宗鏡錄 80

English (machine translation) 80

Language: English

80.1

Compiled by Yanshou, Dhyāna Master Zhijue, Abbot of Huiri Yongming Monastery.

80.2

Now, entering this source-gate, how does one realize that all phenomena are like transformations?

Answer: Because the myriad phenomena lack substance and their names and characteristics are fundamentally empty, suddenly existing out of nothing, they are called 'transformations'. As the 'Chapter on the Ten Forbearances' in the Avataṃsakasūtra says: "Sons of the Buddha, what is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's forbearance of conforming to transformation? Sons of the Buddha, this bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows that all worlds are entirely like transformations. Namely: all sentient beings' mental karma is a transformation, arising from perception and thought. All worldly formations are transformations, arising from conceptual distinction. All pain, pleasure, and inversions are transformations, arising from false grasping. All worldly unreal phenomena are transformations, manifested by verbal discourse. All afflictions and conceptual distinctions are transformations, arising from mental recollections. Furthermore, there are transformations of purification and subduing, manifested by non-discrimination. Transformations that do not turn in the three times, because of non-arising and equality. Transformations of the bodhisattva's vow-power, because of vast cultivation. Transformations of the Tathāgata's great compassion, manifested expediently. Transformations of expedients in turning the wheel of the Dharma, spoken through wisdom, fearlessness, and eloquence. The bodhisattva thus understands worldly and world-transcending transformations: knowing them through immediate realization, knowing them vastly, knowing them boundlessly, knowing them according to facts, knowing them autonomously, knowing them truly, unable to be overturned by false views, and though acting according to the world, remaining undecayed. For example, a transformation does not arise from citta, does not arise from mental factors, does not arise from karma, and does not receive retribution; it is not born in the world, not extinguished in the world, cannot be pursued, cannot be grasped or touched; it does not abide for long, does not abide for an instant; it does not move in the world, does not depart from the world; it is not exclusively bound to one direction, does not universally belong to all directions; it is not finite, not infinite; it does not tire or cease, nor does it not tire or cease; it is neither ordinary nor noble, neither defiled nor pure, neither birth nor death, neither wise nor foolish, neither seen nor unseen; it does not rely on the world, does not enter the dharmadhātu; it is neither clever nor dull; it neither grasps nor does not grasp; it is neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa, neither existent nor non-existent. A bodhisattva possessing such skillful expedients acts in the world, cultivates the bodhisattva path, understands worldly phenomena, emanates bodies and travels transformed, does not attach to the world, does not grasp at their own body, makes no distinctions regarding the world or the body, does not abide in the world, does not depart from the world, does not abide in phenomena, does not depart from phenomena, and on account of their original vows, does not abandon a single realm of sentient beings, nor do they subdue only a few realms of sentient beings; they do not discriminate phenomena, yet do not fail to discriminate; they know the nature of all phenomena to have no coming and no going; though they possess nothing, they fulfill the Buddha Dharma; they understand phenomena to be like transformations, neither existent nor non-existent. Sons of the Buddha, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abides in the forbearance of conforming to transformation in this way, they are fully able to fulfill the bodhi path of all Buddhas and benefit sentient beings. This is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's ninth forbearance, the forbearance of conforming to transformation." Therefore, we know that good and unwholesome phenomena are transformatively produced from the mind: with causes that have no action, they experience results that suddenly appear. Hence the Sixth Patriarch said: "Thinking of evil phenomena, one transforms into the hells; thinking of good phenomena, one transforms into the heavenly realms. Harmful malice transforms into beasts; loving-kindness and compassion transform into bodhisattvas. All are transformations of one's own nature."

80.4

A question in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa asks: "If all phenomena are empty like transformations, why are there various different expositions of the Dharma?"

80.5

The answer says: "Just as what the Buddha transforms and what other people transform, though unreal, have various different forms and characteristics; what is seen in dreams is also like this. When people see good or bad things in a dream, some give rise to joy, while others give rise to fear. Just like the images in a mirror, although there is no real matter, following the original form the images may be handsome or ugly. The myriad phenomena are also like this: although empty, each has its respective causes and conditions. As the Buddha said here: among these transformed phenomena, there are transformations by śrāvakas, transformations by pratyekabuddhas, transformations by bodhisattvas, transformations by Buddhas, transformations by afflictions, and transformations by karma." It also says: "As for those that are like transformations, the transforming master is not a fixed thing; merely through the arising of mind, something is created, all lacking reality. The human body is also like this: fundamentally it has no cause, but merely from the mind of past lives arises the body of this life, all lacking reality. Therefore, all phenomena are like transformations."

80.6

Question: One should not say that transformed things are empty. Why? The transforming mind is also obtained from cultivating meditative absorption; from this mind various transformations are produced, whether persons or phenomena. Since these transformations have causes and effects, how can they be empty?

80.7

Answer: As the Buddha said, contemplating non-arising, one attains liberation from the arisen; relying on the unconditioned, one attains liberation from the conditioned. Although one contemplates the unarisen phenomenon as non-existent, it can serve as a cause and condition; the unconditioned is also like this. Although transformations are empty, they can also serve as the causes and conditions that generate mind. Furthermore, emptiness does not mean empty because it is not seen; it is called empty because it lacks real functional utility. For this reason, it is said that all phenomena are like transformations. Therefore, we know that all phenomena are produced from the mind and are all like illusions and transformations. Although illusions and transformations are not real, they can also serve as the causes and conditions of good and evil, and receive the retributions of ascent and descent. One must not give rise to the view of annihilation; merely realize that the substance is empty, and do not generate grasping or rejecting.

