大般涅槃經義記 9.215

9.215

下佛答之。先立四答，後就辨性。明四答中，先舉、次列、下辨其相。定中，初問、次辨、後結。辨中五句，前二世俗因果法定，後三出世因果法定。分別答中，初問、次辨，於中且就四諦辨之。「是名」下結。隨問答中，初問、次辨。四句兩對：一說無常、二隨問以答、三說法燒、四隨問以答。一門略而不辨。「十力」已下就前四答以辨佛性，文別有四：第一就其分別答門，明性體狀；二就置答，破離偏著；三「迦葉白云：何名因亦過去」下，重顯向前分別中義；四「眾生佛性非有無」下，重顯向前置答中義。就初段中要分為二：一就如來後身佛性以答前問，二就九住已還佛性收答前問。細分有四：一就如來後身佛性，明闡提人有無之義，答上後問；二「如來佛性非過去」下，就彼如來後身佛性，明是三世非三世義，答上初問；三「九住」下，明九地下所有佛性，有是三世非三世義，答上初問，乘前便故先以論之；四「是五種」下，就九地下所有佛性，明闡提人有無之義，答上後問。

Below, the Buddha answers him. He first sets forth the four [types of] answers, and then clarifies the nature in terms of them. In clarifying the four answers, he first adduces them, next lists them, and below distinguishes their characteristics. In the categorical answer (ekāṃśa-vyākaraṇa), there is first a question, next the distinction, and finally a conclusion. In the distinction, there are five clauses: the first two are the categorical laws of mundane cause and effect, and the latter three are the categorical laws of supramundane cause and effect. In the answer by analytical distinction (vibhajya-vyākaraṇa), there is first a question, then the distinction, in which it is provisionally clarified in terms of the four noble truths. From "These are called" onwards is the conclusion. In the answer by counter-question (paripṛcchā-vyākaraṇa), there is first a question, then the distinction. There are four clauses making two pairs: first, speaking of impermanence; second, answering in accordance with the question; third, speaking of dharmas burning; fourth, answering in accordance with the question. One approach is omitted and not distinguished. From "ten powers" onwards clarifies the buddha-nature in terms of the preceding four answers, with four distinct parts in the text: first, clarifying the essence and characteristics of the nature in terms of the approach of the answer by analytical distinction; second, refuting and abandoning one-sided attachments in terms of the set-aside answer (sthāpanīya-vyākaraṇa); third, from "Kāśyapa addressed [the Buddha], saying: What is meant by the cause also being past?" onwards, re-clarifying the meaning within the preceding analytical distinction; fourth, from "The buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither existent nor non-existent" onwards, re-clarifying the meaning within the preceding set-aside answer. Within the first section, it is fundamentally divided into two: first, answering the previous question in terms of the buddha-nature of the Tathāgata's final body; second, concluding the answer to the previous question in terms of the buddha-nature up to the ninth abode. In a detailed division, there are four parts: first, clarifying the meaning of existence and non-existence in an icchantika in terms of the buddha-nature of the Tathāgata's final body, answering the latter question above; second, from "The Tathāgata's buddha-nature is not past" onwards, clarifying the meaning of being [within] the three periods of time and not being [within] the three periods of time in terms of the buddha-nature of that Tathāgata's final body, answering the first question above; third, from "ninth abode" onwards, clarifying that all buddha-natures below the ninth ground have the meaning of being [within] the three periods of time and not being [within] the three periods of time, answering the first question above—discussed first because it takes advantage of the preceding context; fourth, from "These five kinds" onwards, clarifying the meaning of existence and non-existence in an icchantika in terms of all buddha-natures below the ninth ground, answering the latter question above.