THE GREAT PARINIRVANA SUTRA
VOLUME XXXV
Chapter 12: BODHISATTVA KASHYAPA 3
Good man! Such matters of dispute are the realms of the Buddhas; the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas cannot know them. If there is someone who gives rise to doubt regarding this matter, they can still destroy countless afflictions as vast as Mount Sumeru. If someone gives rise to a determined conviction regarding this matter, that is called attachment.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! What is meant by attachment? The Buddha said:
Good man! People such as these may have heard from others, may have sought out the scriptures themselves, or may have been taught by others; if they cling to these matters and cannot let go, that is called attachment.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa again asked:
World-Honored One! Is such attachment wholesome or unwholesome?
Good man! Such attachment is not called wholesome. Why? Because it cannot destroy the nets of doubt.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa again asked:
World-Honored One! A person like this originally has no doubt; why then say that they have not destroyed the nets of doubt?
Good man! For ordinary people, not having doubt is itself doubt.
World-Honored One! If someone believes that a Srotāpanna does not fall into the three evil paths, is this person also called attached and doubtful?
Good man! This is called certainty, not doubt. Why? Good man! It is like a person who previously saw people and trees. Later, while traveling at night, from a distance they see a bare tree stump and immediately become doubtful: Is that a person or a tree? Good man! It is like someone who previously saw monks and Brahmins, and later, while traveling on a distant road, sees a monk and becomes doubtful: Is this a Śramaṇa or a Brahmin? Good man! It is like someone who previously saw cows and oxen, and later sees a cow from afar and becomes doubtful: Is that a cow or an ox?
Good man! All sentient beings, after seeing two things, later give rise to doubt. Why? Because their minds do not clearly recognize. I also do not say that a Srotāpanna falls into the three evil paths or does not fall into the three evil paths; why then would this person give rise to doubt?
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said:
World-Honored One! According to the Buddha’s teaching, first there must be seeing, and afterward doubt arises. But there are people who have not seen two things and yet also give rise to doubt. What are these things? Such as Nirvana, World-Honored One! For example, a person traveling on a road encounters a muddy stream. Although they have never seen it before, they still become doubtful, thinking: Is this stream deep or shallow? This person has never seen it before; why do they give rise to doubt?
Good man! Nirvana means the ending of suffering; that which is not Nirvana means suffering. All sentient beings see these two: suffering and that which is not suffering. Suffering and that which is not suffering are hunger and thirst, cold and heat, anger and joy, illness and health, old age and youth, life and death, bondage and liberation, love and separation, hatred and encounter. After seeing these things, sentient beings give rise to doubt, wondering whether there will be a state that is far removed from these sufferings and afflictions. Therefore, sentient beings have doubts regarding Nirvana. If your meaning is that a person who has never before seen a muddy stream should not be able to give rise to doubt, then this meaning is incorrect. Why? Because that person has seen it in another place before, and therefore, although they have not encountered it in this place, they can still give rise to doubt.
World-Honored One! When that person previously saw shallow and deep places, they did not give rise to doubt. Why do they now give rise to doubt?
The Buddha said:
Good man! Because previously they had not traveled there, they gave rise to doubt. Therefore, I say that doubt arises because of not understanding.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! As the Buddha has taught, doubt itself is attachment, and attachment itself is doubt. What kind of person is this?
Good man! This is a person who has cut off the roots of goodness.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa asked:
World-Honored One! What kinds of people are able to cut off the roots of goodness?
Good man! If there is a person who is intelligent, wise, sharp in faculties, and able to skillfully analyze, but who distances themselves from virtuous friends, does not hear the true Dharma, does not engage in proper reflection, and does not live according to the Dharma, then such people can cut off the roots of goodness. Having abandoned these four things, their minds think: There is no object of giving. Why? Because the giver gives away their wealth. If giving had karmic results, then one should know that the donor would constantly become poor. Why? Because causes and effects are alike; therefore, one says there is no cause and no result. If one says that there is no cause and no result in this way, this is called cutting off the roots of goodness. Again, they think: The donor, the recipient, and the material being given—these three things are all impermanent and have no fixed nature. If they have no fixed nature, then how can one say, “This is the donor, this is the recipient, and this is the wealth”? If there is no recipient, how can there be a karmic result? Because of this meaning, there is no cause and no result. If one believes there is no cause and no result in this way, one should know that this person can cut off the roots of goodness.
This person again thinks: There is no object of giving. Why? Because the thing given is neither wholesome nor unwholesome (indeterminate). If it is indeterminate, how can it produce a wholesome result? Without a wholesome result, it is indeterminate. Since wealth is indeterminate, one should know that it has no wholesome or unwholesome result. Therefore, there is no act of giving, no cause, and no result. If one believes there is no cause and no result in this way, one should know that this person can cut off the roots of goodness.
This person again reflects: Giving alms is based on intention. If it is intention, then it cannot be seen, has no object, and is not a form of matter; if it is not a form of matter, how can it be called giving alms? Therefore there is no giving, no cause, and no result. If one believes there is no cause and no result, then one should know that this person can sever the roots of virtue.
