大般涅槃經義記 8.211

8.211

自下第三明諸眾生依教不同有見。初先立喻。「雪山」喻佛，「草名忍辱」喻《涅槃經》，「牛」喻菩薩，「食出醍醐」喻學是經得見佛性。「異草」喻於小乘經法，「牛」喻聲聞，「食無醍醐」喻學小經不見佛性。「雖無」已下明雖不見，不得言無。下合顯法。「佛性亦爾」是總合也。餘文別合，與前不次。先合雪山及忍辱草，次合異草。「若能聽」下，就前忍辱合牛食者即成醍醐。「牛食異草則無醍醐」略而不合。「十二部中雖不聞者不可說無」合向末後雖無醍醐不可說言無忍辱草。問曰：向說忍辱草者喻《涅槃經》。今合不可說無忍辱，正應道言不《涅槃》，何得乃言不無佛性？性是經旨，故言不可說無佛性。

From here below, the third section clarifies that sentient beings, relying on different teachings, have seeing [or not seeing]. First, an analogy is established. "Snow Mountain" (Himālaya) is an analogy for the Buddha; the "grass named forbearance" is an analogy for the *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*; the "ox" is an analogy for the bodhisattva; "eating it produces clarified butter" is an analogy for studying this sūtra and attaining the vision of buddha-nature. "Different grasses" is an analogy for the sūtra teachings of the Hīnayāna; the "ox" is an analogy for the śrāvaka; "eating it produces no clarified butter" is an analogy for studying Hīnayāna sūtras and not seeing buddha-nature. From "although there is none" below, it clarifies that although it is not seen, one cannot say it does not exist. Below, the correlation elucidates the Dharma. "Buddha-nature is also like this" is the general correlation. The remaining text contains particular correlations, which do not follow the previous order. First, it correlates the Snow Mountain and the grass of forbearance; next, it correlates the different grasses. From "if one is able to hear" below, concerning the aforementioned forbearance, it correlates the ox eating it and thereby producing clarified butter. "An ox eating different grasses produces no clarified butter" is omitted and not correlated. "Although one does not hear it in the twelve divisions, one cannot say it does not exist" correlates with the earlier concluding statement that although there is no clarified butter, one cannot say there is no grass of forbearance. Question: Earlier it was said that the grass of forbearance is an analogy for the *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*. Now in correlating "one cannot say there is no forbearance", it should properly say there is no lack of the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]*; how can it instead say that buddha-nature is not absent? [Answer:] Nature is the essential purport of the sūtra; therefore it says that one cannot say buddha-nature is absent.