大般涅槃經疏 23.19

23.19

就品又為二：初明佛性、後歎經。初文又四：一明佛性、二明中道、三明縛解、四明修道。佛性是基本，由佛性故中當通達，不識故縛、識之則解。欲得解縛，應須修習。初文有問有答。問為四：一勸問、二求問、三許問、四正問。勸問中，先舉諸法門、後正勸。初舉諸法中有六門：一舉三寶、次舉四諦、三舉實諦、四舉四德、五舉五佛性、六舉因果等。有乘無乘是舉了因性。何者？萬善一乘皆屬了因。有性無性是舉果性、果果性。有眾生無眾生是舉正因性。有有無有、有真無真舉境界性。何者？夫二諦是智所緣境，境又生智，故是境界性。有因無因者，𭁏舉因果。一解云：先兩句明習因因果，又三句明報因因果。有作無作是煩惱因，業非煩惱；是善惡業報，是煩惱業果。二解云：上兩句明出世因果，下三句明世間因果。復次舉法門勸者，總論是舉二諦法門，有佛即世諦、無佛即真諦，乃至有報是世諦、無報是真諦。文但二諦，若準恣汝所問，寧只二諦？二門四門等一切諸法，豈止二諦？且通三諦乃至四門。通三諦者，有佛俗、無佛真、非有佛非無佛中道，乃至報亦如是。通二門者，有佛是有門、無佛是空門，乃至有報無報亦如是。若準恣汝所問應有四門，兩門如上，亦有佛亦無佛是兩亦門，非有佛非無佛是雙非門，乃至亦有報亦無報、非有報非無報亦如是。問：佛勸問諸法門，何不依佛所勸而別問佛性？答諸法門雖別，通入佛性。若問佛性，總能攝別。何者？依有乘無乘五句之勸，即是問五種佛性。又依三寶，是問云何為佛性果。依苦集二諦，即問境界佛性。依道滅，即問緣了。依實無實，即問正性。依因果，即問因性、因因性、果性、果果性。依作無作，即是問因性。依業無業，即問緣性。復次依乘無乘，是問云何為佛性體。依報依三寶四諦等，即是問何義故名佛性。依四德，即是問何故名佛性。依有因無因，即問菩薩何眼不了了見。依有果無果，即問佛以何眼能了了見。依有作無作等二句，即問眾生何故不見。依報無報，即問正性。佛有十八條勸，菩薩依此勸門起六種問，同異若此，而人不見。私謂：勸別問別，實稱佛言，但未為得意。總勸別問，收法不遍，未為得意。總勸總問，亦稱佛意，但恐時眾不曉總中之別，故佛別勸而設總問，深得佛旨、時會易曉，故佛別勸而師子吼總問，良由此也。

