翻譯名義集 6.54

6.54

【鼻豉迦】此云種。肇曰：「此五眾生之所由生，故名種。」《婆沙》「問曰：『何名大種？』答：『大而是種，故名大種。如言大地及大王等，能減能增，能損能益，是為種義。體相形量，遍諸方域，能成大事，是為大義。』」《大乘入楞伽》云：「謂虛妄分別。津潤大種，成內外水界；炎盛大種，成內外火界；飄動大種，成內外風大，色分段大種，成內外地界。」《圓覺》云：「我今此身，四大和合。所謂髮毛、爪齒、皮肉、筋骨、髓腦、垢色，皆歸於地。唾涕、膿血、津液、涎沫、淡淚、精氣、大小便利，皆歸於水。煖氣歸火，動轉歸風。」《仁王》云：「堅持名地，津潤名水，煖性名火，輕動名風。」淨覺云：「通名大者，且從事立。」《智論》云：「佛說四大，無處不有，故名為大。」長水直以藏性釋大，一何誤哉！孤山云：「四輪持世，其實土輪、金輪、水輪、風輪也。此不言土者，土與金同是堅性，俱屬地大。故此但言四大，則已攝四輪矣。」淨覺云：「然此四大，風金則由妄心而起，火水復由風金而起。」下文結云：「遞相為種，義見此矣。」《宗鏡》云：「皆從四大和合成，盡是一心虛妄變。」維摩詰問文殊師利：「何等為如來種？」文殊師利言：「有身為種，無明有愛為種，貪恚癡為種，四顛倒為種，五蓋為種，六入為種，七識處為種，八邪法為種，九惱為處種，十不善道為種。以要言之，六十二見及一切煩惱皆是佛種。」天台釋云：即是以非種為種，何者？離三道之外，更無如來種。一正因，即苦道；二了因，即煩惱道；三緣因，即業道。又上文云：三道是三德種，種既有三，如來亦三：一法佛如來，二報佛如來，三應佛如來。種以能生為義。若不能生，不名為種。以此三種，能生三佛，從微至著，終于大果，亦種類義。若此三種，非佛種類，此外更無同類之法。亦種性義，性名無改。此之三法，從初至後，不斷不滅，必致三佛三德之果，故名不改。今約眾生明種，不出此三。由煩惱潤業受身有苦，三無前後，亦非一時，不縱不橫。故《金𰼺》云：「若有眾生未稟教者，來至汝所，先當語云：『汝無始來，唯有煩惱業苦而已。』即此全是理性三因（此乃約性開三）。由未發心，未曾加行，故性緣了，同名正因（此乃對修方合）。」又妙樂云：「三道是三德種者，即性種也。有生性故，故名為種。生時此種純變為修。」此等諸文，皆以迷時為性，悟後名修。然此性種，天台名相對種。荊溪以敵對而釋，有總有別。若總以三道之事，俱對三德之理，此乃事理總論敵對。若別敵對。如記主云：此三從別，一一各異。苦道在迷屬因，法身所證是果，此乃因果相對；煩惱是昏迷之法，般若是明悟之法，此乃迷悟敵對；行違理是繫縛之法，行順理是解脫之法，此以縛脫敵對。荊溪又轉名相翻種。在因則翻法身為苦道，至果乃翻苦道為法身；迷日翻般若為煩惱，悟時翻煩惱為般若；縛則翻解脫為結業，脫則翻結業為解脫。始終理一，故名性種。若《法華疏》釋：「諸佛兩足尊，知法常無性。佛種從緣起，是故說一乘。」天台解曰：中道無性，即是佛種。妙樂釋云：「立本無性，為本性德，故知今種，即性家之種。」先德疑云：「《淨名》以三道為性種，《法華》以中道為性種。觀此二處，文義頗異。遂立四義，消通二文：一種本，二種體，三種緣，四種果。遂定《淨名》三道是種之當體，《法華》三德是所依體，乃種之本也。」今謂種以能生為義，種即是本，豈有二殊？學者須究二處經文，各順一義。《維摩》指迷令悟，故以在迷三道為佛種，正助二修為種緣（此乃迷悟分修性）。《法華》明諸佛設教，故當平等理性為佛種，逆順兩事為種緣（此乃事理分修性）。《淨名》三道，乃約即為種（三道是能，三德是所），猶氷是水種。《法華》三德，指性自是種（乃性當家名種），如水為氷種。作此區別，煥然明矣。又《法華疏》曰：「若就類論種，一切低頭舉手，悉是解脫種；一切世智，三乘解心，即般若種。夫有心者，皆當作佛，即法身種。」荊溪云：「類謂類例，即修德也。斯乃順修三因，能成三德之果，故名類種。此由《法華》遍開六道：低頭舉手，彈指散華，本是人天之福，今開即是緣因佛種；一切世智，三乘解心，本是五乘之智，今開即是了因佛種；夫有心者，不知正因，今開眾生皆當作佛，即法身種。」妙樂問曰：「若爾，般若解脫有於種類，及以對論法身類種，與對論種，為同為異？」答：「理一義異。言理一者，只緣理一，是故修性相對離合。言義異者，對生死邊，名為相對。理體本淨，名為類種。又聞能觀智，名為了種；聞所緣理，名為正種，即是理淨與事淨為類，此約開顯明類種。」昔經圓既隔偏，但約當教三因，自論類種，若前三教，如妙樂云：「別教唯有種類之種，而無相對，於中法身，種類仍別。始終常淨，唯不從覆，故得種名。」此與《釋籤》「雖法身本有，不同別教為惑所覆」，二文相戾。妙宗釋曰：「別教法身為惑所覆者，良由不知本覺之性，具染惡德，是故染惡，非二德也（云云）。但有法身本覺，隨於染緣，作上一切迷中之法，以是名曰：為惑所覆。既覆但中佛性之理，如淳善人，一切惡事，非本所能，為惡人逼，令作眾惡。故說善人為惡所覆。此顯定有能覆之惑。所覆真如，其理不變，始終常淨。故說唯不從覆，故得種名。」問：「《妙玄》云：『十回向始正修中。此中但理，不具諸法。』《釋籤》則曰：『不同別人，理體具足，而不相收。』故絳幃難云：『別人既有理性三因，何緣別修緣了？』淨覺雖約理性三因，皆但中德？」答：「未契四明之意，故於妙宗釋此義曰，亦為不知本覺之性，具染惡德，不能全性，起染惡修，乃成理體，橫具三法。言不相收者，以其三法，定俱在性，皆是所發。猶如三分，各稱帝王，何能相攝？是故不知性中三法，二是修者，二乃成橫。故曰三皆在性，而不互融也。藏、通兩教，全無此義。但約當教，其名非無，因時三學為五分種，達分即為二解脫種（第五記云：解脫達分者，涅槃名解脫所修善根。不住生死，名為達分），念處即般若種。當曉有身為種。若非聞法，孰能自知？不加功行，捨身受身，奚得成就無上菩提？遂示性、類二法，以為標月之指歟！」

[Bījaka] Here translated as "seed" [dhātu/bīja]. Zhao says: "That from which these five skandhas are born is called 'seed'." The *Vibhāṣā* says: "Question: 'What is meant by great element [mahābhūta]?' Answer: 'Because they are great and are seeds, they are called great elements. Just as one speaks of the great earth and great kings, they are able to decrease and increase, harm and benefit—this is the meaning of "seed". In substance, characteristic, shape, and measure, they pervade all directions and realms, and are able to accomplish great things—this is the meaning of "great".'" The *Mahāyāna Laṅkāvatāra* says: "It refers to false discrimination. The moistening great element forms the internal and external water elements; the blazing great element forms the internal and external fire elements; the drifting great element forms the internal and external wind elements; and the segmented-matter great element forms the internal and external earth elements." The *Sūtra of Complete Enlightenment* says: "This body of mine is a harmony of the four great elements. Namely, hair, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, marrow, brain, and