大方廣佛華嚴經搜玄分齊通智方軌 4.87

4.87

三辨宗體者，分別有二：約人、約法。人但本有異前，法者如文耳。問：性起分齊云何？答：此有二義，一始終相對、二闊狹相對明分齊。初始發心至佛性起，終至大菩提大涅槃流通舍利也。闊狹頓悟及三乘始終，出世至聲聞緣覺，世間下至地獄等諸位也，仍起在大解大行大見聞心中。文義俱在下辨，至當指釋。問：若聲聞等有性起者，何故文云於二處不生根？答：言不生者，不生菩提心性起芽，不言無果葉。若無者，微塵中不應有經卷，准喻可知。若細分別，地獄無果葉有體，聲聞有體及果葉也。

Third, determining the doctrine and essence: the distinction has two [aspects]—in terms of persons and in terms of dharmas. In terms of persons, it is simply intrinsic presence, differing from the preceding; as for dharmas, it is as in the text. Question: What is the scope of the emergence of the nature? Answer: This has two meanings: first, clarifying the scope by contrasting beginning and end; second, clarifying the scope by contrasting breadth and narrowness. Beginning with the initial generation of the mind and reaching up to the emergence of the buddha-nature, it ends with great bodhi, great nirvāṇa, and the circulation of the relics. In terms of breadth and narrowness, it encompasses sudden awakening and the beginning and end of the three vehicles, extending supra-mundanely to śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and mundanely down to the stages of the hells, etc., yet it arises in the mind of great understanding, great practice, and great hearing and seeing. Both text and meaning are explained below and will be pointed out and interpreted when reached. Question: If śrāvakas and the like possess the emergence of the nature, why does the text state that it does not take root in two places? Answer: Stating that it does not take root means that it does not sprout the shoot of the emergence of the nature of the bodhicitta; it does not say that it lacks fruit and leaves. If it were entirely absent, there could not be a sūtra scroll within a minute dust mote; this can be known by inference from the simile. If distinguished finely, the hells lack fruit and leaves but possess the essence, while śrāvakas possess the essence as well as fruit and leaves.