萬善同歸集 2.40

2.40

答：「一切法皆無定性，而所適隨緣。若以貪為緣，即適人天之報；若迴向菩薩為緣，即成佛果之報。真如尚不守自性，而況此微善乎？又云：萬善理同無漏者，夫萬善本有，皆資理發；理既無異，善豈容二。本如來藏性，為萬善之因，亦名正因，親生萬善。台教云：『如輕小善不成佛，是滅世間佛種。』又云：『善機有二：一、感人天華報。二、感佛道果報。若以佛眼圓照，眾生萬善，究竟得佛，一大事出世之正意。』荊溪尊者云：『一毫之善，本趣菩提；如操刀執炬，得其要柄。若以相心，如把刃抱火。』《法華經》中，明散心念佛、小音讚歎、指甲畫像、聚沙成塔，漸積功德，皆成佛道。《大悲經》云：『佛告阿難：「若有眾生，於諸佛所，一發信心，種少善根，終不敗亡。假使久遠，百千萬億那由他劫，彼一善根，必得涅槃。如一滴水，投大海中，雖經久遠，終不虧損。」』是以大聖，順機曲應，大小不忘，接後逗前，半滿豈廢。或讚小而引歸深極；或訶半而恐滯初門。黃葉寧金；空拳豈實？皆是抑揚之意，權施誘度之恩。而不得教旨者，但執方便之言，互相是非，確定取捨。或執小滯大，違失本宗；或據大妨小，而虧權慧。又雖然宗大，大旨焉明？徒云斥小，小行空失。運意，則承虛託假；出語，則越分過頭。斷正法輪、謗大般若，深愆極過，莫越於斯；歷劫何窮，長淪無間。《淨名經》云：『無方便慧縛；有方便慧解。無慧方便縛；有慧方便解。』豈可執權謗實，害有賓無。但大小雙弘，空有俱運，一心三觀即無過矣。是以順法體，則纖毫不立；隨智用，則大業恒興。體不離用，故寂而常照；用不離體，故照而常寂。是以常體常用，恒照恒寂。若會旨歸宗，則體用俱離，何照何寂？曷乃據體而礙用；執性而壞緣！理事不融，真俗成隔。則同體之悲絕運，無緣之慈靡成。善惡既不同觀，冤親何能普救？過之甚矣，失莫大焉！又先德云：『夫善知識者，雖明見佛性，與佛同等；若論其功，未齊諸聖。須從今日，步步資熏。』又古德云：『蕈子比丘還債，雖不得理，猶有行門；今時多有學人，二事俱失。』故知見性未諦，但是隨語依通；及檢時中，正助皆喪。是以先聖，終不浪階；撫臆捫心，豈可容易。是以六即揀濫；十地辨功。若以即故，何凡何聖？若論六故，凡聖天隔。又若論其理，初地即具足一切地；若言其行，後地則倍倍超前。秖如纔登八地，一念利生，下地多劫不及。」