impure matter all return to earth. Spittle, snot, pus, blood, fluids, saliva, phlegm, tears, semen, vital energy, and feces and urine all return to water. Warmth returns to fire, and movement returns to wind." The *Benevolent Kings Sūtra* says: "Firm solidity is called earth, moistening is called water, warm nature is called fire, and light movement is called wind." Jingjue says: "The common name 'great' is established temporarily based on phenomena." The *Great Commentary* says: "The Buddha spoke of the four great elements as having no place where they do not exist; hence they are called 'great'." Changshui directly interprets 'great' through the nature of the tathāgatagarbha; how mistaken that is! Gushan says: "Four discs uphold the world: in fact, they are the soil disc, the gold disc, the water disc, and the wind disc. The reason soil is not mentioned here is that soil and gold are both of a firm nature, and both belong to the earth element. Therefore, here it merely speaks of the four great elements, which already subsumes the four discs." Jingjue says: "However, among these four great elements, wind and gold arise from the deluded mind, and fire and water further arise from wind and gold." The text below concludes: "They mutually serve as seeds to one another; the meaning is seen here." The *Zongjing lu* says: "All are harmoniously formed from the four great elements, all being delusive transformations of the one mind." Vimalakīrti asked Mañjuśrī: "What constitutes the seed of the Tathāgata?" Mañjuśrī said: "Having a body is the seed; ignorance and craving for existence are the seed; greed, anger, and delusion are the seed; the four inversions are the seed; the five hindrances are the seed; the six sense entrances are the seed; the seven stations of consciousness are the seed; the eight wrong factors are the seed; the nine causes of vexation are the seed; the ten unwholesome courses of action are the seed. In brief, the sixty-two views and all defilements are all seeds of buddhahood." Tiantai explains: This means taking what is not a seed as the seed. Why? Apart from the three paths, there is no other seed of the Tathāgata. First, the direct cause, which is the path of suffering; second, the revealing cause, which is the path of defilements; third, the conditioning cause, which is the path of karma. Furthermore, the text above says: The three paths are the seeds of the three virtues. Since the seeds are three, the Tathāgatas are also three: first, the Dharma-Buddha Tathāgata; second, the Retribution-Buddha Tathāgata; third, the Response-Buddha Tathāgata. A seed takes the capacity to generate as its meaning. If it cannot generate, it is not called a seed. Since these three seeds can generate the three Buddhas, proceeding from the subtle to the manifest, and ending in the great fruition, it also has the meaning of a category/kind [jāti]. If these three seeds were not of the Buddha's category, outside of them there would be no dharma of the same kind. It also has the meaning of lineage/nature [gotra]; 'nature' means changelessness. These three dharmas, from beginning to end, are uninterrupted and indestructible, and inevitably result in the fruit of the three Buddhas and the three virtues; hence they are called changeless. Now, explaining the seeds in terms of sentient beings does not go beyond these three. Due to defilements moistening karma, one receives a body and suffers; the three have no before or after, nor are they simultaneous, neither vertical