80.8

Question: All phenomena that possess characteristics arise from transformation. The mind has no shape or characteristics; how can it be transformatively manifested?

80.9

Answer: The mind is fundamentally a transformation, its principle inconceivable. Manifesting mind from mind is like a transformation giving rise to a transformation. The Buddhabhūmisūtraśāstra says: "Transformations of mind are only two: first, corresponding to one's own body, meaning transformatively manifesting various minds and images of mental factors upon one's own mind; second, corresponding to other bodies, meaning causing other minds to also manifest various minds and images of mental factors. These are all objective aspects (nimittabhāga) appearing like subjective aspects (darśanabhāga). Another view holds: meditative power can enable one's own mind to understand phenomena beyond its own sphere, which is called transforming one's own mind; by conferring blessings upon sentient beings, enabling the ignorant to understand deep and subtle phenomena, and enabling those who have lost mindfulness to attain correct mindfulness, this is called transforming another's mind. However, the mind has no transformation, because it has no shape or material quality. As the treatise says: 'Because the mind has no form, it cannot be transformed.' It also says that transformed bodies have no mind or mental factors. This is said with reference to the meditative power of the two vehicles and ordinary beings; their meditative power is inferior and cannot transformatively manifest formless and immaterial phenomena. The inconceivable meditative absorption of all Buddhas and bodhisattvas can transformatively manifest all of them. Were it not so, how could the Tathāgata manifest greed, anger, and the like? How could śrāvakas and animals know the Tathāgata's mind? Why do the sūtras speak of transforming immeasurable kinds of beings, causing them all to have minds? Why does this treatise speak of various transformed mental karma? Why do the sūtras say that there is mind dependent on another? It is only that transformed forms share the function of real forms, while transformed sense faculties and minds merely have their characteristics appear without sharing their real function. Furthermore, that statement was made in reference to inferior kinds. If so, why not transform insentient things to make the characteristics of mind appear? Insentient things are already the nimittabhāga of mind and the like; how could one cause them to have the characteristics of mind appear again? If the characteristics of mind appeared, they would be named sentient beings, and would not be subsumed under the insentient. Therefore, transformed minds are spoken of as only two kinds: first, one's own body; second, transforming another's body, and so on."

80.10

Question: This gate of the one mind is non-different in its principle; yet, in addressing capacities and matching dharmas, the teaching contains multiple gates, with different names and designations for the one dharma. Sometimes it is called the Buddha-nature, and sometimes it is termed the tathāgatagarbha. In what sense is the meaning of 'garbha' (womb/treasury) established, and why is it called 'Buddha-nature'?

80.11

Answer: The tathāgatagarbha is the true conscious mind. Within this true mind, all Buddha-dharmas, as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, are fully present, just as within the deluded mind, defiled dharmas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges are fully present. This mind and the dharmas are of the same essence and nature; therefore, it is called the tathāgatagarbha. Because all sentient beings possess the tathāgatagarbha, which is capable of serving as the cause of Buddhahood, they are said to possess the Buddha-nature. Just as within the sleeping mind there is the nature of awakening, within yellow stone there is the nature of gold, and within white stone there is the nature of silver, likewise within all worldly dharmas there is the nature of nirvāṇa. This nature is the very reality of sentient beings themselves; therefore, it is named the 'Self'. The Self is none other than the Buddha-nature. When concealed, it is called the tathāgatagarbha; when revealed, it is called the dharmakāya.

80.12

Question: If the very reality of sentient beings themselves is named the Buddha-nature, and awakening to this nature is what is called being a Buddha, then merely realizing the one nature would accord with the fundamental source. Why, then, in the teachings, are two, three, four, or five different kinds of Buddha-nature sometimes spoken of?

