大般涅槃經集解 55.88

55.88

案僧亮曰：彼所舉者皆有為共相，形對涅槃真我，不可與無我為匹也。以是義故是因者，上二因。是果者，上二果也。涅槃是果非因，佛性是因非果。若涅槃但果而非苦者，佛性亦但因不應是苦也。非沙門果者，非彼二果，非不是餘果是苦也。是了因者，非彼二因，明是了因非生因也。寶亮曰：當知涅槃之體畢竟無因，如無我無我所也。雖引初句為答，後即遣也，明涅槃不同世法，所以常也。是因非果者，還據正因佛性。正因唯住因位，不得名果也。非因生故者，正因佛性既非善惡因之所生，唯一用不移，至佛不移、至佛不動，故非因生法也。體既非因所生，亦非息心家果也。了因故者，非但緣因是了因，正因亦是了因。何者？若眾生無厭求樂心者，一念善不能作也。由有此解故，可得熟果，是故正因亦遠為佛作了因也。

Sengliang comments: What he brought forward are all common characteristics of the saṃskṛta, which, when contrasted with the true self of nirvāṇa, cannot be equated with non-self. "For this reason, it is a cause" refers to the two causes above. "It is a fruit" refers to the two fruits above. Nirvāṇa is fruit and not cause; buddhadhātu is cause and not fruit. If nirvāṇa is only a fruit and not suffering, then buddhadhātu is also only a cause and should not be suffering. "Not the fruit of the śramaṇa" means it is not those two fruits, but not that it is not other fruits that are suffering. "It is a revealing cause" means it is not those two causes, clarifying that it is a revealing cause and not a generative cause. Baoliang says: One should know that the essence of nirvāṇa is ultimately without cause, just like non-self and the lack of what belongs to self. Although he cites the initial proposition to answer, he immediately dismisses it afterward, clarifying that nirvāṇa is unlike worldly dharmas, which is why it is permanent. Regarding "is a cause and not a fruit": this again refers to the primary cause buddhadhātu. The primary cause resides solely in the causal stage and cannot be termed a fruit. Regarding "because it is not produced from causes": since the primary cause buddhadhātu is not produced from good or evil causes, its single function is immutable; reaching Buddhahood it is unmoved, reaching Buddhahood it is unperturbed; hence it is not a dharma produced from causes. Since its essence is not produced from causes, it is also not the fruit of calming the mind. Regarding "because it is a revealing cause": not only is the contributory cause a revealing cause, but the primary cause is also a revealing cause. Why is this? If sentient beings did not have a mind of weariness [of saṃsāra] and seeking joy, they could not produce even a single moment of goodness. Because they possess this understanding, the fruit can mature; therefore, the primary cause also distantly serves as a revealing cause for the Buddha.