大般涅槃經疏 23.25

23.25

「善男子」下，第二正答五問兼答一問。答初問又二：先牒問誡聽，如文。次「佛性者」下，正答。初問又二：一明佛性體、二簡不見者。初明體又三：一標名、二釋相、三結體。標者，佛性名第一義空，第一義空名為智慧。智慧是有，即空而有、即有而空。空則三諦皆空，一空一切空，乃是第一義空。名智慧者，三諦皆照，一照一切照乃是智慧，當知空有非空非有，即三而一即一而三，即非三非一即空，故盡一切相。即智故照一切境，即非空非智，故云一切中，是故名為第一義空。第一義空名為智慧、名為佛性，如此標名，貴在得意，不可言盡。次「所言空者」下，釋相者為二：先釋空、次釋智。初釋空，則三諦皆空。文云「空者不見空與不空。」不見空者，不見空邊、不見不空，是不見中無邊無中，是第一義空。次釋智，智則三諦皆照。文云「智者見空及與不空。」見空是見邊，見不空是見中。見邊見中，是第一義智慧。若此空智，非前非後、不淺不深，即空即智、即智即空，亦即非空非智而空而智，是為佛性之相。文又釋不空者即是四德，空者即是二邊無有四德。對非顯是，解釋分明。三結體者，佛性名中道。中道之法常恒無變，如文。從「無明覆故」下，第二簡不見者，又二：先簡二邊異故不見、次簡起中道見故不見。初文者，無明所覆，此簡生死有邊，異故不見第一義空，次簡二乘偏證空邊，異故不見第一義空，如文。次從「善男子」去，是簡起中道見故不見。有人解云：兩種不見一種見，而皆言不見者，以隨情故。是義不然，前唱中道見凡有三種，全未見而言見中道者，此乃名同而於名起見，後結以是義故不見佛性，當知三種並不見性。將後驗前，前是唱中道見。凡夫惑心雖作中道想，而因苦果苦，是定苦行，是故不見第一義空。二乘自行勝於凡夫，化他邊劣於菩薩，雖作中道之想，名定苦樂行。二乘偏空，故不見第一義空。菩薩慈悲甘苦如樂，是定樂行，即是偏假，故不見第一義空。如此三種雖同名中道，與上名相違，相違故無圓遍之義，是故不見。「如汝所言」下，正答第二問。舊云：此答因性。觀師云：此具明五性，豈獨因耶？就文為兩：初答第二問、後論義。初答問為二：先牒問、次正答。初具提其問。其問何義？義者，名之所以。有何所以稱為佛性？佛答為三：初總舉圓義、二別舉遍義、三結歎。初總答意者，善得圓旨是其所以。佛是圓人、性是圓法，人法合稱，故言佛性。又一切諸佛是圓人，菩提是圓果，兼得涅槃之果果也。既言果與果果，即知此果從因，因生此果、果從因生。中道者，非因非因因、非果非果果，皆顯現者，悉由佛性為種子，故知此中道即是佛性。佛性既為種子，種子能生兩因兩果；此兩因果又是種子，能顯中道。即是更互以為種子。不作此釋，無奈此文何。通塗雖爾，別說即是佛性以為種子。問：佛性既為四性種子，何獨是於菩提種子？答：特是略出，又是旁正。如十二因緣非無旁義，正發觀智生於菩提，種子義彰。餘之三性，其義則旁。譬如胡瓜，正能發熱，是熱病緣。