nor horizontal. Therefore the *Golden Hammer* says: "If there are sentient beings who have not received the teaching and come to you, you should first tell them: 'From beginningless time, you have had only defilements, karma, and suffering.' Precisely these are entirely the three causes of inherent principle (this is opening the three according to nature). Because they have not yet aroused the mind [of bodhi] nor engaged in expedients, the inherent conditioning and revealing causes are together named the direct cause (this is unified only in contrast to cultivation)." Again, *Miaole* says: "That the three paths are the seeds of the three virtues refers to the seeds of nature. Because they possess the generative nature, they are called seeds. When generated, this seed entirely transforms into cultivation." All such texts take the time of delusion as nature, and what follows awakening as cultivation. However, this nature-seed is called by Tiantai the "correlative seed". Jingxi explains it through direct confrontation, which has both general and particular aspects. If one generally takes the phenomena of the three paths to correspond to the principle of the three virtues, this is a general discussion of confrontation between phenomena and principle. If it is particular confrontation, as the commentator says: these three follow particularities, each being different. The path of suffering, while in delusion, belongs to the cause, and what is realized by the dharmakāya is the fruit—this is the correlation between cause and fruit; defilements are dharmas of dark confusion, while prajñā is a dharma of bright awakening—this is the confrontation between delusion and awakening; practice that contradicts principle is a dharma of bondage, while practice in accord with principle is a dharma of liberation—this is the confrontation between bondage and liberation. Jingxi further changes the name to "subversive seed". In the cause, the dharmakāya is overturned into the path of suffering; reaching the fruit, the path of suffering is overturned into the dharmakāya. In the day of delusion, prajñā is overturned into defilement; at the time of awakening, defilement is overturned into prajñā. When bound, liberation is overturned into fettering karma; when liberated, fettering karma is overturned into liberation. Beginning and end are one in principle; hence it is called the nature-seed. As the *Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra* explains: "The Buddhas, the two-legged honored ones, know that dharmas are always without nature. The Buddha-seeds arise from conditions; therefore they preach the One Vehicle." Tiantai explains: "The middle way without nature is itself the Buddha-seed." *Miaole* explains: "Establishing the fundamentally natureless as the inherent virtue of original nature, one therefore knows that this seed is the seed of the domain of nature." A former worthy raised a doubt: "*Jingming* takes the three paths as the nature-seed, while the *Lotus Sūtra* takes the middle way as the nature-seed. Looking at these two passages, their text and meaning differ considerably. He therefore established four meanings to reconcile the two passages: first, the root of the seed; second, the substance of the seed; third, the conditions of the seed; fourth, the fruit of the seed. He then determined that the three paths in *Jingming* are the actual substance of the seed, and the three virtues in the *Lotus Sūtra* are the supporting substance, namely the root of the seed." Now I say that a seed