Chinese
中三因种遍修遍果遍。又云一尘一心即一切生佛之心性。情犹未决。余曰。良由自昔不善遍揽因果自他依正。观于己心心佛众生。亦由不阅诸教大旨。不晓佛说果德之意。不达佛现互融之由。余欲开导子之情怀。更以四十六问而问于子。子若能晓余之一问。则众滞自消。法界融通。释然大观洞见法界生佛依正。一念具足一尘不亏。 问佛性之名从因从果。从因非佛。果不名性。问佛性之名常无常耶。无常非性。常不应变。问佛性之名共耶别耶。别不名性。共不可分。问佛性之名大小教耶。小无性名。大无无情。问佛性之名有权实耶。对体辩异其相何耶。 问无情之名大小教耶。大教大部有权实耶。问无情无者无情为色为非色耶。为二俱耶。问无情色等佛见尔耶。为生见耶。为共见耶。问无情败坏故无性者。阴亦败坏性亦然耶。问无情是色。法界处色为亦无耶。为复有耶。 问唯心之言子曾闻耶。唯只是心。异不名唯。问唯心之言凡圣心耶。若圣若凡二俱有过。问唯心名心造无心耶。唯造心耶。二俱有过。问唯心唯心亦唯色耶。若不唯色。色非心耶。问唯心所造唯依与正。依正能所同耶异耶。 问众生量异性随异耶。不尔非内尔不名性。问众生惑心。性遍不遍神我四句。为同异耶。问众生有性 现代汉语译本： 中三因（三种成佛的根本原因：正因、了因、缘因）的种子普遍存在，修行能普遍结果，果报也普遍存在。又说，一微尘包含一心，即一切众生和佛的心性。但我对此仍然疑惑不解。我回答说：‘这是因为你过去不善于全面了解因果、自他、依报和正报，以及观察自己的心、佛和众生。也是因为你没有阅读各种佛教经典的大旨，不明白佛所说的果德的含义，不了解佛显现相互融合的原因。’我想要开导你的心怀，再用四十六个问题来问你。你如果能明白我的一个问题，那么所有的疑惑自然消除，法界融通无碍，释然开朗，洞见法界中众生、佛、依报和正报，一念之间具足一切，一微尘也不缺少。 问：佛性的名称是从因上说还是从果上说？从因上说就不是佛，从果上说就不能称为性。问：佛性的名称是常还是无常？无常就不是性，常就不应该变化。问：佛性的名称是共同的还是个别的？个别就不能称为性，共同就不可分割。问：佛性的名称是小乘教义还是大乘教义？小乘教义没有性名，大乘教义没有无情。问：佛性的名称是有权巧方便还是真实究竟？如果对体性进行辨别，它们的相状有什么不同？ 问：无情的名称是小乘教义还是大乘教义？大乘教义的各个部分是有权巧方便还是真实究竟？问：所谓的‘无情’，是指无情之物是色法还是非色法？还是两者都是？问：无情之物等同于佛所见的吗？是众生所见的吗？还是共同所见的？问：如果说无情之物会败坏所以没有佛性，那么五阴也会败坏，佛性也是这样吗？问：如果说无情之物是色法，那么法界之中，色法之处是有还是没有佛性？ 问：‘唯心’的说法你听说过吗？如果只是心，与其他的不同，就不能称为‘唯’。问：‘唯心’是指凡夫的心还是圣人的心？如果是圣人的心或凡夫的心，两者都有过失。问：‘唯心’是指心造无心，还是唯独造心？两者都有过失。问：‘唯心’，那么‘唯心’也只是色法吗？如果不‘唯’，那么色法就不是心吗？问：‘唯心’所造的，只是依报和正报吗？依报和正报的能造和所造是相同还是不同？ 问：众生的数量不同，佛性也随之不同吗？如果不是这样，就不是内在的，这样就不能称为佛性。问：众生的迷惑之心，佛性是普遍还是不普遍？神我和四句（有、无、亦有亦无、非有非无）是相同还是不同？问：众生有佛性吗？
English
English version: The seeds of the three causes (the three fundamental causes of becoming a Buddha: the direct cause, the assisting cause, and the conditional cause) are universally present; cultivation leads to universal fruition, and the resulting karmic rewards are also universal. It is also said that one dust particle contains one mind, which is the mind-nature of all sentient beings and Buddhas. However, I still have doubts about this. I replied, 'This is because you have not been good at comprehensively understanding cause and effect, self and others, the dependent environment and the principal reward, and observing your own mind, Buddhas, and sentient beings. It is also because you have not read the main points of various Buddhist scriptures, do not understand the meaning of the Buddha's fruit virtues, and do not understand the reason why Buddhas manifest mutual integration.' I want to enlighten your mind, so I will ask you forty-six more questions. If you can understand one of my questions, then all doubts will naturally disappear, the Dharma realm will be unobstructed, you will be enlightened and clearly see the sentient beings, Buddhas, dependent environment, and principal reward in the Dharma realm, complete in one thought, and lacking nothing in one dust particle. Question: Is the name of Buddha-nature spoken of from the perspective of cause or from the perspective of effect? If it is spoken of from the perspective of cause, then it is not a Buddha; if it is spoken of from the perspective of effect, then it cannot be called 'nature'. Question: Is the name of Buddha-nature permanent or impermanent? If it is impermanent, then it is not 'nature'; if it is permanent, then it should not change. Question: Is the name of Buddha-nature common or individual? If it is individual, then it cannot be called 'nature'; if it is common, then it cannot be divided. Question: Is the name of Buddha-nature a teaching of the Small Vehicle (Hinayana) or the Great Vehicle (Mahayana)? The Small Vehicle has no name for 'nature'; the Great Vehicle has no insentient beings. Question: Is the name of Buddha-nature expedient or ultimate? If the essence is distinguished, what are the differences in their characteristics? Question: Is the name of insentient beings a teaching of the Small Vehicle or the Great Vehicle? In the various parts of the Great Vehicle, is it expedient