Again he reflects: If a donor, for the sake of a Buddha image, images of heavenly beings, or deceased parents, practices giving without a recipient, then if there is no recipient there is no karmic result; if there is no karmic result, then there is no cause; if there is no cause, there is no result. If one believes in such a lack of cause and result, then one should know that this person can sever the roots of virtue.
This person again reflects: There is no father and no mother. If it is said that parents are sentient beings and are the cause for producing sentient beings, then they should continuously produce beings without interruption. Why? Because the cause is permanent, yet they do not constantly produce beings. Therefore one should know there are no fathers and mothers. This person again thinks: There is no father and no mother. Why? Because if the body of sentient beings comes from parents, then one person should possess both male and female organs completely, but this is not so. Therefore one should know that sentient beings do not come into existence from parents.
This person again thinks: Sentient beings are not born from parents. Why? Because their eyes see that sentient beings are not like their parents, such as in physical appearance, thoughts, intentions, conduct, walking, and stopping. Therefore parents are not the cause of sentient beings. Again he reflects: In the entire world there are four kinds of non-existence: first, what has not yet arisen is called non-existent, like when there is only clay and the function of a pot has not yet appeared. Second, what has ceased is called non-existent, like a pot that has already broken and is called non-existent. Third, because each thing is different, one does not exist within another, like there is no horse within a cow and no cow within a horse. Fourth, complete non-existence, like the horns of a turtle or the hair of a hare. Parents and sentient beings are also included among these four kinds of non-existence. If one believes that parents are the cause producing sentient beings, then when parents die, their children should necessarily die as well. Therefore parents are not the cause producing sentient beings.
Again he reflects: If one believes that parents are the cause of producing beings together with them, then the cause within parents should constantly produce sentient beings, but there are beings born from moisture and beings born through transformation. Therefore one should know that sentient beings are not produced from the cause of parents. Again he thinks: Sentient beings themselves can arise and grow without being born from parents. For example, peacocks become pregnant upon hearing thunder and seeing lightning. Likewise, when a female blue bird drinks the tears of a male blue bird, it becomes pregnant. When the ming-ming bird sees the male bird dance, it becomes pregnant. When one thinks in this way, if one does not encounter a good spiritual friend, one should know that this person can sever the roots of virtue.
This person again reflects: In the entire world there are no results of good and evil. Why? Because there are sentient beings who possess all ten wholesome practices, enjoy giving, and diligently cultivate merit, yet these people are repeatedly afflicted by illness, die young, lose wealth, and experience many sufferings and worries. There are also people who commit the ten unwholesome deeds, being greedy, stingy, jealous, lazy, and not cultivating any wholesome deeds, yet their bodies are peaceful, they have no illness, live long lives, possess much wealth, and have no sorrows or suffering. Therefore one should know that there are no karmic results of good and evil.
This person again reflects: I have also heard the noble ones say that some people cultivate wholesome teachings but at death fall into the three evil paths. Some people commit evil deeds but at death are born among gods or humans. Therefore one should know there are no good or evil results. Again he reflects: The noble ones speak two theories: either they say killing brings wholesome results, or they say killing brings evil results. Therefore one should know that the words of the noble ones are uncertain. If even the noble ones speak uncertainly, why should I be certain? Therefore one should know that there are no wholesome or evil results. Again he thinks: In the entire world there are no noble beings. Why? Because if someone is considered a noble being, they must attain the right path. When all sentient beings, while still possessing afflictions, cultivate the right path, then one should know that such a person simultaneously possesses both afflictions and the right path. If afflictions and the right path exist together at the same time, then the bonds cannot be destroyed. If there are no afflictions and one cultivates the right path, then what use is such a right path? Therefore, for one who possesses afflictions, the right path cannot destroy them; for one without afflictions, the right path is useless. Thus one should know that there are no noble beings in the entire world.
This person again reflects: Ignorance conditions formations, and so on until birth conditions aging and death. These twelve links of dependent origination are possessed by all sentient beings. The nature of the Eightfold Noble Path is equal for all; therefore, when one person attains realization, all people should also attain realization. When one person practices, all suffering should be extinguished. Why? Because afflictions are equal, yet now realization is not attained. Therefore one should know that there is no right path. Again he reflects: Noble beings all have things in common with ordinary people, such as eating and drinking, walking and standing, lying down and sitting, sleeping and resting, laughing and rejoicing, hunger and thirst, heat and cold, sorrow and worry, and fear. Since they share such things with ordinary people, one should know that noble beings have not attained the right path. If they had attained the right path, they should have completely eliminated such things. Since noble beings cannot eliminate these things, one should know that there is no right path.
This person again reflects: Noble beings have bodies and therefore experience the five kinds of sensual pleasures. They also insult and strike others, are jealous and arrogant, experience suffering and pleasure, and create wholesome and unwholesome karma. Because of these causes and conditions, one should know there are no noble beings. If there were a right path, these things should have already been eliminated, but since they are not eliminated, one should know there is no right path.