80.13

Answer: The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra states: 'The Buddha-nature as the direct cause is the mind of sentient beings.' It also says: 'The Buddha-nature is not called one dharma, nor ten dharmas, nor a hundred dharmas, nor a thousand dharmas, nor ten thousand dharmas. When bodhi has not yet been attained, all wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate [states] are called the Buddha-nature.' Thus we know that when bodhi has not yet been attained, all dharmas are not even enumerated by name; how much less, once awakened and realized, would one still speak of two or three! Nevertheless, though there is expansion and contraction, the one nature is without difference. According to root and branch, cause and effect, it is divided into multiple kinds. The Fo xing lun (Treatise on Buddha-nature) states: 'The Buddha-nature has three kinds, namely, three causes and three kinds of Buddha-nature. As for the three causes: first, the cause that should be attained; second, the cause of applied practice; third, the cause of fulfillment. Of these three causes, the former cause takes unconditioned true principle as its substance, while the latter two causes take conditioned aspiration and practice as their substance. As for the three kinds of Buddha-nature: within the cause that should be attained, there are three natures: first, the nature dwelling in its own nature; second, the emerging nature; third, the nature of reaching and attaining the fruit. These three natures further constitute three treasuries (garbha): first, the treasury as what is subsumed; second, the treasury as concealment; third, the treasury as what subsumes. First, as for the treasury as what is subsumed: the Buddha explained that with respect to suchness dwelling in its own nature, all sentient beings are the tathāgatagarbha. The word "tathā" (thusness/suchness) has two meanings: first, suchness-wisdom; second, the suchness-realm. Neither being inverted, it is called "suchness". The word "āgata" (come) means coming from one's own nature, coming all the way to reaching and attaining [the fruit]; this is called the "Tathāgata". Therefore, although the nature of the Tathāgata is called "should be attained" in the cause and "reaching and attaining" in the fruit, its substance is non-dual. It is only due to the difference between purity and defilement: when in the cause, because it runs counter to the two kinds of emptiness, ignorance arises and is mingled with kleśas; hence it is called defiled and turbid. Although it is not immediately revealed, it must certainly be manifestable; hence it is called "should be attained". When reaching the fruit, it accords with the two kinds of emptiness, is no longer burdened by delusion, and is undefiled by kleśas; it is said to be pure. The fruit having already become manifest, it is called "reaching and attaining". As for what is called "treasury": all sentient beings are entirely within the Tathāgata's wisdom; hence it is called a "treasury". Because suchness-wisdom accords with the suchness-realm, definitely no sentient beings go beyond the suchness-realm; all are subsumed and upheld by the Tathāgata. Hence, as what is contained, sentient beings are the tathāgatagarbha. Second, as for the treasury as concealment: the Tathāgata is concealed of itself and not manifest; hence it is called a "treasury". The word "Tathāgata" has two meanings: first, the meaning of manifesting suchness without inversion. By reason of false discrimination, it is called inverted; by absence of false discrimination, it is called suchness. Second, the meaning of manifesting permanence. This nature of suchness comes from the nature dwelling in its own nature all the way to reaching and attaining; because the substance of suchness does not alter or change, it has the meaning of permanence. When the Tathāgata-nature abides prior to the path, it is concealed and covered by kleśas, and sentient beings do not see it; hence it is called a "treasury". Third, as for the treasury as what can subsume: it means that all the merits exceeding the number of sands of the Ganges on the stage of the fruit are completely subsumed when abiding in the Tathāgata's nature that should be attained. If one were to say that the nature is obtained only upon reaching the fruit, then this nature would be impermanent. Why? Because it is not obtained just now, one knows it is fundamentally present; therefore, it is said to be permanent.' Although three causes of Buddha-nature are spoken of, they are only the one nature. Why? The direct cause is fundamentally present; because sentient beings are unawakened, it is covered by adventitious defilements. Like gold in ore, the substance of gold does not show; one must rely on effort before the utility of gold is completed. This Buddha-nature as the direct cause is also like this: being in bondage, it does not show, being situated within the ore of kleśas. One must first rely on the revealing cause of wisdom to know it and open it up, and next depend on auxiliary causes as skillful means to help manifest it; only then is the great function accomplished. Although the auxiliary function is differentiated, the substance is ever of one taste. Without altering the nature of sentient beings, it accomplishes the Buddha-nature. Because the principle dwelling in its own nature is in the ordinary yet identical with the true; because the phenomenon of the emerging nature accomplishes the fruit and is not in vain; because the textual sense of 'should be attained' abides in defilement, yet how could it be lost?; and because the path of reaching and attaining realizes the noble state without doubt. Furthermore, because it exists by its own nature, it can emerge; what should be attained reaches the fruit, and its actual verification is not empty. As the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: 'Because icchantikas and the like will definitely attain anuttarāsamyaksaṃbodhi. Good man, for example, suppose someone has milk and curds in his house, and someone asks him, "Do you have clarified butter?" He answers, "I have it." Curds are not actually clarified butter, but because through skillful means he will definitely obtain it, he says he has clarified butter. Sentient beings are also like this: all have mind. Whoever has mind will definitely attain anuttarāsamyaksaṃbodhi. For this reason, I always proclaim that all sentient beings have the Buddha-nature.' Furthermore, the sūtras and treatises generally illuminate four kinds of Buddha-nature: first, the causal nature, which is the dependent origination of defilement and purity; second, the cause-of-cause nature, which is internal perfuming giving rise to the aspiration; third, the fruition nature, which is initial awakening already perfected; fourth, the fruit-of-fruit nature, which is fundamental awakening already revealed. Furthermore, the first conceals and reveals according to conditions; the second summons forth the pure function; the third exhausts defilement and fulfills purity; the fourth returns to the source and reveals reality. Furthermore, the first is the nature dwelling in its own nature, which is the direct cause; the second is the emerging Buddha-nature, which is the revealing cause; the third and fourth are both the nature of reaching and attaining the fruit, which are auxiliary causes. Furthermore, the first two are principle and wisdom in the cause, while the latter two are principle and wisdom in the fruit. Although cause and effect differ, wisdom does not diverge from principle; they tally without duality, revolving as only the one mind, transcending marks and severed from speech, with nothing they do not embrace. Hence it is called Buddha-nature. Furthermore, the Niepan shu (Commentary on the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra) states: 'The proper nature of nirvāṇa has five kinds: first, the proper nature, which is neither cause nor cause-of-cause, neither fruit nor fruit-of-fruit; second, the causal nature, which is the twelve links of dependent origination; third, the cause-of-cause nature, which is the wisdom produced by the twelve links of dependent origination; fourth, the fruition nature, which is samyaksaṃbodhi; fifth, the fruit-of-fruit nature, which is mahāparinirvāṇa. Although they are distinguished, they are just the one dharma.' Furthermore, ancient commentaries explain that there are three kinds of natures: first, the nature of principle, which is tathatā; second, the nature of practice, which is the untainted seeds; third, the concealed nature, which is the category of worldly dust and toil. Although the hidden and manifest aspects of the three natures are distinguished, their single substance is shared by ordinary beings and sages. Furthermore, in terms of permanence and according with conditions, two kinds of Buddha-nature are distinguished: First, the meaning of permanence. The sūtra says: 'The original taste of the medicine remained in the mountains.' This is like Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta revering the four assemblies and others: because this Buddha-nature blends with kleśas without being soiled, and reveals bodhi without becoming pure. Because it is permanent and unchanging, the bodhisattva dared not look down on even a single minor sentient being, since the Buddha-nature is indestructible. Second, the meaning of according with conditions. The sūtra says: 'Following where it flows, it becomes various tastes.' This is like Bodhisattva Sadāprarudita grieving for the four assemblies and others: because the true mind does not preserve its own nature, but its entire substance accords with conditions to produce persons and dharmas. The sūtra says: 'The dharmakāya transmigrates through the five destinies, and is called sentient beings.' Because sentient beings accord with conditions and lose their nature, remaining unawakened and unknowing, the bodhisattva constantly gives rise to sorrow and grief. Furthermore, the Buddha-nature of sentient beings in every case has two meanings: first, the Buddha-nature that is the basis, which has the above two meanings—one is permanence, and the second is according with conditions; second, the defilements that depend on it: one is the meaning of seeming existence through conditioned completion, and the second is the meaning of being empty as having no nature. Because defiled dharmas have the meaning of being empty, the Buddha-nature that is their basis is ever pure and unchanging. Because defiled dharmas have the meaning of seeming existence, the Buddha-nature that is their basis accords with conditions and becomes defiled. Therefore, we know that because sentient beings have no nature and are empty, while in the ordinary they are not ordinary; because the dharmakāya accords with conditions, while situated in the sage it is not a sage. Furthermore, because sentient beings have seeming existence through conditioned completion, the sage is not the ordinary; because the dharmakāya is permanent and unchanging, the ordinary is not the sage. Thus, the ultimate and the conventional are of one limit, yet defilement and purity are ever distinct; ordinary and sage are two paths, yet beings and Buddhas are non-different. Only when fused in this manner is the Buddha-nature of the one mind clarified.