takes the capacity to generate as its meaning; the seed is precisely the root—how could there be two different things? Scholars must investigate the scriptures in both places, each following one perspective. *Vimalakīrti* points to delusion to cause awakening; hence it takes the three paths in delusion as the Buddha-seed, and the direct and auxiliary cultivations as the conditions of the seed (this distinguishes cultivation and nature through delusion and awakening). The *Lotus Sūtra* clarifies the Buddhas' establishment of teachings; hence it takes the equal principle-nature as the Buddha-seed, and both adverse and compliant phenomena as the conditions of the seed (this distinguishes cultivation and nature through phenomena and principle). The three paths of *Jingming* take identity as the seed (the three paths are the active, the three virtues are the passive), just as ice is the seed of water. The three virtues of the *Lotus Sūtra* point to the nature itself as the seed (the nature itself in its own right is called the seed), just as water is the seed of ice. Making this distinction, it becomes brilliantly clear. Furthermore, the *Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra* says: "If discussing seeds in terms of category, every bowing of the head and raising of the hand is a seed of liberation; all worldly knowledge and understanding minds of the three vehicles are seeds of prajñā. Whoever has a mind shall become a Buddha—this is the seed of the dharmakāya." Jingxi says: "Category means analogous instance, which is cultivated virtue. These are compliant cultivations of the three causes, capable of accomplishing the fruit of the three virtues; hence they are called category-seeds. This is because the *Lotus Sūtra* universally opens the six destinies: bowing the head, raising the hand, snapping fingers, and scattering flowers were originally the blessings of humans and devas, but now opened, they are the Buddha-seeds of the conditioning cause; all worldly knowledge and understanding minds of the three vehicles were originally the wisdom of the five vehicles, but now opened, they are the Buddha-seeds of the revealing cause; whoever has a mind does not know the direct cause, but now opening it so that all sentient beings shall become Buddhas, this is the seed of the dharmakāya." *Miaole* asks: "If so, do prajñā and liberation have category-seeds? And comparing the dharmakāya category-seed with the correlative seed, are they identical or different?" Answer: "The principle is one, but the meanings differ. Regarding their principle being one: only because the principle is one do cultivation and nature correlate, separate, and unite. Regarding their meanings being different: facing the side of birth-and-death is called correlative; the principle-substance being fundamentally pure is called the category-seed. Furthermore, hearing the capable-of-contemplating wisdom is called the revealing seed; hearing the contemplated principle is called the direct seed—namely, purity of principle and purity of phenomena belong to the same category. This clarifies the category-seed in terms of opening and revealing." In the past scriptures, the Perfect was separated from the Partial, so one only discussed category-seeds within the three causes of that specific teaching. As for the previous three teachings, as *Miaole* says: "The Separate Teaching only has category-seeds and lacks the correlative; among them, the category of the dharmakāya is still distinct. From beginning to end it is always