This person again thinks: Those with great compassion are called noble beings. Through what cause are they called noble beings? They are called noble beings because of the Noble Path. If the nature of the Noble Path were compassion, then it should love all sentient beings and should not require cultivation before it arises. If there were no compassion, then why do noble beings who attain the Noble Path become compassionate? Therefore one should know that there is no Noble Path in the world. Again he thinks: All four great elements do not arise from causes and conditions; all sentient beings possess the nature of these four elements. They do not observe that sentient beings come from here and should go there, or that they should not come from here. If there were a nature of the Noble Path, it should also be like this. But now it is not so; therefore one should know that there are no noble beings in the world. Again he thinks: If noble beings possess one Nirvana, then one should know that there are no noble beings. Why? Because it cannot be obtained. A permanent phenomenon should not be grasped or taken or abandoned. If the Nirvana of noble beings were many, then it would be impermanent. Why? Because it would be something that could be counted. If Nirvana is one, then when one person attains it, all should attain it. If Nirvana is many, then it has limitations. If Nirvana has limitations, how can it be called permanent? If one says the essence of Nirvana is one while there are many liberated people, like one umbrella with many ribs, this meaning is not correct. Why? Because each person’s attainment does not mean that all attain it. Because it has limitations, it is impermanent; if it is impermanent, how can it be called Nirvana? If there is no Nirvana, then who are the noble beings? Therefore one should know that there are no noble beings.
Again he thought: The Way of the Sage is not attained through causes and conditions. If the Way of the Sage is not attained through causes and conditions, then why do all sentient beings not become sages? If all people are not sages, then one should know that there are no sages and no Sage Way. This person again thought: The Noble One said that right view has two causes and conditions: first, hearing the Dharma from others; second, internally reflecting by oneself. If these two causes and conditions arise from conditions, and these conditions arise from other conditions, continuing in this manner, then there is the fault of infinite regress. If these two causes and conditions do not arise from conditions, then why do all sentient beings not possess them? When contemplating in this way, one can sever the roots of goodness.
O good man! If there are sentient beings who hold such deep views of no cause and no effect, then such a person can sever the five roots, such as faith and so forth.
O good man! A person who severs the roots of goodness is not someone of low status or dull understanding, nor is such a person among the gods or in the three evil paths. One who disrupts the Sangha is the same.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! When can such a person give rise to the roots of goodness again?
The Buddha said:
O good man! Such a person has two occasions when the roots of goodness arise again: when first entering hell and when leaving hell.
O good man! Goodness has three aspects: past, present, and future. If it is past, its nature has already ceased by itself; although the cause has ceased, its karmic result has not yet matured, so it cannot be called the severing of the past result. Because the causes of the three times are severed, it is called severing.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! If severing the causes of the three times is called severing the roots of goodness, then a person who severs the roots of goodness still has Buddha-nature. Is such Buddha-nature past, present, future, or does it pervade all three times? If it is past, how can it be called eternal? Buddha-nature is also eternal, therefore it should be known that it is not past. If it is future, how can it be called eternal? Why does the Buddha say that all sentient beings will certainly attain it? If it is certain to be attained, why say that it can be severed? If it is present, how can it be eternal? Why does one say that it can certainly be seen? The Tathāgata also said that Buddha-nature has six qualities: first, eternal; second, true; third, real; fourth, good; fifth, pure; sixth, able to be seen. If a person who has lost the roots of goodness has Buddha-nature, then such a person cannot be called one who has severed the roots of goodness. If there is no Buddha-nature, why does it say that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature? If one says that Buddha-nature can both exist and disappear, why does the Tathāgata say that it is eternal?
The Buddha said:
O good man! For the sake of sentient beings, the Tathāgata, the World-Honored One, has four ways of answering: first, a definite answer; second, a differentiated answer; third, an answer according to the question asked; fourth, an answer through silence.
O good man! What is a definite answer? If someone asks whether creating evil karma brings a good result or an evil result, one should definitely answer that it brings an evil result. Good karma is the same. If someone asks whether the Tathāgata is an omniscient one, one should definitely answer that He is omniscient. If someone asks whether the Buddha’s teachings are pure, one should definitely answer that they are pure. If someone asks whether the disciples of the Tathāgata live in accordance with the Dharma, one should definitely answer that they live in accordance with the Dharma. This is called a definite answer.
What is a differentiated answer? As I have explained the four noble truths. What are the four? They are Suffering, Origination, Cessation, and the Path. Why is it called the Truth of Suffering? Because there are the eight kinds of suffering, it is called the Truth of Suffering. What is the Truth of Origination? Because it arises from the five aggregates, it is called the Truth of Origination. What is the Truth of Cessation? Because greed, hatred, and delusion have been completely cut off, it is called the Truth of Cessation. What is the Truth of the Path? Because of the thirty-seven factors assisting enlightenment, it is called the Truth of the Path. This is called a differentiated answer.
What is an answer according to the question asked? As I have said, all phenomena are impermanent. Someone then asks: With regard to what phenomena did the Tathāgata, the World-Honored One, say that they are impermanent? The answer is: The Tathāgata referred to conditioned phenomena when saying that they are impermanent. The same applies to non-self. As I have said, all phenomena are burning. Someone then asks: With regard to what phenomena did the Tathāgata, the World-Honored One, say that all are burning? The answer is: The Tathāgata referred to greed, hatred, and delusion, and therefore said that all are burning.
