宗鏡錄 14.3.1

14.3.1

Answer: The one mind is immovable; all phenomena have no nature. Because they have no nature, all without exception attain buddhahood. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: 'Sons of the Buddha, when the tathāgatas attain right awakening, within their bodies they universally see all sentient beings attain right awakening, and even universally see all sentient beings enter nirvāṇa, all having the same single nature—namely, having no nature. What kind of nature is absent? Namely, having no mark-nature, no exhaustible nature, no unarisen nature, no cessation-nature, no self-nature, no not-self-nature, no sentient-being-nature, no not-sentient-being-nature, no bodhi-nature, no dharmadhātu-nature, no space-nature, and likewise having no nature of attaining right awakening. Knowing that all phenomena are without nature, they obtain all-knowledge (sarvajñā), and with continuous great compassion, they rescue and deliver sentient beings. Sons of the Buddha, it is like space: whether all worlds come into being or are destroyed, it is always without increase or decrease. Why? Because space is unarisen. The bodhi of all buddhas is also like this: whether right awakening is attained or not attained, there is likewise neither increase nor decrease. Why? Because bodhi is neither with marks nor without marks, neither one nor manifold. Sons of the Buddha, suppose someone could manifest as many cittas as there are sands in the Ganges, and each citta could again manifest as many buddhas as there are sands in the Ganges, all of them without color, without form, and without marks, continuing in this way for as many kalpas as the sands in the Ganges without rest. Sons of the Buddha, what do you think? How many are there in total among the manifested cittas and manifested tathāgatas of that person?' In the Tathāgatotpattisaṃbhava [chapter], Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: 'As I understand the meaning of what the Venerable One has said, manifesting and not manifesting are equal and without difference. Why ask: "How many are there in total?"' Bodhisattva Samantabhadra said: 'Good indeed, good indeed! Sons of the Buddha, it is as you have said. Even if all sentient beings were to attain right awakening in a single thought-moment, it would be equal and no different from not attaining right awakening. Why? Because bodhi has no marks. If there are no marks, then there is neither increase nor decrease. Sons of the Buddha, bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should know in this way: attaining equal and right awakening is identical to bodhi, having one mark which is markless.' The commentary explains: 'The reason we know the buddha-wisdom is omnipresent is that there is no sentient being who does not possess original awakening, for their substance is not different from the buddhas. The sūtra says: "The buddha-wisdom secretly flows forth," which seems as if the buddha-wisdom pervades other sentient beings; here it reveals that sentient beings themselves possess the buddha-wisdom, hence it merely says "pervades". There are three points to this meaning: First, it clarifies that not a single sentient being lacks it, which lets us know that those "without nature" do not belong to the count of sentient beings—meaning grasses, trees, and the like—which already surpasses the view of the five natures. Second, the cause of sentient beings being bound already completely possesses the fruition-dharma of liberation from bondage; therefore it is said that they have the wisdom of the tathāgata. It is not merely that they will attain it later after having the nature, nor that the principle comes first and wisdom comes later. Thus we know that in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], in response to earlier expedients, it provisionally spoke of having the nature; later students still thought it discussed having it while hiding its absence, so how much less, upon hearing that they equally possess the fruition-wisdom, could anyone believe it? Third, that fruition-wisdom within the cause is the fruition-wisdom of other buddhas; because in the source of the Perfect Teaching, self and other, cause and fruition, have no dual substance. Were it not so, in this stating that sentient beings have the fruition, how could it be called speaking of the buddha-wisdom? This is profound upon profound; without the Huayan school, there would be no such principle.' An objection asks: 'The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "The buddha-nature is named wisdom. When there is wisdom, then there is no kleśa." Now, if they possess the buddha-wisdom, why do they become sentient beings?' The explanation says: 'Because they are inverted, they do not realize it; how could one say they lack it? Like the strong man confused about the jewel in his forehead, how could it be that there is no treasure within his flesh? If it were originally absent, how could it be present once free from inversion? Since it appears once they are free from it, this shows that it was originally not absent, like a poor person obtaining a jewel—it is not that it is only now bestowed upon them. Therefore, in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], fearing that they would not practice, it says: "To say it definitely exists is an attachment." Fearing that they would not believe it exists, it says: "If one says it definitely does not exist, that is false speech." One may provisionally attach to it, but one must not speak falsely. Furthermore, sūtras such as the Tathāgatagarbha[-sūtra] speak of nine similes to illustrate the tathāgatagarbha: like a blue lotus flower in muddy water, before it emerges from the mud, no one values it; also like a poor woman carrying a noble child in her womb; like a priceless jewel wrapped in filthy rags; like a mani jewel fallen into a deep latrine; like a pure gold statue covered with tattered garments; like an āmra tree whose flowers and fruits have not yet opened; also like unhusked rice grain within the chaff; like gold within ore; like an image within a mold—these all have the meaning of the buddha-body existing within defilement, which is largely the same as this. Furthermore, this principle of having no nature can accomplish everything and can destroy everything; thus, when one is accomplished, all are accomplished, and when one is destroyed, all are destroyed. "When one is accomplished, all are accomplished" means that cause and fruition interpenetrate completely. Within this, there are two points: First, it clarifies that sentient beings and buddhas are non-dual. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "When the tathāgatas attain right awakening, within their bodies they universally see all sentient beings attain right awakening," and so forth. The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: "All sentient beings are the very mark of bodhi." Since they are the very mark of bodhi, what is not accomplished? Second, it clarifies that the subject and object are non-dual; that is, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "All have the same single nature—namely, having no nature." The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: "Non-action is bodhi, because it is free from the citta and phenomena." Phenomena are the object, and the citta is the subject. Truly because citta and objects share the same nature, so too it is with sentient beings and buddhas. Therefore, because the true mind does not abide in its own nature, its entire substance accords with conditions, accomplishing all the myriad phenomena. The nature is the substance. Because all phenomena are solely manifested by citta, each is without self-substance, dependently arisen upon illusory marks, and without a fixed nature. Because they are without nature, they can accord with various conditions to establish everything. If they had a fixed nature, it would be just like metal and stone, each having a hard nature that cannot be changed. Now, this absence of nature is just like water: meeting cold, it becomes ice; encountering fire, it becomes warm. Therefore a verse from the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: "If origin (samudaya) had a fixed nature, it could never have been severed before; how could it be severed now? If the path (mārga) had a fixed nature, it could never have been cultivated before; how could it be cultivated now?"'