大乘義章 1.39

1.39

問曰：向言法佛之性本有法體，其相云何？如妄想心，雖未對緣現起煩惱，體是一切過恒沙等諸煩惱性。真心如是，雖未從緣現成諸德，體是一切三昧智慧神通解脫陀羅尼等一切德性。是諸德性同體緣集，不離不即、不異不脫。二相如是。或分為三，三有四門：一約緣分三，如《涅槃》說，一不善五陰、二善五陰、三佛果五陰。不善陰者，佛性集成外凡五陰，陰即是性，如凍是水。故經說言「生死二法，是如來藏。」言善陰者，佛性集成三乘聖人無漏五陰，陰即是性。言果陰者，佛性集成佛果五陰，陰即是性，如湯是水，鐶釧是金。二約緣就實以分三種：一者染性、二者淨性、三非染淨性。性在生死名為染性，性在涅槃名為淨性。此二約緣，就實論性，性外無緣可隨變動，以不變故古今一味，是故名為非染淨性。三體相及用以分三，如馬鳴說：一者體大，謂真如性；二者相大，謂真如中具過恒沙性功德法；三者用大，謂真心中備起法界染淨之用。此三如後八識章中具廣分別。四對果論三：一者法佛性、二報佛性、三應佛性。法報兩性，義如前釋。應佛性者，應佛有二：一者法應：以得現化法門力故，普門皆現。二者報應，以本大悲大願力故，隨物異示。法應家性，本有法體，如來藏中現像起法門，是其體也。報應家性，本無法體，唯有方便可生之義。或說為四，如《涅槃》說：一闡提人有、善根人無；二善根人有、闡提人無；三二人俱有；四二人俱無。是義云何？佛性有四：一不善陰、二善五陰、三佛果陰、四是理性。四中前三，隨用以分，後一就實。不善陰者，凡夫五陰，真妄所集，唯真不生、單妄不成，真妄和合方有陰生。攝陰從妄，唯妄心作，如夢中身昏夢心作，如波風作。攝陰從真，皆真心作，如夢中身皆報心作，如波水作，從真義邊說為佛性。與《勝鬘經》生死二法是如來藏，其義相似。善五陰者，地上之身。通而論之，地前亦有。此陰真心，緣治合成，攝陰從緣，緣治所造，如莊嚴具模樣所作。攝陰從真，真心所為，如莊嚴具真金所作，真作義邊說為佛性。佛果陰者，是佛果德，與前善陰大況相似，滿不滿異。言理性者，癈緣談實。實之處無緣，以無緣故真體一味，非因非果，與《涅槃》中非因果性其一也。四中初一闡提人有、善根人無；第二善陰，善根人有、闡提人無；第三果陰，二人俱無；第四理性，二人俱有。通而論之，三人俱有，佛亦有故。四種如是。經中或復說性為四：一是因性、二是果性、三是因果性、四非因果性。言因性者，所謂生死十二因緣，能與菩提作因緣，故名為佛性。是以經言「譬如胡苽，能與熱病作因緣，故名為熱病。因緣亦爾。」