O good man! The Tathāgata possesses the Ten Powers, the Four Fearlessnesses, the Three Foundations of Mindfulness, Great Loving-Kindness, Great Compassion, Śūraṅgama and so forth; the eighty thousand billion samādhi methods, the thirty-two marks, the eighty excellent characteristics, the five wisdom seals and so forth; the thirty-five thousand samādhi methods, Vajra Samādhi and so forth; the four thousand two hundred samādhi methods, and immeasurable, boundless skillful means samādhis. Such dharmas are the Buddha’s Buddha-nature. This Buddha-nature has seven qualities: first, eternal; second, self; third, bliss; fourth, pure; fifth, true; sixth, real; seventh, good. This is called a differentiated answer.
O good man! The Buddha-nature of a Bodhisattva in his final body has six qualities: first, eternal; second, pure; third, true; fourth, real; fifth, good; sixth, only slightly seen. This is called a differentiated answer.
Regarding your earlier question of whether a person who has severed the roots of goodness has Buddha-nature, you should know that this person also has Buddha-nature, and the Tathāgata also has Buddha-nature in His final body. These two Buddha-natures are called nonexistent because they are obstructed by the future, and are called existent because they will certainly be attained. This is called a differentiated answer. The Buddha-nature of the Tathāgata is neither past, nor present, nor future. The Buddha-nature of the final body is present and future. Because it can be slightly seen, it is called present; because it has not yet been completely seen, it is called future.
Before the Tathāgata attained unsurpassed Bodhi, the cause of Buddha-nature was also past, present, and future, but the result was not like this. Some aspects belong to the three times, and some do not belong to the three times. Since the cause of Buddha-nature of the Bodhisattva’s final body is also past, present, and future, the result is likewise so. This is called a differentiated answer.
The Buddha-nature of a ninth-stage Bodhisattva has six qualities: first, eternal; second, good; third, true; fourth, real; fifth, pure; sixth, able to be seen. Since the cause of Buddha-nature is also past, present, and future, the result is likewise so. This is called a differentiated answer.
The Buddha-nature of Bodhisattvas from the eighth stage down to the sixth stage has five qualities: first, true; second, real; third, pure; fourth, good; fifth, able to be seen. Since the cause of Buddha-nature is also past, present, and future, the result is likewise so. This is called a differentiated answer.
The Buddha-nature of Bodhisattvas from the fifth stage down to the first stage has five qualities: first, true; second, real; third, pure; fourth, able to be seen; fifth, good and not good.
O good man! The five kinds of Buddha-nature, the six kinds of Buddha-nature, and the seven kinds of Buddha-nature will certainly be attained by those who have severed the roots of goodness. Because they will attain them, it is said that they exist. This is called a differentiated answer. If someone claims that a person who has severed the roots of goodness definitely has Buddha-nature, or definitely does not have Buddha-nature, this is called an answer through silence.
Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! I have heard that not answering is what is called an answer through silence. Now, for what reason does the Tathāgata answer and call it an answer through silence?
O good man! I also do not say that remaining silent and not answering is itself an answer through silence.
Good man! Such a silent answer has two meanings: first, it prevents and cuts off; second, it does not cling. Because of this meaning, it is called a silent answer.
Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! According to the Buddha’s teaching, how is it said that the cause of Buddha-nature is also past, present, and future; the result is also past, present, and future; and yet is not past, present, and future?
The Buddha taught:
Good man! The five aggregates have two kinds: one is cause, and the other is result. Those five aggregates as causes are past, present, and future. Those five aggregates as results are also past, present, and future, and are also not past, present, and future.
Good man! All the fetters, ignorance, afflictions, and so forth are Buddha-nature. Why? Because the cause of Buddha-nature arises from ignorance, formations, and various afflictions, producing wholesome five aggregates. This is called Buddha-nature arising from the wholesome five aggregates. Until one attains the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Therefore, in the previous sutra I said that the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is like milk mixed within blood. Blood means the afflictions, ignorance, formations, and so forth. Milk means the wholesome five aggregates. Therefore, I said that from afflictions and wholesome five aggregates one attains the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Just as the bodies of sentient beings are formed from vital essence and blood, Buddha-nature is also like this. For those at the stages of Stream-enterer and Once-returner who cut off a small amount of afflictions, Buddha-nature is like milk. For the Non-returner, Buddha-nature is like curd. For the Arhat, Buddha-nature is like butter. From the Pratyekabuddha stage to the Ten Abodes of Bodhisattvas, Buddha-nature is like refined butter; the Buddha-nature of the Tathagata is like the finest clarified essence.
Good man! Because present afflictions obstruct it, causing sentient beings not to see it, just as in Fragrant Mountain there is the herb of patience, yet not all cows are able to eat it. Buddha-nature is also like this. This is called a discriminating answer.
Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! If the five, six, and seven kinds of Buddha-nature exist in the future, why do You say that those who have cut off their roots of goodness possess Buddha-nature?
