這是從筆者所倡導的文獻學與哲學分析的雙軌方法對日本現代的新思潮：所謂批判佛教進行全面性的說明與反省。這批判佛教由日本駒澤大學的兩位佛教學者谷憲昭與松本史朗提出，認為佛教是批判性格的，特別是就強調緣起性空的印度原始佛教而言是如此，這是非實體主義立場的。後來在中國與日本興起的佛性、如來藏與本覺思想都與原始佛教的這種義理相悖，是實體主義立場的「界論」。本文透過多元的角度，說明佛性、如來藏、本覺思想是原始佛教的義理的引申的發展，不是有實體主義傾向的界論。佛性、如來藏與本覺這些觀念，說到底，仍然是以空為本性，卻又具有濃烈的動感，對普渡眾生的宗教理想有更廣、更深的適切性。這種思想是印度佛教的正面的、合法的開拓，與印度哲學中的外道的神我思想並無嚴格意義的交集，它也有鮮明的批判性格。基於此，批判佛教並不能真確理解佛性、如來藏與本覺思想。

The article deals with the problem of Critical Buddhism advocated by Hakamaya Nori’aki and Matsumoto Shirō. These two Japanese Buddhist scholars maintain that Buddhism, particularly Primitive Buddhism is critical in nature, and they condemn the ideas of Buddha Nature, Tathāgatagarbha and Original Enlightenment developed in China and Japan as deviating from the fundamental Buddhist thoughts of pratītyasamutpāda and śūnyatā, thereby backtracking to the substantialism of the idea of Brahman in the Upaniṣads. This substantialism is what is called by Matsumoto the “Dhātu-vāda”. The article argues that the ideas of Buddha Nature, Tathāgatagarbha and Original Enlightenment have nothing to do with the “Dhātu”, and they all carry ultimately the meaning of empty (śūnya). In consequence, the similarity and analogy between Dhātu and Buddha Nature, Tathāgatagarbha and Original Enlightenment is out of the question. Both Hakamaya and Matsumoto do not have a true understanding of these important ideas in Mahāyāna Buddhism.