大方廣佛華嚴經疏 50.24

50.24

第二「佛子如來不為」下明德用圓備者，如來之身色相圓備，常現大機前故。文中，先標舉、後徵釋。標中，約人顯實，云不為菩薩，明說永滅是為二乘，迹盡雙樹並為凡小，據此亦名揀異灰斷。後徵釋中，文有二重。初釋之中，自有二義：一令稱實見受用身，即同法身常住其前。《涅槃》云「涅槃不空者，謂有善色常樂我淨故。因滅無常獲此常故。」二「於一念」下令見三際應用亦即是常，故云皆如現在。《涅槃》云「吾今此身即是常身。」「法身」下開栴檀座佛塔，見三世佛無涅槃者，《楞伽》亦云「無有佛涅槃，無有涅槃佛。」亦不起二不二想者，遠離覺所覺故。謂既知幽靈不竭、妙色湛然，三際大均，何生滅之動靜？故不起二也。亦不取此一常，故無不二也。下重徵釋。徵意云：菩薩何以能不起想？釋云：菩薩由了法空，本無想著故。既無心於動靜，終不謂佛常與非常。

Second, from "Bodhisattvas, the Tathāgata does not, for the sake of..." onward explains that virtues and functions are perfectly complete; the Tathāgata's body is fully equipped with physical marks, constantly manifesting before those of great capacity. In the text, it first sets forth the heading, and then inquires and explains. In the heading, revealing reality in terms of persons, it says that it is not for bodhisattvas, making clear that speaking of eternal extinction is for the two vehicles, and the vanishing of traces at the twin trees is entirely for ordinary people and the lesser [vehicle]; based on this, it is also called distinguishing it from ash-like extinction. In the subsequent inquiry and explanation, the text has two levels. In the first explanation, there are naturally two meanings: first, to cause them to see the enjoyment-body in accordance with reality, which is identical to the dharmakāya constantly abiding before them. The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "That nirvāṇa is not empty means there is wholesome form, permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Because of eliminating the impermanent, one obtains this permanence." Second, from "in a single thought" onward causes them to see that the responsive function across the three times is also precisely permanent; hence it says they are all like the present. The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "My present body is precisely the permanent body." From "dharmakāya" onward, opening the sandalwood-throne Buddha-stūpa, one sees that the Buddhas of the three times have no nirvāṇa. The Laṅkāvatāra also says: "There is no Buddha in nirvāṇa, nor is there any nirvāṇa Buddha." Also, not giving rise to thoughts of duality or non-duality is because of being far removed from what perceives and what is perceived. That is to say, since one knows that the subtle spirit is inexhaustible and wondrous form is serene, with the three times completely equal, what movement or stillness of arising and cessation could there be? Therefore one does not give rise to [the thought of] two. Nor does one grasp this single permanence, so there is no non-duality. Below, it inquires and explains again. The intent of the inquiry says: How can a bodhisattva not give rise to thoughts? The explanation says: Because the bodhisattva understands the emptiness of dharmas, fundamentally there is no conceptual grasping. Having no mind toward movement and stillness, in the end one does not call the Buddha permanent or impermanent.