The Buddha said:
Good man! Sentient beings have past karma. Because of this karma, sentient beings in the present undergo karmic results. There is future karma, but because it has not yet arisen, it completely does not produce results. If there were no present afflictions, then all sentient beings should clearly see their present Buddha-nature. Therefore, those who cut off their roots of goodness, because of the causes and conditions of present afflictions, can cut off their roots of goodness; through the power of future Buddha-nature, their roots of goodness are born again.
Bodhisattva Kasyapa said:
World-Honored One! How can roots of goodness arise in the future?
Good man! Just as a lamp and the sun, although they belong to the future, can still dispel darkness. The future can likewise give rise to the future Buddha-nature of sentient beings. This is called a discriminating answer.
Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha:
World-Honored One! If the five aggregates are Buddha-nature, why do You say that the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither inside nor outside?
The Buddha taught:
Good man! Because of what cause and condition have you forgotten this? Did I not previously say that the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is the Middle Way?
Bodhisattva Kasyapa said:
World-Honored One! Truly I have not forgotten. It is only because sentient beings cannot understand this Middle Way that I ask in this manner.
Good man! Sentient beings’ not understanding is itself related to the Middle Way; sometimes they understand, and sometimes they do not. Good man! In order to enable sentient beings to clearly understand, I say that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside. Why? Ordinary people think that Buddha-nature exists within the five aggregates, like a fruit contained inside a vessel. Others think that Buddha-nature exists apart from the five aggregates, like empty space. Therefore, the Tathagata speaks of the meaning of the Middle Way: the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither within the six sense faculties nor outside the six sense faculties; because it combines both inside and outside, it is called the Middle Way. Therefore, the Tathagata says that Buddha-nature itself is the Middle Way; because it is neither inside nor outside, it is called the Middle Way. This is called a discriminating answer.
Furthermore, good man! What is meant by neither inside nor outside?
Good man! Some say that Buddha-nature is precisely non-Buddhist paths. Why? Because great Bodhisattvas spent countless kalpas among non-Buddhist practitioners, cut off various afflictions, disciplined their own minds, taught and transformed sentient beings, and only afterward attained the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Therefore, Buddha-nature is non-Buddhist paths. Others say that Buddha-nature is precisely the inner path. Why? Because although great Bodhisattvas cultivated non-Buddhist paths for countless kalpas, if they separated themselves from the inner path, they could not attain the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Therefore, Buddha-nature is the inner path. The Tathagata, in order to prevent these two kinds of attachment, says that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, and is also called both inside and outside; thus it is the Middle Way. This is called a discriminating answer.
Furthermore, good man! Some say that Buddha-nature is precisely the Tathagata’s vajra body with the thirty-two excellent marks and eighty beautiful features. Why? Because it is not false. Others say that Buddha-nature is precisely the Ten Powers, the Four Fearlessnesses, Great Loving-kindness, Great Compassion, the Three Mindfulness Bases, and all samadhis such as the Shurangama Samadhi and so forth. Why? Because through these samadhis the vajra body with the thirty-two excellent marks and eighty beautiful features is produced. Therefore, the Tathagata, in order to prevent these two kinds of attachment, says that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, and is also called both inside and outside; thus it is the Middle Way. This is a discriminating answer.
Furthermore, good man! Some people believe that Buddha-nature is wholesome contemplation. Why? Because apart from wholesome contemplation, one cannot attain the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Therefore, Buddha-nature is wholesome inner contemplation. Others believe that Buddha-nature is hearing the Dharma from another person. Why? Because hearing the Dharma from another person allows one to engage in wholesome inner contemplation; without hearing the Dharma, one does not contemplate. Therefore, Buddha-nature is hearing the Dharma from another person. Thus, the Tathagata, in order to prevent these two kinds of attachment, says that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, and is also called both inside and outside. This is called the Middle Way.
Furthermore, good man! There are also people who believe that Buddha-nature is external, meaning the Perfection of Giving. Through the Perfection of Giving, one attains the unsurpassed Bodhi fruit. Therefore, they say that the Perfection of Giving itself is Buddha-nature. Others say that Buddha-nature is internal, meaning the five other perfections. Why? Because apart from these five, one should know there is no Buddha-nature, cause, and result. Therefore, they say that the five perfections are Buddha-nature. The Tathagata, in order to prevent these two kinds of attachment, teaches that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, and is both inside and outside. This is called the Middle Way.
Again, O virtuous man! Some people say that Buddha-nature exists within, like the precious jewel on the forehead of a strong warrior. Why? Because permanence, bliss, self, and purity are like a precious jewel. Therefore, they believe that Buddha-nature is within. Some people say that Buddha-nature exists outside, like the treasure of a poor woman. Why? Because it is seen through skillful means. Buddha-nature is likewise outside sentient beings and can be seen through skillful means. The Tathāgata, in order to prevent these two kinds of attachment, says that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, and is both inside and outside. This is called the Middle Way.
O virtuous man! The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither existent nor nonexistent. Why? Because although Buddha-nature exists, it is not like empty space. Why? Because although worldly space cannot be seen even through countless skillful means, Buddha-nature can be seen; therefore, although it exists, it is not like empty space. Although Buddha-nature is empty, it is not like the horns of a rabbit. Why? Because although turtle hair and rabbit horns cannot arise even through countless skillful means, Buddha-nature can arise; therefore, although it is empty, it is not the same as rabbit horns. Therefore, Buddha-nature is neither existent nor nonexistent; it is both existent and nonexistent.
