大般涅槃經義記 8.182

8.182

問曰：何不即用此義以為緣實，而言此中就相辯深？釋言：此等若即是實，即是佛性，二乘知此應知佛性，何故上言「聲聞、緣覺雖觀因緣，不名佛性」？又此所辯唯是世諦，空、無常、苦、無我之理若是佛性，佛性便非常樂我淨，云何上言「因緣中道名為佛性，如是佛性常樂我淨」？又上文言「從緣生法悉是無常，佛性常故不從緣生」，明此所說但是緣相非是性體。上來解釋初句甚深，下次解釋後之三句。於中分二：一解向前無知見等明凡不見，即舉向前佛菩薩境對以顯之；二「觀緣智凡有四」下解釋向前二乘不及，還舉向前佛菩薩境對以顯之。前中有四：一明凡不見。二「十住」下明佛菩薩見、三「一切眾生不能見」下明前凡夫不見之損、四「是故我」下明佛菩薩知見之益。初中，「眾生雖與共行而不見」者明不能解。「不見知故無始終」者明不能滅。起來始，未有盡時名為無終。第二段中「十住見終不見始」者，見己生死至佛當盡名為見終。不知根本起之所由，名不見始。「諸佛世尊見始終」者，見因緣法原起所由亦見盡時，名見始終。「以是了了得見性」者，佛性是其因緣之本，故佛如來見始如終，名見佛性。第三段中「一切眾生不見因緣是故輪轉」法說明損，次喻後合，下復喻顯。第四益中言「是故」者，乘前顯後。是凡不見有大損故，我經中說知見有益。「若人見緣即見法」者見法實也，因緣之體是法性故。「即見佛」者，見佛實也。因緣實性據佛望之，由來清淨畢竟無染，即是諸佛法身之體，是故見之名為見佛。「佛即性」者，彼佛法身據凡望之為惑隱覆，與後顯時淨德為本，故名佛性。「何以」下釋。一切諸佛同用此理以為自性故名佛性，佛性是佛自體性故。

Question: Why not take this very meaning as the true reality of conditions, instead of saying that here one discerns profundity only with regard to marks? Answer: If these were the true reality itself, they would be buddha-nature, and the two vehicles, knowing this, ought to know buddha-nature. Why, then, was it said above that 'though śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas contemplate dependent origination, it is not called buddha-nature'? Furthermore, what is discerned here is only conventional truth; if the principle of emptiness, impermanence, suffering, and non-self were buddha-nature, then buddha-nature would not be permanence, bliss, self, and purity. How could it have been said above that 'the Middle Way of causes and conditions is called buddha-nature, and such buddha-nature is permanence, bliss, self, and purity'? Furthermore, the text above stated: 'Dharmas arisen from conditions are all impermanent; because buddha-nature is permanent, it does not arise from conditions.' This clarifies that what is spoken of here are merely the marks of conditions, not the substance of the nature. The foregoing has explained the profundity of the first line. Next, the subsequent three lines are explained. There are two parts to this: First, explaining the earlier 'no knowing or seeing,' etc., clarifying that ordinary worldlings do not see, by contrasting it with the earlier realm of buddhas and bodhisattvas to reveal it. Second, from 'the wisdom contemplating conditions has four kinds' onward, explaining the earlier 'out of reach of the two vehicles,' again contrasting it with the earlier realm of buddhas and bodhisattvas to reveal it. The first part contains four sections: 1. Clarifying that ordinary worldlings do not see. 2. From 'the ten abodes' onward, clarifying the seeing of buddhas and bodhisattvas. 3. From 'all sentient beings cannot see' onward, clarifying the harm of the aforesaid ordinary worldlings' not seeing. 4. From 'therefore I' onward, clarifying the benefit of the buddhas' and bodhisattvas' knowing and seeing. In the first section, 'sentient beings, though moving along together with it, do not see' clarifies that they cannot understand it. 'Because they do not see or know it, it has neither beginning nor end' clarifies that they cannot extinguish it. Arising is the beginning; never having a time of cessation is called 'having no end.' In the second section, 'the ten abodes see the end but do not see the beginning' means that they see their own birth-and-death as coming to an end when reaching buddhahood; this is called 'seeing the end.' Not knowing the origin from which it fundamentally arose is called 'not seeing the beginning.' 'The buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones, see both beginning and end' means that they see the origin from which the dharmas of causes and conditions fundamentally arose and also see their time of cessation; this is called 'seeing beginning and end.' 'Thereby clearly gaining sight of the nature' means that buddha-nature is the fundamental basis of those causes and conditions; thus the Tathāgata sees the beginning just as the end, which is called 'seeing buddha-nature.' In the third section, 'all sentient beings do not see causes and conditions, and therefore transmigrate' clarifies the harm through dharma exposition; next comes a metaphor, and then the application; below, it is further revealed through another metaphor. In the fourth section on benefit, 'therefore' builds on what preceded to reveal what follows: because the ordinary worldling's failure to see brings great harm, I have spoken in the sūtra of the benefit of knowing and seeing. 'If a person sees conditions, they see the Dharma' means seeing the reality of phenomena, for the substance of causes and conditions is dharma-nature. 'They see the Buddha' means seeing the reality of the Buddha. When viewed from the perspective of the Buddha, the true nature of causes and conditions has always been pure and utterly without defilement; it is the very substance of the dharmakāya of all buddhas. Therefore, seeing it is called 'seeing the Buddha.' 'The Buddha is the nature' means that when viewed from the perspective of the ordinary worldling, that dharmakāya of the Buddha is concealed and veiled by afflictions, yet it serves as the basis for the pure virtues when later manifested; therefore it is called 'buddha-nature.' From 'Why is this?' onward is the explanation: All buddhas alike take this principle as their own nature, hence it is called 'buddha-nature,' for buddha-nature is the Buddha's own essential nature.