大乘玄論 3.6

3.6

尋經第三。既識佛性，應須遍讀眾經。由來舊辨《阿含經》中亦明佛性，但有小妨耳，故云一切眾生悉有聲聞性、悉有辟支佛性、悉有佛性。《阿含》既爾，其餘諸經亦有說佛性語，但不甚分明，如是眾經明佛性，亦復何嫌？故新《金光明經》云「若了義說，是身即是大乘，即如來藏，即如來性」也。《華嚴經》云「菩薩隨喜心，不斷如來性。」又言「欲不斷佛種性者，當發菩提心。」又《華嚴．性起品》即是明佛性義。從寶王如來性而起，離世間因，得入法界果。結前因果，生後因果，故《華嚴》明佛性有因有果，而未作正因緣因之名，亦未作果與果果之秤。至如具足明佛性義，即如《涅槃》中所辨，故具明有因有因因有果有果果。今時一師每以《涅槃經》為證。然此一教處處皆明佛性，故〈哀歎品〉中瑠璃珠喻，亦是具足明佛性義，如是〈如來性品〉皆明佛性義，乃至〈師子吼〉、〈迦葉〉廣明佛性事，義乃顯然。故一師所引文句，以〈師子吼〉文為正也。故師子吼菩薩問言：「云何為佛性？以何義故名為佛性？」如是凡有五問佛性，如來次第答。答第一問言：善男子！汝問云何為佛性者，善男子？佛性者名第一義空，第一義空名為智慧，斯則一往第一義空以為佛性。又言第一義空名為智慧，豈不異由來義耶？今只說境為智、說智為境。復云所言空者，不見空與不空。對此為言，亦應云所言智者，不見智與不智。即不見空除空，不見不空除不空。除智又除不智，遠離二邊名聖中道。又言：如是二見不名中道，無常無斷乃名中道。此豈非以中道為佛性耶？是以除不空則離常邊，又除於空即離斷邊；不見智與不智，義亦如是，故以中道為佛性。是以文云「佛性者，即是三菩提中道種子也。」是故今明第一義空名為佛性。不見空與不空、不見智與不智，無常無斷名為中道，只以此為中道佛性也。若以此足前十一師，則成第十二解。然若識正道，知道無有一，豈復有二釋於其間哉？而言第一義空為佛性者，非是由來所辨第一義空。彼明第一義空，但境而非智，斯是偏道。今言智慧，亦非由來所明之智慧。彼明智慧，但智而非境，斯亦是偏道義，非謂中道也。但中道義難識，具如二諦中辨，非中非邊不住中邊，中邊平等假名為中。若了如是中道則識佛性，若了今之佛性亦識彼之中道，若了中道即了第一義空，若了第一義空即了智慧，了智慧即了金光明諸佛行處，若了金光明諸佛行處則了此經云「光明者名為智慧。」若了智慧即了佛性，若了佛性即了涅槃也。