What is meant by existent? All sentient beings possess it without interruption and without destruction, like a lamp, until they attain the unsurpassed Bodhi path; therefore, it is called existent. What is meant by nonexistent? All sentient beings at present do not yet possess all the Buddha-dharmas of permanence, bliss, self, and purity; therefore, it is called nonexistent. Because existence and nonexistence together constitute the Middle Way, the Buddha therefore said that the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither existent nor nonexistent.
O virtuous man! If someone asks whether a fruit exists within this seed or not, the answer should be that it is both existent and nonexistent. Why? Because apart from the seed, the fruit cannot arise, and therefore it is called existent; because the seed has not yet produced a sprout, it is called nonexistent. For this reason, it is said to be both existent and nonexistent. Why? Because although the seasons differ, the essence of the seed remains one. The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is also like this. If one claims that there is a separate Buddha-nature within sentient beings, that meaning is incorrect. Why? Because sentient beings themselves are Buddha-nature, and Buddha-nature itself is sentient beings; only the times differ, being pure or impure.
O virtuous man! If someone asks whether this seed can produce fruit, and whether this fruit can produce a seed, the definite answer should be that it both produces and does not produce.
The World-Honored One, if ordinary people say that within milk there is curd (thickened milk), what is the meaning of this?
O virtuous man! If someone says that curd exists within milk, that is called attachment. If one says there is no curd, that is falsehood. Leaving these two extremes aside, the definite answer should be that it is both existent and nonexistent. What is meant by existent? From milk, curd is produced; the cause is milk, and the result is curd. This is called existent. What is meant by nonexistent? The colors and flavors are each different, and their uses are not the same. For a heat-related illness one uses milk; for a cold-related illness one uses curd. Milk produces cold illness, and curd produces heat illness.
O virtuous man! If one says that the nature of curd exists within milk, then milk would be curd and curd would be milk; their nature would be one. Due to what causes and conditions does milk arise first while curd does not arise first? If there are causes and conditions, why do people in the world not explain them? If there are no causes and conditions, why does curd not arise first? If curd did not arise first, who established the order of milk, curd, fresh butter, refined butter, and ghee? Therefore, one should know that curd was previously nonexistent but now exists. That which was nonexistent before and now exists is an impermanent phenomenon.
O virtuous man! If someone says that milk possesses the nature of curd and therefore can produce curd, while water does not possess the nature of curd and therefore cannot produce curd, that meaning is incorrect. Why? Because water also possesses the nature of milk and curd. Why? Because through grass and water, milk and curd are produced. If one says that milk certainly has the nature of curd while grass and water do not, that is called falsehood. Because the mind is not impartial, it is called falsehood.
O virtuous man! If one says that milk definitely contains curd, then curd should also definitely contain the nature of milk. Then, due to what causes and conditions does milk produce curd while curd does not produce milk? If there are no causes and conditions, one should know that curd was previously nonexistent and now exists. Therefore, the wise say that within milk there is neither curd nor the absence of curd.
O virtuous man! Therefore, in the sutras the Tathāgata says: If one says that all sentient beings definitely possess Buddha-nature, that is called attachment; if one says that they do not possess Buddha-nature, that is called falsehood. The wise should say that the Buddha-nature of sentient beings is both existent and nonexistent.
O virtuous man! The eye-consciousness arises through the combination of four things. What are these four? They are the eye faculty, visible forms, light, and attention. The nature of eye-consciousness is neither the eye faculty, nor visible forms, nor light, nor attention, but eye-consciousness arises due to their combination. Such eye-consciousness was nonexistent before and now exists, and after existing, it again becomes nonexistent. Therefore, one should know that eye-consciousness has no inherent nature. The curd within milk is likewise.
Some people say that because water does not contain curd, it cannot produce curd; therefore, milk must certainly contain curd. This meaning is incorrect. Why? O virtuous man! Because all phenomena have different causes and different results. It is not that one cause produces all results, nor that all results arise from one cause. O virtuous man! From the four things arises eye-consciousness, yet one cannot say that from these four things arises ear-consciousness.
O virtuous man! Apart from skillful means, can milk produce curd and curd produce butter, or are skillful means required?
O virtuous man! The wise see that without skillful means, curd cannot be obtained from milk; likewise, fresh butter cannot be obtained without skillful means. O virtuous man! Therefore, the sutras say: Because of causes there are phenomena; because causes cease, phenomena do not exist.
O virtuous man! The nature of salt is salty and can make things that are not salty become salty. If something that is not salty already possessed salty nature beforehand, why would people in the world seek salt? If it was not salty before, then one should know that it was nonexistent before and now exists. It becomes salty due to other conditions.
Some may say that all things that are not salty possess salty nature, but because it is too little it cannot be known; because this salty nature is too little, salt can make those things become salty. If salty nature did not originally exist, then even with salt, they could not become salty.