or ultimate? Question: The so-called 'insentient beings', does it refer to insentient things as form or non-form? Or both? Question: Are insentient things the same as what the Buddhas see? Is it what sentient beings see? Or is it what is seen in common? Question: If it is said that insentient things decay and therefore have no Buddha-nature, then the five aggregates also decay, is Buddha-nature also like that? Question: If it is said that insentient things are form, then in the Dharma realm, in the places of form, is there or is there not Buddha-nature? Question: Have you heard of the saying 'Only Mind'? If it is only mind, and different from others, then it cannot be called 'Only'. Question: Does 'Only Mind' refer to the mind of ordinary beings or the mind of sages? If it is the mind of sages or the mind of ordinary beings, both have faults. Question: Does 'Only Mind' refer to the mind creating no-mind, or only creating mind? Both have faults. Question: 'Only Mind', then is 'Only Mind' also only form? If it is not 'Only', then is form not mind? Question: What is created by 'Only Mind', is it only the dependent environment and the principal reward? Are the creator and the created of the dependent environment and the principal reward the same or different? Question: Are the Buddha-natures different as the number of sentient beings is different? If it is not like this, then it is not internal, and it cannot be called Buddha-nature. Question: The deluded mind of sentient beings, is Buddha-nature universal or not universal? Are the self and the four phrases (existence, non-existence, both existence and non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence) the same or different? Question: Do sentient beings have Buddha-nature? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
唯应身性亦法性耶。亦报性耶。问众生本迷迷佛悟耶。佛既悟已。悟生迷耶。问众生一身几佛性耶。一佛身中几生性耶。 问佛国土身为始本耶。始本同耶。为复异耶。问佛土佛身为一异耶。一无能所。异则同凡。问佛土界分生亦居耶。为各所居佛无土耶。问佛土所摄为远近耶。何土与生一异共别。问佛佛土体为同异耶。娑婆之处为共别耶。 问佛成道时土亦成耶。成广狭耶。不成有过。问佛成见性与生见处为同异耶。离二不可。问佛成土成。与彼彼成。彼彼不成为一异耶。问佛成三身。与彼彼果及彼彼生为一异耶。问佛成身土成何眼智。见自他境初后如何。 问真如所造互相摄耶。不相摄耶二俱如何。问真如之体通于修性。修性身土等不等耶。问真如随缘变为无情。为永无耶。何当有耶。问真如随缘随已与真为同异耶。为永随耶。问真如本有为本无耶。与惑共住同异如何。 问波水同异。前后得失。真妄同异。法譬如何。问病眼见华华处空处。同异存没法譬如何。问镜像明体本始同异。前后存没法譬如何。问帝网之譬唯譬果耶。亦譬因耶。果无因耶。问如意珠身身有土耶。唯在果耶。通因如何。 问行者观心心即境耶。能所得名同异如何。问行者观心一耶多耶。一多心境同异如何。 现代汉语译本 问：应身（Nirmanakaya，佛的化身）的性质是法性（Dharmata，宇宙的真实本质）吗？还是报性（Sambhogakaya，佛的报身）？问：众生本来是迷惑的，还是佛本来是觉悟的？佛既然已经觉悟，那么觉悟会产生迷惑吗？问：众生一个身体中有几个佛性（Buddha-nature）？一个佛身中有几个生性？ 问：佛的国土和佛的身是同时开始的吗？开始和根本是相同的吗？还是不同的？问：佛的国土和佛的身是一体的还是不同的？如果说是一体，那就无能无所；如果说是不同，那就和凡人一样。问：佛的国土有界限，众生也居住在其中吗？还是各自居住，佛没有国土？问：佛的国土所摄受的是远处的众生还是近处的众生？哪个国土与众生是一体、不同、共同还是分别的？问：佛与佛的国土的本体是相同还是不同？娑婆世界（Sahā world，我们所居住的这个世界）是共同的还是分别的？ 问：佛成道（Buddhahood，证悟成佛）的时候，国土也同时成就吗？成就的国土是广大还是狭小？如果不成就，会有什么过失？问：佛成就的见性（seeing nature）与众生所见的处所是相同还是不同？离开这二者就无法说明。问：佛成就，国土成就，与彼彼成就，彼彼不成就，是一样的还是不同的？问：佛成就三身（Trikaya，佛的三种身：法身、报身、应身），与彼彼的果报以及彼彼的众生是一样的还是不同的？问：佛成就身和国土，用什么眼和智慧来见自他之境？最初和最后的情况如何？ 问：真如（Tathata，事物的真实如是的状态）所造的万物互相摄受吗？还是不互相摄受？这两种情况都是如何的？问：真如的本体贯通于修行之性，修行之性、身、国土等等是相等还是不相等？问：真如随缘变化为无情之物，是永远没有情吗？什么时候才会有情？问：真如随缘，随顺已有的事物与真如本身是相同还是不同？是永远随顺吗？问：真如是本来就有的还是本来就没有的？与迷惑共同存在的情况是相同还是不同？ 问：波浪和水是相同还是不同？前后有什么得失？真实和虚妄是相同还是不同？用什么法来比喻？问：有眼病的人看到虚幻的花，花存在的地方和空无的地方，是相同还是不同？存在还是消失？用什么法来比喻？问：镜子和明体的本始是相同还是不同？前后存在还是消失？用什么法来比喻？问：帝网（Indra's net，因陀罗网，比喻宇宙万物相互关联）的比喻只是比喻果报吗？也比喻原因吗？果报没有原因吗？问：如意珠（Cintamani，能实现愿望的宝珠）的身，身中有国土吗？只是在果报中才有吗？贯通到原因的情况如何？ 问：修行者观心，心就是境吗？能观的心和所观的境，它们的名称、相同和不同之处如何？问：修行者观心，是一还是多？一和多，心和境，它们的相同和不同之处如何？
English
