大般涅槃經義記 9.188

9.188

第二十門明闡提等有性無性。先辨諍相。有人宣說眾生定有，有言定無，所以成諍。次須論理，理則不定。生死身中即無佛果，名為不有；不無佛因，說為不無。又如下說四種佛性：一闡提人有不善陰及理佛性，名為不無；無善五陰及佛果性，名為不有。文中有三：一佛說有性，「我說眾生即佛性」等，法說明有，次喻、後合；二「如我為王說箜篌」下，佛說性無，先喻、後合；三明眾生聞之不解，作種種說或有或無。

The twentieth section clarifies whether icchantikas and others have the nature or lack the nature. First, the aspects of the dispute are distinguished: some declare that sentient beings definitely have it, while others say they definitely lack it, so disputes arose. Next, the principle must be discussed: in principle, it is not definite. Within the body of saṃsāra, there is no fruit of buddhahood, which is termed 'not having'; yet there is not an absence of the cause of buddhahood, which is spoken of as 'not lacking'. Furthermore, as explained below regarding the four kinds of buddha-nature: an icchantika has unwholesome aggregates and the principle of buddha-nature, which is termed 'not lacking'; they lack wholesome five aggregates and the nature of the fruit of buddhahood, which is termed 'not having'. In the text there are three parts: first, the Buddha teaches the presence of the nature—'I teach that sentient beings are identical to buddha-nature' and so forth—clarifying the presence through an exposition of doctrine, followed by a simile, followed by the application; second, from 'Just as I explained the harp for the king' downward, the Buddha teaches the absence of the nature, first with a simile, followed by the application; third, it clarifies that sentient beings, hearing this without understanding, make various assertions, saying it either exists or does not exist.