Just as a seed itself possesses the four great elements and, through the external four great elements, grows and develops: sprouting, becoming a plant, producing shoots, and growing leaves. The nature of salt is also like this. This meaning is incorrect. Why? Because if something that is not salty already had salty nature, then salt itself should also contain a small amount of non-salty nature. If salt possessed these two natures, then due to what causes and conditions, apart from non-salty things, could salt not be used independently? Therefore, one should know that salt originally does not possess these two natures. Just like salt, all things that are not salty are also the same.
If one says that the external four great elements can increase and develop the internal four great elements, this meaning is incorrect. Why? Because this is speaking according to sequence. It is not that through skillful means curd is obtained from milk, fresh butter is obtained, and so on; all phenomena are not like this. They are not obtained merely through skillful means. The four great elements are also like this.
If one says that the external four great elements increase the internal four great elements, but one does not see the internal four great elements increasing the external four great elements, then, like the Śiriṣa fruit, which previously had no form or substance, when the Mão star appears it produces a fruit five inches long; in this way, this fruit does not grow due to the external four great elements.
O virtuous man! As I have said, the twelve divisions of the Buddhist scriptures are sometimes spoken according to one’s own intention, sometimes according to another person’s intention, and sometimes according to both one’s own and another person’s intention. What is meant by speaking according to one’s own intention?
Like when five hundred Bhikkhus asked Śāriputra: “Venerable Great Elder! What are the causes of the body according to the Buddha’s teaching?” Śāriputra said: “Venerable Great Ones! You yourselves have already attained right liberation and should know for yourselves. Why ask such a question?” A Bhikkhu said: “Venerable Elder! Before I attained right liberation, I thought that ignorance was the cause of the body. By contemplating in this way, I attained the fruit of Arhatship.” Another Bhikkhu said: “Venerable Elder! Before I attained right liberation, I thought that craving and ignorance were the causes of the body. By contemplating in this way, I attained the fruit of Arhatship.” Some Bhikkhus said: “Volitional formations, consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense bases, contact, feeling, craving, grasping, existence, birth, food, and the five desires are the causes of the body.”
At that time, the five hundred Bhikkhus each expressed their own understanding, then together went to where I was. They bowed their heads and paid homage at my feet, circumambulated me three times to the right, paid homage, and then withdrew to sit to one side. Each one brought forth his own understanding, as previously stated, and reported it to me. Śāriputra asked: “World-Honored One! Among such people, who speaks correctly and who does not speak correctly?” I said to Śāriputra: “Excellent! Excellent! All of these Bhikkhus have spoken correctly.” Śāriputra asked: “World-Honored One! What is the meaning of the World-Honored One?” I told Śāriputra: “For sentient beings in the Desire Realm, I say that parents are the cause of the body. Teachings such as these are called speaking according to one’s own intention.
What is called speaking according to the intention of others? It is like the Elder Bā-tra-la who came to me and said: ‘Gautama! Do you know illusionary arts? If you know illusionary arts, then you are a great illusionist. If you do not know them, then you are not an omniscient one.’ I said: ‘Elder! Is one who knows illusionary arts called an illusionist?’ The elder replied: ‘Indeed, indeed! One who knows illusionary arts is an illusionist.’ I said: ‘Elder! King Pasenadi of Śrāvastī has a Caṇḍāla named Khí-hư. Do you know him?’ The elder replied: ‘Gautama! I have known that person for a long time.’ The Buddha said: ‘Since you have known that person for a long time, could you yourself be a Caṇḍāla?’ The elder replied: ‘Gautama! Although I know that Caṇḍāla, my body is not a Caṇḍāla.’ The Buddha said: ‘You have understood this meaning: you know that a Caṇḍāla is not a Caṇḍāla. Then why can I now not know illusionary arts while not being an illusionist? Elder! In truth, I know illusionary arts, I know illusionists, I know the karmic results of illusionary arts, and I know the techniques of illusionary arts. I know killing, I know the person who kills, I know the karmic results of killing, and I know liberation from killing. Likewise, I know wrong view, I know the person with wrong view, I know the karmic results of wrong view, and I know liberation from wrong view. Elder! If one says that a person who is not an illusionist is an illusionist, or that a person who does not have wrong view is a person with wrong view, then one incurs immeasurable offenses.’ The elder said: ‘Gautama! According to your words, I have committed a very great offense. Now all possessions belonging to me I offer to you. I only ask that you do not let King Pasenadi know of this matter of mine.’ I said: ‘Elder! The condition of this offense is not the loss of possessions. Because of this offense, you will fall into the three evil destinies.’ At that time, when the elder heard the words ‘evil destinies,’ his mind became fearful. He immediately said to me: ‘Holy One! Now because of my forgetfulness I have committed a great offense. Now you, Holy One, being omniscient, surely know the path of liberation. What should I do now to escape hell, hungry ghosts, and animals?’ Then I expounded the Four Noble Truths. After hearing them, the elder attained the fruit of Stream-entry. With shame in his heart, he turned toward me and repented: ‘I was originally foolish. The Buddha is not an illusionist, yet I said that he was an illusionist. From now on, I take refuge in the Three Jewels.’ I said: ‘Excellent! Excellent! Elder!’ This is called speaking according to the intention of others.