Answer: "All phenomena lack a fixed nature, and where they tend follows conditions. If greed is the condition, they tend toward the retribution of humans and gods; if dedication [of merit] to bodhi is the condition, they become the retribution of the fruit of Buddhahood. Even tathatā does not preserve its own nature—how much less this minor goodness? Furthermore, regarding 'the myriad good practices being identical in principle to the outflow-free': the myriad good practices are fundamentally possessed, all activated by relying on principle. Since principle is without difference, how could goodness admit of duality? The nature of the fundamental tathāgatagarbha is the cause of the myriad good practices; it is also called the primary cause, directly generating the myriad good practices. The Tiantai teachings state: 'If one disparages minor goodness as unable to achieve Buddhahood, one destroys the worldly seed of Buddhahood.' It also says: 'There are two kinds of capacities for goodness: first, inducing the flower-retribution of humans and gods; second, inducing the fruit-retribution of the Buddha Way. If viewed completely with the Buddha-eye, all myriad good practices of sentient beings ultimately attain Buddhahood, which is the primary intent of the One Great Matter appearing in the world.' The Venerable of Jingxi said: 'A single strand of goodness fundamentally tends toward bodhi; it is like gripping the essential handle when holding a knife or carrying a torch. If done with a mind attached to marks, it is like grasping the blade or embracing the fire.' The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra clarifies that reciting the Buddha's name with a distracted mind, praising with a soft voice, drawing images with fingernails, or piling sand into stupas—gradually accumulating merit—all culminate in the Buddha Way. The Mahākāruṇika Sūtra says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: "If sentient beings produce a single thought of faith and plant a minor root of goodness toward the Buddhas, it will never perish. Even after a long duration of hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of nayutas of kalpas, that single root of goodness will surely attain nirvāṇa. Just like a drop of water thrown into the great ocean, though long ages pass, it will ultimately never be lost."' For this reason, the Great Sage complies with capacities and flexibly responds, forgetting neither the small nor the great, welcoming the latter and guiding the former; how could either the partial or the complete be cast aside? Sometimes he praises the small to lead them back to the deep and ultimate; sometimes he rebukes the partial for fear they will stagnate at the initial gate. Are yellow leaves truly gold? Can an empty fist be real? These are all matters of praise and deprecation, the grace of provisional guidance and deliverance. Yet those who fail to grasp the doctrinal intent merely cling to provisional words, arguing right and wrong with one another and rigidly making selections. Some cling to the small and stagnate in the great, violating their own fundamental school; others rely on the great to obstruct the small, diminishing provisional wisdom. Moreover, though they take the great as their school, how have they clarified the great purport? Vainly claiming to reject the small, they forfeit minor practices to no purpose. In exerting intention, they rely on emptiness and depend on false pretenses; in voicing words, they overstep their bounds and go too far. Severing the wheel of the saddharma and slandering the great prajñā, no profound fault or extreme error surpasses this; through endless kalpas, they will perpetually sink into the Avīci hell. The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: 'Wisdom without upāya is bondage; wisdom with upāya is liberation. Upāya without wisdom is bondage; upāya with wisdom is liberation.' How could one cling to the provisional and slander the real, or harm existence to honor nothingness? Provided that both great and small are promoted together, and emptiness and existence are both engaged, the threefold contemplation in a single mind will be without error. Hence, following the essence of phenomena, not a single hair is established; according with the functioning of wisdom, great deeds are constantly promoted. Function does not depart from essence, so it is tranquil yet constantly illuminating; essence does not depart from function, so it is illuminating yet constantly tranquil. Thus, it is constantly essence and constantly function, ever illuminating and ever tranquil. If one integrates the purport and returns to the source, then both essence and function are transcended: what illumination, what tranquility is there? Why then rely on essence to obstruct function, or cling to nature to destroy conditions? When principle and phenomena do not merge, the paramārtha-satya and saṃvṛti-satya become separated. Then the compassion of identical essence ceases to function, and universal loving-kindness is not accomplished. Since good and evil are not viewed identically, how can foes and kin be universally rescued? The fault is severe indeed, and no loss is greater! Furthermore, an earlier worthy said: 'A kalyāṇamitra, though clearly seeing the buddhadhātu identically with the Buddhas, has not yet equaled the sages in terms of merit. From today onward, one must nurture and perfume it step by step.' Another ancient worthy said: 'The mushroom monk paid back his debt; though he did not attain the principle, he still retained the gate of practice. Nowadays many practitioners have lost both.' Thus we know that when seeing the nature is not definitive, it is merely borrowing understanding based on words; when examined in daily life, both primary and auxiliary practices are lost. Therefore, the former sages never stepped forward recklessly; examining our chests and feeling our hearts, how could we take this lightly? Hence, the six identities eliminate confusion, and the ten stages differentiate merit. If viewed from the perspective of identity, what is ordinary and what is sage? If discussed in terms of the six [levels], ordinary and sage are as distant as heaven and earth. Again, in terms of principle, the first stage completely possesses all stages; in terms of practice, each subsequent stage exponentially surpasses the previous. Just as upon newly ascending the eighth stage, a single thought of benefiting beings cannot be matched by lower stages in many kalpas."