[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt) › 80.13 # 宗鏡錄 80.13 English (machine translation) 80.13 - **Language:** English ### [80.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.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. - [Previous: 80.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.80.12) - [Next: 80.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.80.14) - [Up: 80](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.80) ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.80.13) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.80.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.80.13) · Pramāṇa