大般涅槃經義記 8.258

8.258

自下第三，師子以其不生異果證乳有酪，如來對破。有二問答。師子初問「若乳無酪今方有者，乳中本無菴摩羅樹，何故不生」舉異果難。下佛先印，「乳亦能生菴摩羅樹，乳灌一夜生五尺故」。如來何意說乳能生菴摩羅樹？為欲將樹類顯乳故。類之云何？乳能生樹，乳中無樹；乳中生酪，何得有酪？「若一切」下，釋去難辭。「若一切法一因生者，汝可難言何故不生」，明因別故不生菴摩。「如四大」下，明果異故不生菴摩。舉彼四大造色各異，類明乳等生法各異。「以是」下結。以是因別果異義故不生菴摩。「師子」下，復因喻請法，「如佛向說正因緣因，佛性是何」。下佛為釋二因所攝。「正謂眾生，緣謂六度」，良以眾生真妄集成其猶礦石，真妄成故能為離妄淨德之本，故曰正因。諸度但能除妄顯真，故說為緣。此望何果？釋言：望彼性淨之果。眾生實性以為正因、六度為緣，理在灼然。望彼方便菩提之果，義有兩兼：一眾生佛性以為正因、六度為緣，報佛之性正能生彼菩提果故。故下文言「佛性正因、發心緣因，以此二因得菩提果」。二六度正因、佛性緣因，法佛之性不能正生菩提果故。故上文言「復有了因佛性菩提，復有生因六波羅蜜阿耨菩提」。正即是正，了即是緣。

From here below is the third [section]: Siṃhanāda adduces the fact that it does not produce a different effect to prove that milk contains curds, and the Tathāgata refutes it in response. There are two questions and answers. First, Siṃhanāda asks: "If milk has no curds and only now comes to have them, since there is originally no āmalaka tree in milk, why does it not produce one?"—raising a different effect as a challenge. Below, the Buddha first assents: "Milk can also produce an āmalaka tree, for when watered with milk, in a single night it grows five feet." With what intention does the Tathāgata say that milk can produce an āmalaka tree? It is because he wishes to use the tree as an analogical illustration of milk. How are they analogous? Milk can produce a tree, yet there is no tree in milk; curds are produced from milk, so how could there be curds [pre-existing] in it? Below "If all...", he explains away the words of the challenge. "If all dharmas were produced from a single cause, you might challenge [me by asking] why it does not produce [an āmalaka]"—clarifying that because the causes are distinct, it does not produce an āmalaka. Below "Just as the four great elements...", it clarifies that because the effects are different, it does not produce an āmalaka. He adduces that the physical forms created by those four great elements are each different, to analogously clarify that the dharmas produced by milk and so forth are each different. Below "For this reason...", it concludes. It is because causes are distinct and effects are different that it does not produce an āmalaka. Below "Siṃhanāda", he further inquires about the Dharma based on the metaphor: "As the Buddha just stated regarding the primary cause and the contributory cause, what is buddha-nature?" Below, the Buddha explains for him what is subsumed under the two causes. "The primary refers to sentient beings; the contributory refers to the six perfections." This is because sentient beings are a composite of the true and the false, just like mineral ore; because they are formed of the true and the false, they can serve as the basis for the pure virtues free from delusion, and thus are called the primary cause. The various perfections can only remove delusion and reveal the true, and thus are spoken of as contributory causes. In reference to what effect is this? The explanation says: in reference to that effect of natural purity. Taking the true nature of sentient beings as the primary cause and the six perfections as contributory causes is entirely evident in principle. In reference to that effect of expedient bodhi, the meaning has two aspects: First, the buddha-nature of sentient beings is taken as the primary cause and the six perfections as contributory causes, because the nature of the reward buddha can directly produce that effect of bodhi. Therefore the later text says: "Buddha-nature is the primary cause, generating the aspiration is the contributory cause; through these two causes one attains the fruit of bodhi." Second, the six perfections are the primary cause and buddha-nature is the contributory cause, because the nature of the dharma buddha cannot directly produce the fruit of bodhi. Therefore the earlier text says: "Furthermore, there is buddha-nature as the revealing cause of bodhi, and furthermore there are the six pāramitās as the generative cause of anuttarabodhi." "Primary" is precisely the primary [cause], and "revealing" is precisely the contributory [cause].