宗鏡錄 83.17

83.17

Answer: Subject and object are different; one cannot cling to them as one. Mind and object are of one flavor; they cannot be called different. If one follows conditions from the perspective of nature, then sentient and insentient are different, and as natures they are also distinct. If one eliminates conditions to follow nature, then there is neither awareness nor non-awareness. If the two natures blend mutually, then there is nothing that is not awakening. The Avataṃsakasūtra states: 'There is no minute part of tathatā that is not awakening.' Then tathatā pervades all places, sentient and insentient. If there is no minute part that is not awakening, how could the insentient not be buddha-nature? Furthermore, the intention of the sūtra is only to eliminate the view of clinging to tiles and rubble as insentient, not to eliminate buddha-nature. Thus nature is nowhere absent, its measure surpassing empty space; how could it be eliminated? Furthermore, an ancient virtuous one said: 'Awareness-nature is principle; conscious awareness pertains to phenomena. As in the insentient, there is only awareness-nature, yet no conscious awareness—just as in water there is only fire-nature, yet no fire's illumination.' Now speaking of nature, it is based solely on the fundamental principle; who speaks of the branch tips? Furthermore, awareness-wisdom that conditions thoughts is called sentience; the intrinsic nature that does not change is called nature. The foolish are deluded about nature and give rise to sentience, so object and wisdom are not one. The wise comprehend sentience to become nature, so object and self are not two.