Third, investigating the sūtras. Having recognized buddha-nature, one should read widely across the various sūtras. Traditionally, past discriminators held that the Āgamas also explain buddha-nature, but with slight reservations: they say that all sentient beings possess the nature of a śrāvaka, possess the nature of a pratyekabuddha, and possess the nature of a buddha. Since this is so in the Āgamas, other sūtras also contain statements on buddha-nature, though not very clearly. What objection could there be to these various sūtras explaining buddha-nature in this way? Thus the new Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra states: "In an explicit exposition, this body is the Mahāyāna, is the tathāgatagarbha, is the nature of the Tathāgata." The Avataṃsakasūtra states: "A bodhisattva's rejoicing mind does not sever the Tathāgata-nature." It also says: "One who wishes not to sever the lineage of the buddhas should produce the mind of awakening (bodhicitta)." Furthermore, the chapter on "Emergence of the Nature" in the Avataṃsaka precisely clarifies the meaning of buddha-nature. Emerging from the nature of the Jewel-King Tathāgata, departing from worldly causes, one attains entry into the fruit of the dharmadhātu. Tying together previous cause and fruit, it engenders subsequent cause and fruit; thus the Avataṃsaka clarifies that buddha-nature has cause and fruit, though it has not yet coined the names "primary cause" (正因) and "contributory cause" (緣因), nor the terms "fruit" (果) and "fruit-of-fruit" (果果). As for fully explaining the meaning of buddha-nature, it is as articulated in the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra, which therefore fully explains: there is cause, cause-of-cause, fruit, and fruit-of-fruit. At present, a certain master constantly cites the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra as proof. Indeed, this single teaching explains buddha-nature everywhere: the parable of the lapis lazuli jewel in the "Lamentation" chapter also completely clarifies the meaning of buddha-nature; so too the chapter on "The Nature of the Tathāgata" entirely clarifies the meaning of buddha-nature; and going on to the chapters on "Lion's Roar" and "Kāśyapa", the matters of buddha-nature are extensively elucidated, its meaning becoming manifest. Therefore, among the passages cited by this master, the text of the "Lion's Roar" chapter is taken as primary. Bodhisattva Lion's Roar asks: "What is buddha-nature? For what reason is it called buddha-nature?" There are five such questions on buddha-nature, which the Tathāgata answers in turn. Answering the first question, he says: "Good son! You ask what is buddha-nature, good son? Buddha-nature is called ultimate emptiness; ultimate emptiness is called wisdom." This, on an initial reading, takes ultimate emptiness as buddha-nature. Yet it also says that ultimate emptiness is called wisdom—how is this not different from the traditional meaning? Now it simply explains the cognitive object as gnosis, and explains gnosis as the cognitive object. It further states: "What is called empty means not seeing either empty or non-empty." In response to this, one should also say: "What is called wisdom means not seeing either wisdom or non-wisdom." That is: not seeing emptiness removes emptiness; not seeing non-emptiness removes non-emptiness. Removing wisdom and also removing non-wisdom, being far removed from both extremes is called the noble Middle Way. It also says: "Such two views are not called the Middle Way; neither impermanent nor eternal is called the Middle Way." How is this not taking the Middle Way as buddha-nature? Therefore, removing non-emptiness departs from the extreme of permanence, and removing emptiness departs from the extreme of annihilation; not seeing wisdom and non-wisdom is also like this. Hence, the Middle Way is taken as buddha-nature. Thus the text states: "Buddha-nature is the seed of the Middle Way of saṃbodhi." Therefore, it is now explained that ultimate emptiness is called buddha-nature. Not seeing empty or non-empty, not seeing wisdom or non-wisdom, neither impermanence nor annihilation is called the Middle Way; it is simply this that is the Middle Way buddha-nature. If this were added to the previous eleven masters, it would make a twelfth interpretation. However, if one realizes the true path, knowing that the path does not have even one [interpretation], how could there be two interpretations within it? When it is said that ultimate emptiness is buddha-nature, it is not the ultimate emptiness distinguished traditionally. Their explanation of ultimate emptiness is merely cognitive object and not gnosis; this is a one-sided path. When wisdom is spoken of now, it is also not the wisdom explained traditionally. Their explanation of wisdom is merely gnosis and not cognitive object; this is also a one-sided doctrine, not what is called the Middle Way. Yet the meaning of the Middle Way is difficult to recognize, as fully distinguished in [the discussion of] the two truths: neither middle nor extreme, not abiding in middle or extreme, the equality of middle and extreme is conventionally designated as "middle". If one understands such a Middle Way, one recognizes buddha-nature; if one understands present buddha-nature, one also recognizes that Middle Way; if one understands the Middle Way, one understands ultimate emptiness; if one understands ultimate emptiness, one understands wisdom; understanding wisdom, one understands the sphere of practice of all buddhas of the Golden Radiance; understanding the sphere of practice of all buddhas of the Golden Radiance, one understands that this sūtra says: "Radiance is called wisdom." If one understands wisdom, one understands buddha-nature; if one understands buddha-nature, one understands nirvāṇa.