Question: Earlier you said that the nature of the Dharmabuddha is originally possessed of a dharma-essence. What are its characteristics? Just as the mind of deluded conceptualisation, although it has not yet encountered conditions to visibly produce afflictions, has as its essence all the natures of afflictions outnumbering the sands of the Ganges, so it is with the true mind: although it has not yet, in dependence on conditions, visibly accomplished the various virtues, its essence is the nature of all virtues—all the samādhis, wisdoms, supernatural knowledges, liberations, dhāraṇīs, and so forth. These natures of virtues are gathered by conditions within the same essence: they are neither separate nor identical, neither distinct nor detached. Such are the two aspects. Alternatively, it is divided into three. The threefold division has four gates: First, division into three according to conditions, as the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* says: (1) the unwholesome five aggregates, (2) the wholesome five aggregates, and (3) the five aggregates of the Buddha-fruit. As for the unwholesome aggregates, Buddha-nature, gathering together through conditions, forms the five aggregates of ordinary worldlings; the aggregates are precisely the nature, just as ice is water. Therefore the sūtra states: 'The two phenomena of saṃsāra are the tathāgatagarbha.' As for the wholesome aggregates, Buddha-nature, gathering together through conditions, forms the untainted five aggregates of the noble persons of the three vehicles; the aggregates are precisely the nature. As for the fruit aggregates, Buddha-nature, gathering together through conditions, forms the five aggregates of the Buddha-fruit; the aggregates are precisely the nature, just as hot broth is water and bracelets and armlets are gold. Second, division into three types according to conditions and taking account of reality: (1) the defiled nature, (2) the pure nature, and (3) the nature that is neither defiled nor pure. When the nature is in saṃsāra, it is called the defiled nature; when the nature is in nirvāṇa, it is called the pure nature. These two are according to conditions. When discussing the nature in terms of reality, there are no conditions outside of the nature that can transform along with it; because it is unchanging, it has one flavour from antiquity to the present, and is therefore called the nature that is neither defiled nor pure. Third, division into three by essence, characteristic, and function, as Aśvaghoṣa says: (1) the greatness of essence, namely the nature of tathatā; (2) the greatness of characteristics, namely that tathatā contains the dharmas of nature-virtues outnumbering the sands of the Ganges; (3) the greatness of function, namely that within the true mind there completely arise the defiled and pure functions of the dharmadhātu. These three will be extensively differentiated later in the chapter on the eight consciousnesses. Fourth, discussing three in relation to the fruits: (1) the nature of the Dharmabuddha, (2) the nature of the Reward Buddha, and (3) the nature of the Response Buddha. The two natures of Dharma and Reward have been explained in their meaning as before. As for the nature of the Response Buddha, Response Buddhas are of two kinds: first, the Dharma-response, where through obtaining the power of the teaching gate of manifest transformation, it manifests everywhere in all gates; second, the Reward-response, where through the power of original great compassion and great vows, it displays differently according to living beings. The nature of the Dharma-response originally possesses a dharma-essence: within the tathāgatagarbha, the teaching gate that manifests images and arises is its essence. The nature of the Reward-response originally lacks a dharma-essence, having only the meaning of being capable of being produced through expedient means. Alternatively, it is stated as fourfold, as the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* says: (1) icchantikas have it, but those with roots of goodness lack it; (2) those with roots of goodness have it, but icchantikas lack it; (3) both have it; (4) both lack it. What does this mean? There are four [aspects of] Buddha-nature: (1) the unwholesome aggregates, (2) the wholesome five aggregates, (3) the aggregates of the Buddha-fruit, and (4) the nature of principle. Among these four, the first three are differentiated according to function, while the last one is in terms of reality. As for the unwholesome aggregates, the ordinary person's five aggregates are gathered from the true and the deluded: the true alone does not produce them, and the deluded by itself does not establish them; only when the true and the deluded unite are the aggregates produced. subsuming the aggregates under the deluded, they are created solely by the deluded mind, just as the body in a dream is created by the dazed dreaming mind, or as waves are created by the wind. Subsuming the aggregates under the true, they are all created by the true mind, just as the body in a dream is entirely created by the retribution-mind, or as waves are created by water; speaking from the aspect of the true, it is called Buddha-nature. This meaning is similar to that in the *Śrīmālādevī Sūtra* where the two dharmas of saṃsāra are the tathāgatagarbha. As for the wholesome five aggregates, they are the bodies [of bodhisattvas] on the stages; speaking comprehensively, they also exist before the stages. These aggregates are formed by the union of the true mind and conditioning antidotes. Subsuming the aggregates under conditions, they are made by conditioning antidotes, just as ornaments are made from a mould. Subsuming the aggregates under the true, they are made by the true mind, just as ornaments are made from real gold; speaking from the aspect of what the true makes, it is called Buddha-nature. As for the aggregates of the Buddha-fruit, they are the virtues of the Buddha-fruit; they are broadly similar to the wholesome aggregates above, differing in being complete versus not complete. As for the nature of principle, it is discussed in terms of reality setting aside conditions. Where reality is, there are no conditions; because there are no conditions, the true essence has one flavour, being neither cause nor fruit, which is identical to the nature that is neither cause nor fruit in the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]*. Among these four: the first, icchantikas have, and those with roots of goodness lack; the second, the wholesome aggregates, those with roots of goodness have, and icchantikas lack; the third, the fruit aggregates, both lack; the fourth, the nature of principle, both have. Speaking comprehensively, all three persons have it, because the Buddha also has it. Such are the four kinds. The sūtra also speaks of the nature as fourfold: (1) the causal nature, (2) the fruitional nature, (3) the nature that is both cause and fruit, and (4) the nature that is neither cause nor fruit. As for the causal nature, it refers to the twelve links of dependent origination in saṃsāra: because they can act as cause and condition for bodhi, they are called Buddha-nature. Hence the sūtra states: 'Just as a cucumber can act as the cause and condition for a fever, and is therefore called a fever, so too are the causes and conditions [of dependent origination].'