80.14

An ancient master asked: 'Is the Buddha-nature of all sentient beings permanently abiding at present, or will it be in the future?'

80.15

Answer: 'It is permanent across all three periods of time.'

80.16

Question: 'If it is permanent at present, are sentient beings identical to Buddhas?'

80.17

Answer: Like a child in the womb—how could it not share its father's surname? If one asks about the father's surname, would one blame the child for being old or young? Furthermore, that the Buddha-nature is neither future nor present means: one merely sees this principle, which cannot be postponed to the future; but it is obtained only through cultivating the path, so it cannot be said to be present. If one merely sees this principle, then according to principle there is no disparity; if it is obtained only through cultivating the path, then following phenomena there is no confusion. Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra illustrates six blind men feeling an elephant, each stating a different account; although what they say is not accurate, it also does not depart from the elephant. Just as each clings to one of the six dharmas—the five aggregates, the space element, and so forth—as the Buddha-nature, although they do not hit the mark, they also do not depart from the six dharmas. Just as among the head and feet there is no elephant, so one cannot identify them with it; yet outside the head and feet there is no other elephant, so one cannot separate them from it. Being neither identical nor separate, neither inside nor outside, an elephant can be spoken of. The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is also like this: neither identical to the six dharmas nor separate from the six dharmas, neither inside nor outside; hence it is called the Middle Way, and named the Buddha-nature. If one takes the six dharmas to be the Buddha-nature, that is the Buddha-nature of the blind men. If one departs from the six dharmas to find the Buddha-nature, it is like pointing to empty space as the Buddha-nature, just as the slander of the brahmins who were harmed by Senyo. Those who grasp the Middle Way, being neither identical nor separate, as the Buddha-nature, are like the Buddha-nature seen by the great king and his wise ministers. The Daśabhūmikasūtra states: 'Within the bodies of sentient beings there is the vajra Buddha-nature, resembling the solar disc.' 'Buddha' means awakened; humans possess the awakening of spiritual awareness. Now, the supreme empty truth serves as their nature; hence it is called Buddha-nature. Inanimate things have no awareness; merely maintaining their own substance, they can be called 'dharmas'. Now, the true nature serves as their nature; hence it is called 'dharma-nature'. Therefore it is said that subject and object are provisionally spoken of, while in reality there is no difference. Why is there no difference? Because they are of the same nature. External texts also say: 'Heaven, earth, and the myriad things equally receive the primordial qi of yin and yang.'

80.18

Question: The term 'Buddha-nature' encompasses both realm and wisdom; thus it is said that both bodhi and the cessation of bodhi are called bodhi, and both wisdom and the sphere of wisdom are called prajñā. Why is it said in the teachings that among sentient beings it is called 'Buddha-nature', whereas among insentient things it is called 'dharma-nature'?