What is called speaking according to both one’s own intention and the intention of others? It is like this: Whatever worldly wise people say exists, I also say exists. Whatever worldly wise people say does not exist, I also say does not exist. When worldly wise people say that the five kinds of sensual pleasures are impermanent, suffering, without self, and can be cut off, I also say they are so. When worldly wise people say that the five kinds of sensual pleasures possess permanence, self, and purity, which do not exist, I also say that such things do not exist. This is called speaking according to both one’s own intention and the intention of others.
O good man! When I say that Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages see a small portion of Buddha-nature, this is called speaking according to others’ intention.
What is meant by seeing a small portion? Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages attain three thousand Dharma gates, such as the Śūraṅgama Samādhi and others. You should know that they clearly understand that they themselves will attain the unsurpassed Bodhi path, but they do not see that all sentient beings will definitely attain unsurpassed Bodhi. Therefore, I say that Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages see Buddha-nature only partially.
O good man! I constantly proclaim that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature. This is called speaking according to my own intention. All sentient beings are neither cut off nor destroyed until they attain unsurpassed Bodhi. This is called speaking according to my own intention. All sentient beings possess Buddha-nature, but because afflictions cover it, they cannot see it. When I speak in this way, you also speak in this way. This is called speaking according to both one’s own intention and the intention of others.
O good man! The Tathāgata sometimes speaks of countless teachings through a single Dharma. For example, a sutra says that all pure practices have their cause in good spiritual friends. Although all pure practices have immeasurable causes, by speaking of good spiritual friends, all are included. Likewise, when I say that all evil conduct has wrong view as its cause, although all evil conduct has immeasurable causes, by speaking of wrong view, all are encompassed. Or when I say that faith is the cause of unsurpassed Bodhi, although the causes of this Bodhi are immeasurable, by speaking of faith, all are included.
O good man! Although the Tathāgata speaks of immeasurable teachings to clarify Buddha-nature, they are never separate from the aggregates, sense bases, and elements.
O good man! For the sake of sentient beings, the Tathāgata teaches the Dharma in seven ways: first, speaking of causes; second, speaking of results; third, speaking of causes and results; fourth, speaking through examples; fifth, speaking of what is impossible; sixth, speaking of ordinary worldly expressions; seventh, speaking according to intention.
What is speaking of causes? It is speaking of future results through present causes. As I have said: “Good man! When you see sentient beings who delight in killing and even delight in committing wrong views, you should observe that this person is a person destined for hell.”
O good man! If there are sentient beings who do not delight in killing or wrong views, you should know that such people are heavenly or human beings. This is called speaking of causes.
What is speaking of results? It is speaking of past causes through present results. As a sutra says: “Good man! As you see sentient beings who are poor, ugly in appearance, and without freedom, you should know that such people certainly have broken precepts, have a jealous mind, an angry mind, and a mind without shame. If you see sentient beings who possess wealth, have complete faculties, and possess dignity and freedom, you should know that such people certainly uphold precepts, practice generosity, are diligent, have shame, and lack jealousy and anger.” This is called speaking of results.
What is called speaking of causes and results? As a sutra says: “Good man! Presently, sentient beings take the six sense bases and contact as causes; this is called the karmic result of the past. The Tathāgata also calls this karma. The causes and conditions of this karma will receive future results.” This is called speaking of causes and results.
What is speaking through examples? It is like saying that the lion king is an analogy for my body, or the great elephant king, the great dragon king, the pārijāta tree, the seven treasures, the great ocean, Mount Sumeru, the earth, great rain, the captain of a ship, the guide, the Tamer of Men, the strong warrior, the bull king, the Brahmin, the Śramaṇa, the great city, the Tāla tree, and sutras containing such analogies. These are called speaking through examples.
What is speaking of what is impossible? As in the sutras where I say: “Heaven and earth could unite, but rivers cannot flow into the ocean.” Or, for King Pasenadi, I say that the mountains on all four sides are coming. Or, for the laywoman Lộc Mẫu, I say that if the Tāla tree could receive the eight precepts, then it would enjoy happiness among gods and humans. Or when saying that Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages have thoughts of regression, one should not say that the Tathāgata speaks two contradictory words. Or when saying that a Stream-enterer falls into the three evil destinies, one should not say that Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages have thoughts of regression. This is called speaking of what does not exist.
What is speaking of ordinary worldly expressions? As when I say: male, female, large, small, coming, going, sitting, lying down, vehicles, houses, jars, clothing, sentient beings, permanence, bliss, self, purity, armies, forests, cities, monasteries, union, separation. This is called speaking of ordinary worldly expressions.
What is speaking according to intention? It is like when I criticize those who violate the precepts, causing them to reproach themselves and guard the precepts. It is like when I praise Stream-enterers, causing ordinary people to give rise to wholesome minds. It is like when I praise Bodhisattvas, causing sentient beings to arouse the mind of Bodhi. It is like when I speak of the suffering of the three evil destinies, causing sentient beings to cultivate wholesome dharmas. It is like saying that all things are burning because all are conditioned phenomena; saying that all are without self is the same. It is like saying that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature because I wish them not to be negligent. This is called speaking according to intention.