宗鏡錄 61.35

61.35

Answer: Strictly speaking, all dharmas have no past, future, or present, and are neither responding nor non-responding; yet they are able to have responses. One may also speak of a dharmakāya response, or of a response body's response. A dharmakāya response is an unseen benefit; a response body's response is an apparent benefit. Distinguishing unseen and apparent has four meanings, as will be explained later. In clarifying the characteristics of capacity and response: the characteristics of capacity are explained with reference to good and evil; the characteristics of response are discussed with reference to loving-kindness and compassion. If good and evil constitute capacity, are they solitary or combined? Commentators do not agree. Some say solitary evil constitutes capacity, relying on the sūtra which states: 'I am here to sever the severe sicknesses of boils and tumors of all sentient beings.' And it also says: 'Suppose there are seven sons; yet toward the sick one, the [parent's] heart is especially inclined. The Tathāgata is also like this: toward all sentient beings he is not unequal, yet toward those with transgressions his heart is especially inclined.' It also says: 'The Tathāgata does not dwell in the world for unconditioned sentient beings.' Furthermore, the indeterminate is ignorance, which ultimately belongs to the category of evil. This takes evil alone as capacity. Others take good alone as capacity, relying on the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra which states: 'I regard sentient beings without looking at old, young, or middle-aged, poor, rich, noble, or base; toward those with wholesome minds, I immediately turn with loving-kindness and mindfulness.' This takes good alone as capacity. Others say that good and evil cannot each independently serve as capacity. Why? Just as the mind immediately following the vajra-[like samādhi] is the Buddha, where all goods converge universally and there is no fault of good or evil—how could this serve as capacity? Although it is said that 'Buddha mindfully regards Buddha,' this is a general saying, and there is neither extracting [from suffering] nor bestowing [happiness]; hence we know that solitary good cannot serve as capacity. That solitary evil cannot serve as capacity is seen in the fact that an icchantika, being utterly evil, cannot stimulate the Buddha. The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: 'There is only a single hair that cannot sustain the body'—that is, the naturally possessed principle-good; this is a generic capacity, and ultimately does not effect stimulation. Others take the intermixture of good and evil as capacity: from an icchantika giving rise to a repentant mind, up to equal enlightenment (samyaksaṃbodhi), there is always an intermixture of good and evil; hence it can serve as capacity. Therefore, their characteristics are clarified with reference to this good and evil. Next, clarifying the characteristics of response with reference to loving-kindness: some take loving-kindness alone as response. A sūtra says: 'By the power of the wholesome root of loving-kindness, the elephant sees a lion'—as explained at length in the Nirvāṇasūtra. Others take compassion alone as response, as the Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara states: 'Or playfully sporting in the hells, taking on suffering in their stead with great compassion.' Others employ loving-kindness and compassion combined as response. Why? Truly, because the compassionate mind perfumes wisdom, it can extract others from suffering; because the loving mind perfumes meditation, it can bestow joy upon others. A sūtra says: 'Adorned with the power of meditation and wisdom, through these he crosses sentient beings over.' A treatise says: 'Mercury blended with pure gold can gild all images; merit blended with the dharmakāya responds and manifests everywhere.' Could mercury or pure gold alone coat images? One should know that response is discussed as the combination of loving-kindness and compassion.