宗鏡錄 17.19

17.19

Answer: We now clarify that the icchantika does not sever the good of inherent virtue; meeting conditions, good is activated. The Buddha likewise does not sever the evil of the nature; stimulated by conditions of capacity and perfumed by the power of compassion, he enters Avīci and shares in all evil matters to transform sentient beings. Because inherent evil exists, it is called unsevered; because cultivated evil is no more, it is called impermanent. If both cultivated and inherent were exhausted, that would be severed, and could not be called neither severed nor permanent. The icchantika is also like this: the good of the nature is unsevered, so he gives birth to good roots again; the Tathāgata's evil of the nature is unsevered, so he is still able to raise evil, yet with an understanding citta that is untainted, thoroughly realizing that the boundary of evil is precisely the limit of reality. He is able through the characteristics of the five heinous deeds to attain liberation, yet is neither bound nor liberated; practicing what is not the Path, he penetrates the Buddha-Path. The icchantika is tainted and does not comprehend; herein lies the difference. What does it mean not to comprehend? It is because he does not understand the absence of nature. Therefore, all good and evil phenomena take the absence of nature as their nature. This nature is precisely the Buddha-nature, precisely the unlocated root, precisely because it is the dharmatā. This nature of good and evil cannot be severed. Inquiring right now into the nature of one's own citta, it is unattainable; that is, having no abode, it can pervade all places—this is the nature of good and evil. The nature has neither good nor evil, yet can generate good and evil. Good and evil can be severed; the nature cannot be severed. Good and evil alike take the nature of citta as their nature. If one severs the evil of the nature, one severs the nature of citta. The nature cannot be severed; therefore, the icchantika does not sever the good of the nature. Even if falling into the three destinies, the good of the nature does not decrease, and the evil of the nature does not increase; straight through to Buddhahood, the good of the nature does not increase, and the evil of the nature does not decrease. This nature is precisely the dharmakāya. It is like a bright mirror: originally lacking all beautiful and ugly images, it can manifest all beautiful and ugly images. Images have increase and decrease, but the bright and pure luminous substance neither increases nor decreases. Because the mirror originally has no images, it can manifest images; Buddha-nature has neither good nor evil, so it can manifest good and evil. Sentient beings do not attain the nature; they only attain good and evil, and being constrained by good and evil, they cannot attain sovereignty. Because the good of the nature is not destroyed, from hell the good of the Buddha-realm is activated; because the evil of the nature is not destroyed, the Buddha can manifest the evil of the six destinies. Furthermore, 'nature' is the nature of all phenomena such as good and evil, pervading sentient beings, lands, and all places throughout the ten directions and the three times, without alteration, neither increasing nor decreasing, able to manifest cause and effect, defilement and purity, ordinary beings and sages, good and evil, and so forth. Arising from the nature, they are called the good of the nature and the evil of the nature. As for good, evil, and so on, they have no fixed characteristics, but are formed through habits following conditions—like images in a mirror, no substance can be found in them. If encountering pure conditions, they are good; if due to defiled conditions, they are evil. Obtained through cultivation, they are called cultivated good and cultivated evil. If we speak of the good of the nature, it is not exclusive to the icchantika; if we speak of the evil of the nature, it is not exclusive to the Buddhas. Because it is the nature of all phenomena of good and evil, all sentient beings possess it completely, equally in a single limit. If one awakens to and comprehends this nature, one immediately becomes a Buddha; therefore, one can manifest the sage or show the ordinary being with unimpeded sovereignty. If we speak of cultivated good and cultivated evil, among superior, middling, and inferior faculties, they are not fixed: according to the thickness or thinness of cultivated attainment, depending on the shallowness or depth of one's power, one obtains worldly retribution and rises or sinks in the six destinies, or accomplishes supramundane fruits, varying among the four sages. Because of not understanding the nature of good and evil, one is constrained by good and evil karma, without sovereignty. If one sees the nature and realizes the Way, what Way would not be accomplished? Then phenomenon after phenomenon marks the source, and dust mote after dust mote accords with the purport. How could one attain sovereignty only in the two phenomena of good and evil?