80.19

Answer: In the citta it is called the buddha-nature; in the objective sphere it is called the dharma-nature. Though they differ in following conditions, and grasper and grasped seem distinct, when considered in terms of their nature they are fundamentally identical: one substance without difference. Just as ghee stored in a bottle varies according to the vessel, or like water divided into rivers and oceans takes its name following the place to which it flows, so too is the single-taste true citta: the ordinary and the holy, the objective sphere and cognitive wisdom, are of one limit, without distinction. Therefore, the Fawang jing says: 'All sentient beings' one-mind buddha-nature is equal, because it is equal to all dharmas.' It is solely because the true citta does not keep to its own nature that it turns and moves according to conditions; at the point where it turns and moves, distinct names are established. An ancient worthy said: 'For example, it is like a jewel: turned toward the moon, it produces water; turned toward the sun, it produces fire. The single jewel has never differed, yet it obtains the names of water and fire. Because the jewel's substance is one, it can respond to two conditions. Moreover, when the moon serves as the condition for water, the nature of fire has never been absent within the moon; when the sun serves as the condition for fire, the nature of water has never been absent within the sun. Why is this? Because the two natures are secretly merged with each other. It is only that with respect to the conditions of water and fire there is superiority and inferiority in phenomenal facts; thus the two natures are secretly concealed and do not appear, and following their respective self-substances they obtain the names of water and fire, without being completely devoid of the nature. The tathatā one-mind is also like this: among sentient beings it is called the buddha-nature, and among insentient things it is called the dharma-nature. The one tathatā has never differed, yet it obtains the names of dharma and buddha. Because the substance of tathatā is one, it can respond to two conditions. Moreover, when sentient beings precisely serve as the condition for buddhahood, sentient beings have never lacked the dharma-nature; when insentient things precisely serve as the condition for dharmas, insentient things have never lacked the buddha-nature. Why is this? Because the two natures are secretly merged with each other. It is only because, as with form and citta, there is superiority and inferiority in phenomenal facts, that the two natures are secretly concealed and do not appear, and following their respective self-substances they obtain the names of dharma and buddha, without being completely devoid of the nature.' The Qingliang ji says: 'Regarding "the dharma-nature is precisely the buddha-nature", therefore the sūtra says: "Know that all dharmas are precisely the citta's own nature." If one takes the citta's nature to be the buddha-nature, there is no dharma that is not the citta's nature; then inner and outer are not separated, yet the substance is neither inner nor outer. "Inner" and "outer" belong to characteristics; the nature is not identical with characteristics, so how could there be inner and outer? However, deluded about the one nature, one transforms it into the outer. Since the outer is solely citta, how could it fail to be buddha? What is transformed has no reality; therefore it is said of walls and fences that they lack the buddha-nature. When explaining characteristics through nature, there are none that are not the nature. Just as smoke depends on fire, smoke is precisely fire, yet smoke obscures fire; characteristics arise based on nature, characteristics obscure the nature, yet characteristics are precisely the nature. Just as water becomes waves, waves are precisely water. The objective sphere is transformed depending on citta; the objective sphere is not different from citta. If the citta has the nature, how could the objective sphere not have it? What is more, both citta and the objective sphere are precisely the true nature; the true nature is non-dual, so how could citta and the objective sphere be opposed? If one subordinates the nature to characteristics, that does not preclude inner and outer. If one analogizes the outer objective sphere to citta, making it have awareness and perception, and engage in cultivation to become a buddha, that is the teaching of heterodox views and non-Buddhists. Therefore one must constantly illuminate: neither identical nor separate, neither one nor different, so that there is nothing about which to be deluded.' Hence we know that the buddha-nature is neither inner nor outer; following beings' delusion or awakening, ascent and descent are forcibly spoken of. Furthermore, now, in order to refute the false attachment to the idea that all insentient things possess the buddha-nature: examining this calculated view, it naturally has depths and shallows. First, it is claimed that spirit transforms into earth, wood, metal, and stone, or that owls and muntjacs carry clods of earth to form their offspring—sentient transforming into insentient, and insentient transforming into sentient. This is a heterodox view, no different from non-Buddhist sentient beings calculating that growing grasses and trees possess life; therefore it is unacceptable. If one says that insentient things share the same one nature, this is somewhat closer to the source, yet one must also grasp its meaning. Their fundamental intention was established based on the omnipresence of the self-substance of tathatā, because the real nature has no duality; because the Nirvāṇa Sūtra states that the supreme truth of emptiness is the buddha-nature; because within all dharmas there is a peaceful and blissful nature; because gathering the objective sphere into citta, there is nothing that is not citta; and because the nature of form and the nature of wisdom are of one substance without duality. Passages such as these are found throughout the various sūtras. Now I say: this explanation is too immediate and goes too far; it loses sentient and insentient, and ruins both nature and characteristics. If one uses the supreme truth of emptiness of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] to encompass both citta and the objective sphere, could the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] exclude rubble and say it lacks the nature? Now I directly reveal the correct doctrine, saying: nature and characteristics are neither one nor different; the sentient and the insentient are also neither one nor different. Therefore one should explain it thus: Subordinating the nature to conditions, then the sentient and the insentient are different—first, just as the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] excludes walls, fences, tiles, and rubble; second, there is neither awakening nor non-awakening, because within the true nature there is neither citta nor objective sphere; third, there is nothing that is not awakening, because the insentient nature is fused with the nature of awakening.

80.20

Therefore, the Awakening of Faith asks: 'If the dharmakāya of all buddhas is free from form-characteristics, how can it manifest various form-characteristics?'