Regarding the chapter, it is again divided into two: first, explaining buddhadhātu; later, praising the sūtra. The first text is again divided into four: first, explaining buddhadhātu; second, explaining the middle way; third, explaining bondage and liberation; fourth, explaining the cultivation of the path. Buddhadhātu is the fundamental basis: because of buddhadhātu, one will penetrate the middle; not recognizing it, there is bondage; recognizing it, there is liberation. Wishing to attain liberation from bondage, one must cultivate and practice. The first text contains questions and answers. The questions are divided into four: first, encouraging the asking of questions; second, requesting to ask questions; third, granting permission to ask questions; fourth, the formal asking of questions. Within encouraging the asking of questions, the various Dharma gates are first cited, and afterwards comes the formal encouragement. The initial citation of the various Dharmas contains six gates: first, citing the Three Jewels; next, citing the Four Truths; third, citing the real truth; fourth, citing the four virtues; fifth, citing the five buddhadhātus; sixth, citing cause and effect, and so forth. Having a vehicle and having no vehicle is citing the nature of the revealing cause (vyaktā-hetu-svabhāva). Why? Because the myriad goods and the One Vehicle all pertain to the revealing cause. Having nature and lacking nature is citing the nature of fruition and the nature of fruition of fruition. Sentient beings existing and sentient beings not existing is citing the nature of the direct cause. Existence and non-existence, reality and non-reality cite the nature of the cognitive sphere. Why? The two truths are the spheres cognized by wisdom, and the sphere in turn generates wisdom; therefore, it is the nature of the cognitive sphere. Having causes and lacking causes all cited cause and effect. One explanation says: the first two lines explain the cause and effect of habituated causes, and the next three lines explain the cause and effect of retributive causes. Having karma and lacking karma are causes of afflictions, and karma is not affliction; these are the karmic retributions of good and bad, which are the karmic fruits of afflictions. A second explanation says: the upper two lines explain supramundane cause and effect, and the lower three lines explain mundane cause and effect. Furthermore, regarding the encouragement by citing Dharma gates: generally speaking, it cites the Dharma gates of the two truths; having a Buddha is the conventional truth, and having no Buddha is the ultimate truth, up to having retribution being the conventional truth, and having no retribution being the ultimate truth. The text mentions only the two truths, but if we follow [the phrase] 'ask as you please,' would it only be the two truths? All dharmas such as the two gates and four gates—how could they stop at just the two truths? For the moment, they penetrate the three truths and even the four gates. Penetrating the three truths: having a Buddha is conventional, having no Buddha is ultimate, neither having a Buddha nor lacking a Buddha is the middle way; and it is likewise up to retribution. Penetrating the two gates: having a Buddha is the gate of existence, having no Buddha is the gate of emptiness; having retribution and lacking retribution are also likewise. If following 'ask as you please,' there should be four gates: the two gates are as above; both having a Buddha and lacking a Buddha is the gate of both; neither having a Buddha nor lacking a Buddha is the gate of neither; up to both having retribution and lacking retribution, neither having retribution nor lacking retribution, being also likewise. Question: Since the Buddha encouraged asking about the various Dharma gates, why not follow what the Buddha encouraged and instead separately ask about buddhadhātu? Answer: Although the various Dharma gates are distinct, they universally enter buddhadhātu. If one asks about buddhadhātu, the general can subsume the specific. Why? Following the encouragement in the five lines on having a vehicle and having no vehicle is precisely asking about the five kinds of buddhadhātu. Again, following the Three Jewels is asking what is the fruit of buddhadhātu. Following the two truths of suffering and origin is asking about buddhadhātu as the cognitive sphere. Following the path and cessation is asking about conditions and revealing [causes]. Following real and unreal is asking about the direct nature. Following cause and effect is asking about causal nature, cause-of-cause nature, fruit nature, and fruit-of-fruit nature. Following action and non-action is asking about causal nature. Following karma and non-karma is asking about conditional nature. Furthermore, following having a vehicle and having no vehicle is asking what is the essence of buddhadhātu. Following retribution, the Three Jewels, the Four Truths, and so on is asking by what meaning it is named buddhadhātu. Following the four virtues is asking why it is named buddhadhātu. Following having causes and lacking causes is asking with what eye the bodhisattva sees unclearly. Following having fruition and lacking fruition is asking with what eye the Buddha can see clearly. Following the two lines on having action and lacking action and so on is asking why sentient beings do not see it. Following retribution and no retribution is asking about the direct nature. The Buddha has eighteen items of encouragement; the bodhisattva, based on these gates of encouragement, raises six kinds of questions; their similarities and differences are like this, yet people do not see it. Personally, I consider: Encouraging specifically and asking specifically indeed accords with the Buddha's words, but does not yet grasp the full intention. Encouraging generally and asking specifically does not gather dharmas comprehensively, and does not grasp the full intention. Encouraging generally and asking generally also accords with the Buddha's intention, but it is feared that the assembly at that time would not understand the specifics within the general; therefore, the Buddha encouraged specifically and [Siṃhanāda] formulated a general question, profoundly grasping the Buddha's aim and allowing the contemporary gathering to understand easily; that the Buddha encouraged specifically while Siṃhanāda asked generally is truly for this reason.