大般涅槃經集解 66.44

66.44

案僧亮曰：先答第二問。佛性有常無常，事須分別，不可執常為問也。七事者，具八自在、四樂四淨、無漏、見法性，皆名真實無學法門，皆得少見也。僧宗曰：將欲提其第二問故，先舉果地諸德及後身菩薩法，出分別答也。寶亮曰：十力等乃至佛性七事，皆是果地佛性也。後身菩薩佛性有六者，十住佛性中多明緣因性也。一常者，十地少見真我常，故言亦常也。無漏之解，一得不失，亦言常也。二淨者，除煩惱之穢也。三真者，不雜偽也。四實者，體用非虛也。五善者，純淨心也。六少見者，謂果性如此分別也。道慧記曰：答初問也。明此佛性則非三世而是常，自餘則是三世攝也。智秀曰：答初難，明佛性雖復名義是一，然在果得為七、在因則六，便為不定。豈可聞斷三世因故，便執佛性為三世所攝，謂是無常，作定難耶？

Sengliang states: "He first answers the second question. The buddhadhātu has the permanent and the impermanent, which necessitates distinction; one cannot cling to permanence in framing a question. The seven things—possessing the eight masteries, the four blisses, the four purities, the uncontaminated, and seeing the dharmatā—are all called true aśaikṣa dharmas, and all can be seen to a slight extent." Sengzong states: "Intending to bring up his second question, he first adduces the various virtues of the fruit-stage and the dharmas of the bodhisattva in the final body, presenting an answer by distinguishing." Baoliang states: "The ten powers and so forth up to the seven things of the buddhadhātu are all the buddhadhātu of the fruit-stage. That the buddhadhātu of the bodhisattva in the final body has six is because within the buddhadhātu of the ten abidings, it predominantly clarifies the nature of contributory causes. First, permanence: because on the ten stages one slightly sees the permanence of the true self, it is said to be 'also permanent'. The uncontaminated understanding, once attained, is never lost, so it is also called permanent. Second, purity: the defilements of affliction are eliminated. Third, truth: unmixed with falsity. Fourth, reality: substance and function are not deceptive. Fifth, goodness: a purely clean mind. Sixth, seen to a slight extent: this means the nature of the fruit is distinguished in this way." Daohui's notes state: "This answers the first question, clarifying that this buddhadhātu is not of the three times and is permanent, while the remainder is subsumed under the three times." Zhixiu states: "Answering the first objection, it clarifies that although the buddhadhātu is one in name and meaning, it is realized as seven in the fruit and six in the cause, and is thus indefinite. How could one, hearing of cutting off the causes of the three times, cling to the buddhadhātu being subsumed under the three times, consider it impermanent, and make a definitive objection?"