80.21

The answer states: 'Precisely because this dharmakāya is the substance of form, it can manifest in form. That is to say, from the beginning, form and citta have been non-dual. Because the nature of form is precisely wisdom, the substance of form has no shape and is called the wisdom-body. Because the nature of wisdom is precisely form, it is called the dharmakāya, omnipresent in all places.' Now we take the meaning of the mutual identity and mutual fusion of the two natures to explain it, that is all. The Baimen yihai says: 'To awaken to the dust-objects and all dharmas as lacking self-nature from conditions is called the buddha-nature. The sūtra says: "The buddha-seed of the three times takes non-nature as its nature. Anywhere, following the comprehension of non-nature, that is precisely the buddha-nature." It does not exist because of sentient beings, nor is it absent because of insentient things. Now, when speaking solely of sentient beings, this is to admonish people everywhere to become vessels, constantly seeing clearly in a single hair or minute tip that all principles and phenomena are nothing other than the tathāgata-nature; this is to open up the merits of the arising of the tathāgata-nature, and is called the buddha-nature.' From this we know that the six destinies and four modes of birth, the mountains, rivers, and the great earth, sentient and insentient, all share the same one nature. It is as the World-Honoured One proclaimed three times in his final instruction, the chapter on 'Exhausting All Responses and Returning to the Source'. Moreover, the sūtra says: 'At that time, after the World-Honoured One had entered the various dhyānas in direct and reverse order, he universally addressed the great assembly: "With my profound prajñā, I have universally contemplated the three realms, all the six destinies, the various mountains and the great ocean, and the living beings of the great earth. Such three realms are fundamentally free in their nature, completely quiescent, identical to the characteristic of empty space, without name and without consciousness, forever cutting off all existences, originally equal without thoughts of high or low, without seeing and without hearing, without perceiving and without knowing, unable to be bound, unable to be liberated, without sentient beings, without lifespan, neither born nor arising, neither exhausting nor ceasing, neither worldly nor unworldly. Both nirvāṇa and saṃsāra are ungraspable, because the two limits are equal, equal to all dharmas. Dwelling in leisure and abiding in stillness, without anything to put into operation, an ultimate establishment is utterly ungraspable. Acting from non-abiding dharmas and the dharma-nature, cutting off all characteristics, there is completely nothing at all. The characteristics of dharmas are like this. One who knows this is called a supramundane person; not knowing this matter is called the beginning of saṃsāra. You in the great assembly should sever avidyā and extinguish the beginning of saṃsāra." He also addressed the great assembly again: "With my mahāprajñā, I have universally contemplated the sentient and insentient of the three realms, all persons and dharmas; they are all utterly ultimate, without one who is bound, without one who is liberated, without lord and without reliance, unable to be grasped or held, neither departing from the three realms nor entering into the various existences, originally pure, without defilement, without kleśa, equal to empty space, neither equal nor unequal; exhausting all moving thoughts, conceptual citta ceases. Such characteristics of dharmas are called great nirvāṇa. Truly seeing this dharma is called liberation; ordinary beings who do not know it are said to have avidyā." Having spoken these words, he entered the leap-over dhyāna again, emerging from the first dhyāna up to entering the cessation absorption, and emerging from the cessation absorption down to entering the first dhyāna. Having thus entered the leap-over dhyāna in direct and reverse order, he again addressed the great assembly: "With my buddha-eye, I have universally contemplated all dharmas of the three realms: the original limit of avidyā is fundamentally liberated in its nature. Seeking it in the ten directions, it is completely ungraspable; because the root is non-existent, the dependent branches and leaves are all liberated. Because avidyā is liberated, up to old age and death are all liberated. Due to these causes and conditions, I now abide in the light of constant extinction and quiescence, which is called great nirvāṇa."' As for the inconceivable text of the three proclamations from the true, compassionate Father's vast, great mind of compassion above, if anyone encounters this teaching, they should break their bones for pens, peel their skin for paper, and pierce their blood for ink to copy it down, never forgetting it even for a brief moment, nor losing illumination for a single kṣaṇa. Moreover, as the first passage says: 'Universally contemplate the three realms, all the six destinies, the various mountains and the great ocean, and the living beings of the great earth. Such three realms are fundamentally free in their nature, completely quiescent.' The second passage says: 'Universally contemplate the sentient and insentient of the three realms, all persons and dharmas; they are all utterly ultimate.' The third passage says: 'Universally contemplate all dharmas of the three realms: the original nature of avidyā is fundamentally liberated in its nature.' Therefore, throughout the entire dharmadhātu and across all the ten directions, whether sentient or insentient, whether possessing nature or lacking nature, the mountains, rivers, the great earth, grasses, mustard seeds, humans, and animals do not exist within the three realms, do not depart from the three realms, do not follow saṃsāra, and do not abide in nirvāṇa; all are identical with the wondrous nature of the one-mind tathatā. Believing and understanding in this way, one enters the ekayāna suddenly. There is no other secret text that can surpass this principle. Any explanation apart from this is an expedient arrangement, enticing, guiding, and supporting beings so that all return to the mirror of the source.

80.22

Question: Since it is said that all sentient beings possess the buddha-nature, why does the Nirvāṇa Sūtra say that there is a buddha-nature which icchantikas possess and people of good roots lack, and so forth?

80.23

Answer: All sentient beings truly possess the buddha-nature. The sūtra speaks reciprocally of presence and absence with reference to the wholesome, unwholesome, indeterminate, principle, fruit, and so forth. The Jianfu commentary says: 'Now, basing ourselves on the sūtra's clarification of the buddha-nature, there are roughly five kinds: wholesome, unwholesome, indeterminate, principle, and fruit, etc. Now, when it is said that the icchantika possesses it and the person of good roots lacks it, this is the unwholesome buddha-nature. However, there are two kinds of people of good roots: first, the person of good roots who is detached from desire, because having detached from desire they have severed all unwholesome things; second, those at the five abodes and above, because at the five abodes and above there is no unwholesome nature. Both of these two persons lack the unwholesome nature. When it is said that the person of good roots possesses it and the icchantika lacks it, this is the wholesome buddha-nature. The icchantika has severed all wholesome things; therefore it is said they lack it. What both persons possess is the principle and the indeterminate. What both persons lack is because both lack the fruit nature.' The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'The Tathāgata's buddha-nature is of two kinds: first, presence; second, absence. As for presence: that is to say, the thirty-two marks up to the immeasurable samādhis—this is called presence. As for absence: that is to say, the Tathāgata's past and future wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate karmic causes, fruitional retributions, kleśas, five aggregates, and twelve links of dependent origination—this is called absence. Up to the icchantika's buddha-nature, it is also like this.' Thus, from the Buddha above down to the icchantika below, all possess both the natures of presence and absence; it is not that they are completely devoid of the nature. From this we know that presence and absence are discussed only with reference to the three natures and the fruit. If one speaks of the nature of principle, there is not even ordinary and holy, so how could presence and absence be spoken of? Thus, when considered in terms of principle, none are not fully equipped with it. Therefore, Dharma Master Daosheng said: 'All who receive physical endowment from the two modes are correct causes for nirvāṇa. How could beings of the class of icchantikas alone lack the buddha-nature? It must simply be that the translation of this sūtra was not yet complete.' Thus Dharma Master Daosheng held on to life for ten years to verify this principle. When the latter portion of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] arrived, it indeed contained this text. He thereupon sat upon the lion seat and passed away in meditation.