pure, and solely because it does not follow obscuration does it receive the name of seed." This conflicts with the statement in *Shuqian*: "Although the dharmakāya is fundamentally possessed, it is not like the Separate Teaching where it is obscured by delusion." *Miaozong* explains: "That the dharmakāya in the Separate Teaching is obscured by delusion is truly because it does not know that the nature of original enlightenment possesses the virtues of defilement and evil; therefore, defilement and evil are not the other two virtues (and so forth). There is only the dharmakāya original enlightenment which, following defiled conditions, produces all the above phenomena within delusion; for this reason it is called 'obscured by delusion'. Since it obscures the principle of the Buddha-nature that is the mere middle—just as a purely good person, for whom all evil deeds are not originally within his capacity, is coerced by evil people to commit various evils, so that it is said the good person is obscured by evil. This shows there definitely exists the delusion that can obscure. The true suchness that is obscured does not change in principle and is always pure from beginning to end. Therefore it is said that solely because it does not follow obscuration does it receive the name of seed." Question: "The *Miaoxuan* says: 'In the ten dedications of merit, one first truly cultivates the middle. This middle is mere principle and does not possess all dharmas.' *Shuqian* then says: 'It is not like the person of the Separate Teaching, whose principle-substance is complete yet does not subsume one another.' Therefore Jiangwei challenged: 'Since the person of the Separate Teaching already has the three causes of inherent principle, why should he separately cultivate the conditioning and revealing causes?' Although Jingjue takes the three causes of inherent principle as all virtues of the mere middle?" Answer: "He did not accord with Siming's intention, so in the *Miaozong* this meaning is explained: It is also because of not knowing that the nature of original enlightenment possesses the virtues of defilement and evil, and being unable, completely as nature, to give rise to defiled and evil cultivation, that the principle-substance horizontally possesses the three dharmas. That they do not subsume one another means that because these three dharmas are fixedly both in nature, they are all what is manifested. Just like three shares, each calling itself emperor—how could they subsume one another? Therefore, not knowing that of the three dharmas in nature, two are cultivation, the two become horizontal. Thus it is said that all three are in nature yet do not mutually interfuse. The Piṭaka and Shared teachings completely lack this meaning. Yet based on their respective teachings, the names are not absent: the three trainings during the causal stage are the seeds of the five parts [of the dharmakāya]; the parts of attainment are the seeds of the two liberations (*Record 5* says: attainment of liberation refers to the wholesome roots cultivated toward nirvāṇa called liberation; not abiding in birth-and-death is called attainment); the stations of mindfulness are the seeds of prajñā. One should realize that having a body is the seed. If not for hearing the Dharma, who could know this of themselves? Without applying effort, casting off bodies and receiving bodies, how could one accomplish unsurpassed bodhi? Thus the two dharmas of nature and category are pointed out to serve as fingers pointing to the moon!"