From "Good son" onward is the second part, directly answering the five questions while concurrently answering one question. The reply to the first question also has two parts: first, citing the question and admonishing to listen, as in the text; next, from "As for buddhadhātu" onward, directly answering. The first question also has two parts: first, clarifying the essence of buddhadhātu; second, distinguishing those who do not see it. First, clarifying the essence also has three parts: first, designating the name; second, explaining the characteristics; third, concluding the essence. As for designating the name, buddhadhātu is called paramārtha-śūnyatā, and paramārtha-śūnyatā is called wisdom. Wisdom is existence; it is existence identical with emptiness, and emptiness identical with existence. As for emptiness, all three truths are empty; when one is empty, all are empty—this is paramārtha-śūnyatā. Being named wisdom means that all three truths are illuminated; when one illuminates, all illuminate—this is wisdom. One should know that emptiness and existence are neither empty nor existent; they are three and yet one, one and yet three; they are neither three nor one. Being empty, it exhausts all characteristics. Being wisdom, it illuminates all spheres. Being neither empty nor wisdom, it is therefore called being within all; hence it is named paramārtha-śūnyatā. Paramārtha-śūnyatā is called wisdom and is called buddhadhātu. In designating the name in this way, what matters is grasping the meaning; it cannot be exhausted in words. Next, from "That which is called empty" onward explains the characteristics, which has two parts: first, explaining emptiness; second, explaining wisdom. First, explaining emptiness: then the three truths are all empty. The text states: "The empty means seeing neither emptiness nor non-emptiness." Not seeing emptiness means not seeing the extreme of emptiness; not seeing non-emptiness means not seeing the middle. Free from both extremes and the middle, this is paramārtha-śūnyatā. Next, explaining wisdom: wisdom means that the three truths are all illuminated. The text states: "The wise see emptiness as well as non-emptiness." Seeing emptiness is seeing the extremes; seeing non-emptiness is seeing the middle. Seeing the extremes and seeing the middle is paramārtha wisdom. Such emptiness and wisdom are neither earlier nor later, neither shallow nor deep; emptiness is wisdom, wisdom is emptiness; they are also neither emptiness nor wisdom while being both emptiness and wisdom. These are the characteristics of buddhadhātu. The text also explains that non-emptiness is the four virtues, while emptiness means that the two extremes lack the four virtues. Contrasting the incorrect to reveal the correct, the explanation is clear. Third, concluding the essence: buddhadhātu is called the middle way. The dharma of the middle way is eternal, constant, and unchanging, as in the text. From "Because it is covered by ignorance" onward is the second part, distinguishing those who do not see it, which also has two parts: first, distinguishing those who do not see it because of diverging into the two extremes; second, distinguishing those who do not see it because of giving rise to views on the middle way. In the first passage, being covered by ignorance distinguishes the extreme of existence in saṃsāra; diverging from it, they do not see paramārtha-śūnyatā. Next, it distinguishes the two vehicles who one-sidedly realize the extreme of emptiness; diverging from it, they do not see paramārtha-śūnyatā, as in the text. Next, from "Good son" onward distinguishes those who do not see it because of giving rise to views on the middle way. Someone explains: two kinds do not see and one kind sees, yet all are said not to see because of accommodating sentiments. This meaning is incorrect. Previously, three kinds of views on the middle way were announced; to claim to see the middle way when one has not seen it at all is merely sharing the name while giving rise to views about the name. Later it concludes: "For this reason, they do not see the buddhadhātu." One should know that all three kinds do not see the nature. Examining the former by the latter, the former was announcing views on the middle way. Although the deluded mind of ordinary beings forms the conception of the middle way, their causes are suffering and their results are suffering, which is fixed practice of suffering; therefore, they do not see paramārtha-śūnyatā. The self-practice of the two vehicles surpasses that of ordinary beings, but on the side of transforming others, it is inferior to bodhisattvas; although they form the conception of the middle way, it is termed fixed practice of suffering and pleasure. Because the two vehicles incline toward emptiness, they do not see paramārtha-śūnyatā. Bodhisattvas' compassion takes suffering to be as sweet as pleasure, which is fixed practice of pleasure, meaning they incline toward the provisional; therefore, they do not see paramārtha-śūnyatā. Although these three kinds share the name of the middle way, they contradict the name above; because they contradict it, they lack the meaning of perfect ubiquity, and therefore do not see it. From "As you have said" onward directly answers the second question. An older interpretation says: this answers the causal nature. Master Guān says: this fully clarifies the five natures; how could it be solely the causal? Following the text, there are two parts: first, answering the second question; second, discussing the meaning. The first part, answering the question, has two sections: first, citing the question; second, directly answering. First, he fully raises his question. What is the meaning of the question? "Meaning" is the reason for the name: for what reason is it called buddhadhātu? The Buddha's answer has three parts: first, generally raising the perfect meaning; second, specifically raising the ubiquitous meaning; third, concluding in praise. The idea of the initial general answer is that properly grasping the perfect purport is the reason. Buddha is the perfect person; nature is the perfect dharma. Person and dharma are combined in the designation, hence it is called buddhadhātu. Furthermore, all buddhas are perfect persons; bodhi is the perfect fruit, concurrently attaining the fruit of the fruit, which is nirvāṇa. Having spoken of the fruit and the fruit of the fruit, one knows that this fruit comes from a cause, the cause produces this fruit, and the fruit arises from the cause. The middle way is neither cause nor cause of cause, neither fruit nor fruit of fruit; that all are manifested is entirely due to buddhadhātu serving as the seed. Therefore, know that this middle way is itself buddhadhātu. Since buddhadhātu is the seed, the seed can produce the two causes and two fruits; these two causes and fruits are again seeds that can manifest the middle way. That is, they mutually serve as seeds for one another. Without this interpretation, one can do nothing with this text. Although the general path is like this, specifically speaking, it is buddhadhātu that serves as the seed. Question: Since buddhadhātu is the seed for the four natures, why is it solely the seed for bodhi? Answer: This is merely an abbreviated presentation, and it also concerns primary versus secondary. Just as the twelve links of dependent origination are not without secondary meanings, yet primarily generating contemplative wisdom produces bodhi, so the meaning of the seed is made manifest. For the remaining three natures, the meaning is secondary. It is like a cucumber: it primarily induces heat and is the condition for heat-sickness.