80.24

Question: If it is definitively stated as above that all sentient beings possess the buddha-nature, since sentient beings already possess it, why do they not avoid sinking into delusion?

80.25

Answer: Although sentient beings possess the direct cause (pradhāna-hetu), they lack the contributory conditions (pratyaya) and revealing cause (vyañjaka-hetu). Therefore, the *Sūtra of Complete Enlightenment* states: “To discern complete enlightenment before having transcended saṃsāra means that the very nature of complete enlightenment shares in that transmigration. To expect to escape saṃsāra in this way is impossible.” Hence, an ancient virtuous one wrote in verse: “The perfectly accomplished nature sinks into the ocean of consciousness; / Transmigrating like drifting tumbleweed.” Thus, tathatā and original enlightenment do not keep to their self-nature; because they are without a fixed nature, they merely revolve according to conditions. As it is said: “The dharmakāya transmigrates through the five destinies, and is therefore termed ‘sentient beings’.” One must stimulate it with skillful means, aid it with the illumination of wisdom, and assist it with good conditions; only when one sees it clearly does one escape the bondage of cognitive objects. As the commentary on the *Treatise on the Awakening of Faith* states: “Now, both the true and the false are spoken of in reliance on the one dharmadhātu-citta. For this citta originally possesses substance and function. The substance that is identical with function is entirely empty and quiescent; the function that is identical with substance is clearly aware. Because of delusion from time without beginning, in what is empty and quiescent, the sense-bases, body, and sense-objects firmly appear; and in what is aware, differentiated associations and thoughts profusely arise. Therefore the *Zhaolun* says: ‘The dharmakāya is hidden within the physical shell; true wisdom is concealed inside discursive thought.’ Yet the physical shell and discursive thoughts are fundamentally empty in substance; the empty, quiescent awareness is fundamentally unchanging. The unchanging truth fundamentally accords with conditions; the falsehood whose substance is empty fundamentally accomplishes phenomena. This is not due to deliberate contrivance; it is naturally so by the nature of dharmas.” The body and mind of sentient beings are currently just like this. It is precisely in reference to this meaning that the characteristics of defiled and pure conditions are clarified. The *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* states: “The Buddha addressed [him]: ‘Good son, as you have said, if an icchantika possesses the Buddha-nature, why does it not ward off the offenses of the hells? Good son, within an icchantika there is no Buddha-nature. Good son, it is like a king who hears the sound of a lute (kuṅghou). The sound is pure and wonderful, and his mind becomes attached to it; he rejoices in it and loves it, having no thought of parting from it. He then asked his minister: “Where does such a wonderful sound come from?” The minister answered: “Such a wonderful sound comes from the lute.” The king spoke again: “Bring that sound here!” At that time, the minister brought the lute and placed it before the king, saying: “Great King, you should know that this is the sound.” The king said to the lute: “Produce the sound! Produce the sound!” But the sound of the lute did not come forth. Then the Great King severed its strings, yet the sound still did not come forth. He took its leather and wood and tore them all apart, searching for the sound, but could not find it at all. Then the Great King was angered at the minister and said: “Why did you utter such a falsehood?” The minister addressed the king: “Obtaining sound is not done in this way. Only through a multitude of conditions and skillful means does the sound come forth.” The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is also like this: it has no abiding place. Through skillful means it can be seen; because it can be seen, one attains anuttarāsamyaksambodhi. As for icchantikas, because they do not see the Buddha-nature, how could they ward off the offenses of the three evil destinies? Good son, if an icchantika believes that there is the Buddha-nature, you should know that such a person will not go to the three evil destinies, and is also no longer called an icchantika. Because they do not believe that they themselves possess the Buddha-nature, they fall into the three evil destinies, and are therefore called icchantikas.’” Thus we know that although all sentient beings possess the direct cause, failing to obtain the revealing cause, they vainly sink into birth and death. Because they do not know, they resign themselves to being called base ordinary mortals; because they have not heard, they do not draw close to good spiritual friends. Their eye of wisdom being constantly deluded, how could they have the revealing cause? Constantly habituating evil conditions, how could they accomplish the root of good? Now, for those who have not heard, we broadly search the secret treasury to inspire faith; for those who do not know, we point directly to the source of the mind so that they may understand without obstruction; for those who have already heard, wisdom is brought forth and nourished by myriad goods; for those who already know, they preserve it single-mindedly, perfecting principle and practice. Possessing such profound benefit, how could one begrudge the length of the text? We universally hope that future sages will broadly and respectfully transmit it.

80.26

Question: If the Buddha-nature is definitively said to exist or not exist, it results in the views of annihilationism or eternalism. How is it to be realized so that the principle accords with the direct cause?

