大乘義章 1.57

1.57

因義如是，若就果德總以為一，是則佛性說為生因，同一體性轉變相起，義說為生。不同有為因果，互與異體相辨，因謝果起說為生也。諸度等行方便顯了，說為了因。是以經說「佛性如乳，方便之行喻以醪𤏙。」乳能生酪，名為生因。醪𤏙等緣顯了於酪，故名了因。若就果德分其性淨方便差別，是則生了二相不定。若望性淨菩提涅槃，諸度等行是其了因。故彼《金剛般若論》言「檀等波羅蜜，於實為了因。」斯文顯矣。佛性望彼性淨之果，但是正因，非生非了。言非生者，佛之體，隱時名因，就因以望，因外更無果體可生；顯時名果，據果以望，果外更無因體能生，故非生因。是以經言「佛性之性，不生涅槃。涅槃之法，不從因生。」更復說言「生因所起，名為無常。了因所起，名之為常。涅槃但因所得，不從因生，故名為常。」言非了因者，佛性據體，非是方便顯了之行，故望涅槃不名了因。若言佛性隨緣轉變，籍前起後滿足涅槃，亦得名生，但非異體。無合掌有，名之為生。又復佛性，在諸地中從緣顯了，滿足涅槃，亦得名了；但非異相顯了涅槃，故言非了。若望方便涅槃菩提教道之行，亦生亦了。言生因者，籍修諸度起彼報果，故名為生。是以經言「復有生因，謂六波羅蜜阿耨菩提。」言了因者，前諸地中所成方便教道行德，與體相應。德體雖成，望後猶為闇障所覆，不得顯了。成大菩提中有所修方便諸行，遣除闇障，了前諸德，成大菩提，故名了因。是以經言「復有了因，謂八正道阿耨菩提佛性。」望彼方便之果，亦生亦了。言生因者，即性起彼方便果德，如從真金起莊嚴具，故名生因。是以經言「復有生因，謂首楞嚴定阿耨菩提。」首楞嚴定，即是佛性。故經說言「佛性名為首楞嚴」也。言了因者，佛性為彼方便行顯，體則明了。明了之性，資成果德，故名了因。是以經言「復有了因，所謂佛性阿耨菩提。」辨因差別，略之麁爾。

The meaning of cause is like this. If we treat the virtues of the fruit collectively as one, then Buddha-nature is spoken of as a generative cause: arising through transformation from one same nature, it is conceptually spoken of as generating. This is unlike conditioned cause and fruit, which are distinguished from each other as different entities, where the cause perishing and the fruit arising is spoken of as generation. The practices of the various pāramitās and so forth, which functionally manifest it, are spoken of as revealing causes. Therefore the sūtra says: 'Buddha-nature is like milk, while the practices of skillful means are likened to yeast.' Milk can produce curds, hence it is called a generative cause; yeast and other conditions reveal the curds, hence they are called revealing causes. If, with respect to the virtues of the fruit, one distinguishes between its intrinsically pure and skillful-means aspects, then the two characteristics of generating and revealing are indeterminate. When viewed in relation to intrinsically pure bodhi and nirvāṇa, the practices of the various pāramitās and so forth are their revealing cause. Therefore that Vajracchedikā-śāstra says: 'The dāna and other pāramitās are revealing causes with respect to the real.' This text is explicit. When viewed in relation to that fruit of intrinsic purity, Buddha-nature is merely the direct cause, neither generative nor revealing. Saying that it is not generative means: the essence of the Buddha, when concealed, is called the cause. Viewed from the standpoint of the cause, outside the cause there is no other essence of the fruit to be generated; when revealed, it is called the fruit. Viewed from the standpoint of the fruit, outside the fruit there is no other essence of the cause capable of generating. Hence it is not a generative cause. Therefore the sūtra says: 'The nature of Buddha-nature does not generate nirvāṇa. The dharma of nirvāṇa does not arise from a cause.' Furthermore it says: 'That which is produced by a generative cause is called impermanent. That which is produced by a revealing cause is called permanent. Nirvāṇa is merely attained through a cause, not born from a cause, and therefore is called permanent.' Saying that it is not a revealing cause means: Buddha-nature, in terms of its essence, is not a practice of skillful manifestation, and therefore, in relation to nirvāṇa, it is not called a revealing cause. If one says that Buddha-nature transforms in accordance with conditions, relying on what precedes to give rise to what follows to consummate nirvāṇa, it may also be called 'generative,' but it is not a different entity; the presence of joined palms is called 'generation.' Moreover, as Buddha-nature is manifested through conditions across the stages to consummate nirvāṇa, it may also be called 'revealing'; but because it is not a distinct characteristic that reveals nirvāṇa, it is said to be 'not revealing.' When viewed in relation to the pedagogical practices of skillful bodhi and nirvāṇa, it is both generative and revealing. Saying that it is a generative cause means: relying on the cultivation of the various pāramitās gives rise to that reward-fruit, hence it is called generative. Therefore the sūtra says: 'There is also a generative cause, namely the six pāramitās [for] anuttara-bodhi.' Saying that it is a revealing cause means: the virtues of practice of the pedagogical path of skillful means perfected in the preceding stages correspond with the essence. Although the essence of virtues is perfected, when viewed from what follows it is still covered by dark obscurations and cannot be manifested. The various skillful practices cultivated during the realization of great bodhi dispel the dark obscurations and reveal the preceding virtues, consummating great bodhi; hence it is called a revealing cause. Therefore the sūtra says: 'There is also a revealing cause, namely the eightfold noble path [for] the Buddha-nature of anuttara-bodhi.' Viewed in relation to that fruit of skillful means, it is also both generative and revealing. Saying that it is a generative cause means: the nature itself gives rise to those virtues of the fruit of skillful means, just as an ornament is made from pure gold; hence it is called a generative cause. Therefore the sūtra says: 'There is also a generative cause, namely Śūraṅgama-samādhi [for] anuttara-bodhi.' Śūraṅgama-samādhi is precisely Buddha-nature. Thus the sūtra says: 'Buddha-nature is called Śūraṅgama.' Saying that it is a revealing cause means: Buddha-nature is manifested through those skillful practices, and its essence is then made clear. The nature made clear assists in perfecting the virtues of the fruit; hence it is called a revealing cause. Therefore the sūtra says: 'There is also a revealing cause, namely Buddha-nature [for] anuttara-bodhi.' The differentiation of causes is roughly explained thus.