English version Q: Is the nature of Nirmanakaya (the emanation body of the Buddha) Dharmata (the true essence of the universe)? Or is it Sambhogakaya (the enjoyment body of the Buddha)? Q: Are sentient beings originally deluded, or is the Buddha originally enlightened? Since the Buddha is already enlightened, does enlightenment produce delusion? Q: How many Buddha-natures are there in one body of a sentient being? How many sentient natures are there in one Buddha's body? Q: Did the Buddha's land and the Buddha's body begin at the same time? Are the beginning and the root the same? Or are they different? Q: Are the Buddha's land and the Buddha's body one or different? If they are one, then there is no ability or place; if they are different, then they are the same as ordinary people. Q: Does the Buddha's land have boundaries, and do sentient beings also reside within it? Or do they each reside separately, and the Buddha has no land? Q: Does the Buddha's land encompass sentient beings far away or near? Which land is one, different, common, or separate with sentient beings? Q: Is the substance of the Buddha and the Buddha's land the same or different? Is the Saha world (the world we live in) common or separate? Q: When the Buddha attains Buddhahood, does the land also become accomplished at the same time? Is the accomplished land vast or narrow? If it is not accomplished, what faults will there be? Q: Is the seeing nature (seeing nature) that the Buddha achieves the same as or different from the place seen by sentient beings? It is impossible to explain without leaving these two. Q: The Buddha's accomplishment, the land's accomplishment, and the accomplishment of those others, and the non-accomplishment of those others, are they the same or different? Q: The Buddha's accomplishment of the Trikaya (the three bodies of the Buddha: Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Nirmanakaya), and the retribution of those others and the sentient beings of those others, are they the same or different? Q: When the Buddha accomplishes the body and the land, with what eyes and wisdom does he see the realms of self and others? What is the initial and final situation? Q: Do all things created by Tathata (the true suchness of things) mutually embrace each other? Or do they not mutually embrace each other? How are these two situations? Q: Does the substance of Tathata pervade the nature of cultivation? Are the nature of cultivation, body, land, etc., equal or unequal? Q: Does Tathata, changing according to conditions into inanimate objects, remain inanimate forever? When will it become animate? Q: Is Tathata, following conditions, following existing things, the same as or different from Tathata itself? Does it follow forever? Q: Is Tathata originally existent or originally non-existent? How is the situation of coexisting with delusion the same or different? Q: Are waves and water the same or different? What are the gains and losses before and after? Are truth and falsehood the same or different? What Dharma can be used as a metaphor? Q: A person with diseased eyes sees illusory flowers. Are the place where the flowers exist and the place of emptiness the same or different? Do they exist or disappear? What Dharma can be used as a metaphor? Q: Are the origin of the mirror and the luminous substance the same or different? Do they exist or disappear before and after? What Dharma can be used as a metaphor? Q: Does the metaphor of Indra's net (Indra's net, a metaphor for the interconnectedness of all things in the universe) only refer to retribution? Does it also refer to cause? Is there retribution without cause? Q: Does the body of the Cintamani (a jewel that fulfills wishes) have a land within it? Is it only in retribution? How does it pervade the situation of cause? Q: When a practitioner observes the mind, is the mind the realm? How are the names, similarities, and differences between the observing mind and the observed realm? Q: When a practitioner observes the mind, is it one or many? How are the similarities and differences between one and many, mind and realm? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------