80.27

Answer: Being neither identical nor different, it can accord with the gate of the One Vehicle; being both existent and non-existent, it does not slander the nature of the three causes. As the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* states: “The Buddha said: ‘Good son, if anyone says that all sentient beings definitively possess the Buddha-nature—permanent, blissful, self, and pure, unmade and unarisen, and unseen only due to the conditions of kleśas—you should know that such a person slanders the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. If anyone says that all sentient beings completely lack the Buddha-nature, like a rabbit’s horns, that it arises from skillful means, originally non-existent and now existing, and once existing becoming non-existent again, you should know that such a person slanders the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. If anyone says that for sentient beings it is not existent like empty space and not non-existent like a rabbit’s horns—why? because empty space is permanent, and a rabbit’s horns are non-existent—therefore one can say it is both existent and non-existent: existence refutes the rabbit’s horns, and non-existence refutes empty space—one who speaks thus does not slander the Three Jewels.’”

80.28

Question: When the teachings explain the principle of the one-mind Buddha-nature, by what causal conditions is it, and what good benefits are obtained?

80.29

Answer: The Buddha-eye contemplates reality; the correct principle is free of error. If one definitively believes and accepts it, five faults are eliminated and five virtues are produced. The *Treatise on the Buddha-Nature* (Fo xing lun) states: “To eliminate five faults and produce five virtues, the Tathāgata taught that all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature. As for eliminating the five faults: First, to cause sentient beings to abandon an inferior mind. There are sentient beings who have not heard the Buddha teach the principle of possessing the Buddha-nature, and not knowing that their own aggregates must certainly have the significance of attaining buddhahood, they generate inferior thoughts regarding this body and cannot generate the bodhicitta. Second, to abandon arrogance toward inferior persons. If someone has heard the Buddha teach that sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature, and generates the aspiration on this account, having generated the aspiration, they then claim, ‘I possess the Buddha-nature and therefore can generate the aspiration,’ developing a haughty mind thinking that others cannot. To break this attachment, the Buddha taught that all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature. Third, to abandon false attachments. If someone has this arrogant mind, then correct wisdom that accords with principle and accords with measure cannot arise and manifest; hence falsehood arises. Falsehood is a fault of sentient beings. Faults are twofold: first, fundamentally non-existent; second, adventitious. ‘Fundamentally non-existent’ means that within the principle of tathatā, there is fundamentally no self of persons; yet one forms an attachment to a personal self. This attachment is fundamentally non-existent, and so forth, so that we know that all grasping subjects are false. The avidyā and grasping at karmic consequences that arise from this attachment are all false. There is neither experiencer nor agent, yet grasping that there are such within them is false; hence it is called ‘fundamentally non-existent’. ‘Adventitious’ means that all conditioned dharmas perish moment by moment, having no meaning of abiding. Thus both the reviler and the reviled are non-existent. It is only that the initial kṣaṇa is former and the subsequent kṣaṇa is adventitious; the reviler and the reviled perish as soon as they arise. Thus the initial kṣaṇa is an enemy, while the subsequent one is not an enemy. Because one forms an attachment to what is former within what is adventitious, this attachment is not real and is therefore called false. If this attachment arises, correct wisdom does not arise. To eliminate this attachment, the Buddha taught the Buddha-nature. The Buddha-nature is precisely the tathatā revealed by the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas. Due to tathatā, there is neither reviler nor reviled; penetrating this principle, one leaves behind the attachment to false emptiness. Fourth, to eliminate slander of the real Dharma. All faults of sentient beings are both empty. Due to understanding this emptiness, the pure virtues of wisdom that arise are called real. Slander means that if the Buddha-nature were not taught, one would not comprehend emptiness and would attach to real existence, opposing and slandering tathatā; the virtues of pure wisdom would not be accomplished. Fifth, to abandon the attachment to self. If one does not see false faults and real virtues, one does not generate great compassion toward sentient beings. By hearing the Buddha teach the Buddha-nature, knowing false faults and real virtues, one generates a mind of great compassion toward sentient beings without distinctions of self and other; hence the attachment to self is eliminated. Due to these five causal conditions, the Buddha taught the Buddha-nature, generating five virtues: first, generating a mind of right diligence; second, generating respectful conduct; third, generating prajñā; fourth, generating jñāna; fifth, generating great compassion. Through the five virtues, one overturns the five faults: through right diligence, one overturns the inferior mind; through respect, one overturns the haughty mind; through prajñā, one overturns grasping at false imagination; through generating the conventional wisdom of jñāna, which can manifest real wisdom and all virtues, one overturns slander of the real Dharma; through the mind of great compassion, with equal loving-kindness, one overturns the attachment to self. Furthermore, through prajñā, one does not abandon nirvāṇa; through great compassion, one does not abandon birth and death. Through prajñā, one accomplishes the Buddha-dharma; through great compassion, one accomplishes sentient beings. Therefore, if one understands that all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature, naturally there is no slander and no arrogance, no fault and no transgression. Why? Because sentient beings are subtle, they are all inconceivable. For example, when the Buddha was preaching the Dharma in the Bamboo Grove, he bestowed upon a white pigeon the prophecy of its kalpa, land, name, and eight aspects [of attaining buddhahood]. The great bodhisattvas all expressed repentance, all saying: ‘Unless our wisdom is equal to that of the Tathāgata, from this time forward we dare not appraise sentient beings.’ Upādhyāya Baojian said: ‘I saw an old crow turning its head and nodding over the food platter, and right there I fully saw its dharmakāya.’ Furthermore, an official entered a monastery and ascended the hall with Upādhyāya Panshan. He asked: ‘Does this sparrow also have the Buddha-nature?’ The master said: ‘It does.’ The official asked: ‘If it has the Buddha-nature, why does it defecate on the Buddha's head?’ The master said: ‘Why doesn't it defecate on the hawk's head?’”

First 29 of 40 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

宗鏡錄 — Classical Chinese