大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 37.16

37.16

疏「涅槃云：佛性二種」下，引證，即二十八經。但初云「善男子！佛性復有二種。」從「一者是色」下，疏全是經，直至「然非失壞」，一段終畢。然有二意：一以非內非外然不失壞，證強說升沈；二證可見，謂佛菩薩見之了了，如眼見色。言「非色」者，以未證如，聞他說故，故云聞見。若《涅槃》二十七經云「善男子！佛性亦色非色、非色非非色，及歷相非相常非常」等。下釋云「色者，金剛身故。非色者，十八不共等故。非色非非色者，無定相故。」釋曰：此約佛性之體名色非色，以如來身智等皆果性故，非今所用。

Regarding the Commentary's 'The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: There are two kinds of Buddha-nature' below, it cites proof, which is from the twenty-eighth fascicle. But at the beginning it says: 'Good son! The Buddha-nature furthermore has two kinds.' From 'First is form' below, the Commentary is entirely the sūtra text, continuing straight through to 'yet it is not lost or destroyed', which completes the section. However, there are two meanings: first, using being neither internal nor external yet not being lost or destroyed, it proves that ascent and descent are forcibly spoken of; second, it proves visibility, meaning that Buddhas and bodhisattvas see it distinctly, just as eyes see form. As for saying 'non-form', because one has not yet realized suchness and hears others speak of it, it is called hearing-and-seeing. Like fascicle twenty-seven of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] saying: 'Good son! The Buddha-nature is also form and non-form, neither form nor non-form, and throughout characteristics and non-characteristics, permanent and non-permanent,' and so forth. Below it explains: 'Form refers to the adamantine body. Non-form refers to the eighteen unshared dharmas and so forth. Neither form nor non-form refers to having no fixed characteristics.' The explanation says: this refers to the essence of Buddha-nature being called form and non-form, because the Tathāgata's body, wisdom, and so forth are all the nature of fruition, which is not what is employed here.