華嚴一乘教義分齊章 2.14

2.14

Question: "If the absence of practice in the foolish stage means there is no nature, even if practice is subsequently aroused, how could it come to exist?" Answer: "Having practice is not the stage of lacking practice; therefore, having practice is constantly and eternally existing, while lacking practice is of itself eternally non-existent. One does not turn the lack of practice into practice, nor does one turn the lack of nature into nature, because of the distinction in stages. As the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says regarding those among the three types of people who definitely die, which is an analogy for the icchantika having no Buddha-nature: 'Good sons! If an icchantika meets good friends, buddhas, and bodhisattvas, and hears profound Dharma taught, or even if they do not meet them, in either case they cannot be free from the mind of an icchantika. Why is this? Because they have severed the wholesome roots. An icchantika can also attain the mind of anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi. Why is this? If they can generate the mind of awakening, they are no longer designated as having the nature of an icchantika. Good sons! For what reason is it said that an icchantika attains anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi? Icchantikas truly do not attain anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, like those whose life-span has ended,' and so forth, up to extensive explanations. One should know that here, existence and non-existence before and after the stages are constantly fixed, and do not depend on one another."