": stating that icchantikas lack it means that extolling causes them to generate the mind, while depreciating causes them not to commit evil. If it is said that icchantikas possess Buddha-nature, it reveals and extols the nature of principle, causing them not to deceive themselves. If they have already become an icchantika, it causes them to quickly turn their minds around. If they quickly generate the mind, there is no difference in their attaining buddhahood. Therefore, asserting existence does not necessarily mean totally possessing both the natures of fruition and practice; asserting nonexistence does not necessarily mean totally lacking the principle, and so forth. Hence Master [Dao]sheng said: "Extolling [or depreciating] according to the time was a marvelous way to entice living beings; how could one cling strictly to the literal text?" When the Tripiṭaka Master Faxian translated the six-fascicle Nirvāṇa Sūtra, it stated: "Except for the icchantika, all possess Buddha-nature." Master Daosheng said: "Those endowed with the two modes of being are all the correct cause of nirvāṇa. The icchantika is among the sentient beings; how could they alone lack Buddha-nature? It is simply that this scripture has arrived incomplete." Because he proclaimed this view, he was banished to Mount Wuqiu. Later, when the Great Sūtra arrived, from the chapter on "Noble Practices" onward it indeed stated: "Although an icchantika has severed good roots, they still possess Buddha-nature." Thereupon, the worthy masters took light boats to welcome him and invited him to proclaim this sūtra. Whenever they came to the passage stating that the icchantika possesses Buddha-nature, the venerable masters could not help but clutch their wrists in remorse. Why, then, does the notion of lacking [Buddha-nature] still persist today?