觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 2.4.4

2.4.4

Third, from 'Able to act as' downwards clarifies that the response-body pervades the three lands, which has two parts: first, it explains both reward and response together; second, from 'Having a measure' downwards solely indicates the response-body. In the first meaning: what was explained above regarding the reward-body only discussed the tacit convergence with reality, which is the self-enjoyment [body]. Now, in clarifying the manifestation of responses, it contrasts the response of other-enjoyment that is eternally abiding with the response of the born body that is impermanent, demonstrating the functions of two traces; therefore, it explains both 'body' and so forth together. 'Body' is the born body, which possesses delimited marks, and so it is called 'body'. 'Non-body' is the reward[-body], which has no delimited marks, and so it is called 'non-body'. The *Shorter Prajñā* states, 'The Buddha said that non-body is called the great body'; the 'great body' is indeed the other-enjoyment body. For a body without delimitation, its lifespan is eternal, hence it is 'immeasurable'. For a body with delimitation, its lifespan is impermanent, hence it 'has a measure'. These two response-functions abide by relying on the two principles of the true and the middle, and their capacities are seen by relying on the two consciousnesses: the phenomenal and the karmic. Abiding in principle is extensively explained as in the *Commentary on the Suvarṇaprabhāsa*. The two consciousnesses are elaborated in the *Awakening of Faith*. Clarifying the treatise's intent: essentially, when seen by the phenomenal consciousness, one grasps the delimitation of form, and so it is called the response-buddha; when seen by the karmic consciousness, one transcends delimited marks, and so it is the reward-body. This meaning will be distinguished later in the subcommentary on the contemplation of the Buddha. Practitioners must know: the eternal body is immeasurable, universally responding to the three lands; the impermanent body has a measure, responding only to [the land of] common residence. Why is this? Because the capacities of the [land of] real reward, by virtue of partial realization, see the other-enjoyment body, while the people of the land of expedients exclusively receive the Separate and Perfect [teachings]. Although the buddha-marks they see have slight degrees of superiority and inferiority, they are not the born body; all are the reward-buddha. If in the land of common residence, those possessing the capacities of the four teachings who receive the Separate and the Perfect can behold the reward-buddha. Therefore, the *Lotus Sūtra* clarifies that [the Buddha] is ever on Vulture Peak, the *Avataṃsaka* states that his preaching extends to the end of the future, and various Mahāyāna texts state that within the responsive marks one sees this noble, superior body of the Dharma-nature; hence we know that the eternal body universally responds to the three lands. As for the impermanent body, it only responds to common residence, accommodating the capacities of the Tripiṭaka and Shared [teachings] and giving rise to the good of ordinary beings. In the next meaning, there are two parts: first, clarifying the two meanings of having a measure. In what was discussed above, the bodies manifested in the three lands outside of self-enjoyment are all termed 'response'. As for other-enjoyment, although it is termed 'response' in relation to facing [specific] capacities, yet because it is what is realized through authentic causes, it is again termed 'reward'; it is not the differentiated function of accommodating capacities. If one speaks of following beings and according with conditions, with variations of long and short in the measures of body and lifespan, one must speak in terms of the impermanent function of common residence. Therefore, now separately indicating the marks of the response-body, it merely opens out two measures within 'having a measure'. And these two measures, because they rely on the phenomenal consciousness's seeing of mere emptiness, belong solely to impermanence. If one relies on the karmic consciousness's seeing of non-emptiness, then this very impermanence is in its entirety the eternal; then the two functions of the eternal and the impermanent are mutually identical, like two birds flying together. If the capacities in the upper two lands cease and the responses transform, that too is impermanence; but because it is not the eight marks, it is tentatively called eternal. Regarding the words 'seven hundred' and so on, the *Śūraṅgama-samādhi Sūtra* says: 'Bodhisattva Dṛḍhamati asked: How long is the Buddha's lifespan? The Buddha instructed him to go eastward past thirty-two thousand buddha-lands to the country of Adornment, to ask the Buddha King of Luminous Adornment and Sovereign Ease. That Buddha replied: Like the lifespan of Śākya[muni], mine is also like this. If you wish to know, my lifespan is seven hundred asaṃkhyeya kalpas. Dṛḍhamati returned here and reported this to the Buddha. Ānanda said: That Buddha is indeed another name for Śākyamuni.' Although due to superior capacities [that Buddha] is seen as long[-lived], yet seven hundred can still be counted, so it is the measurable of what has a measure. As for Amitāyus, humans and devas cannot count it, so it is the immeasurable of what has a measure. Second, from 'The response-buddhas' downwards concludes that it is thus for all response-buddhas. Since each and every buddha has fully realized the three bodies, when their response-bodies receive beings and beings' lifespans are long or short, how could they not accord with them and each display the two measures? Therefore, Amida manifests the long and can also manifest the short, while Śākyamuni manifests the short and can also manifest the long. Thus the thirty-sixth fascicle of the *Great Commentary* states, 'One should know that Śākyamuni Buddha also has pure realms, like the realm of Amitābha Buddha. Amitābha Buddha also has unadorned and impure realms, like the realm of Śākyamuni Buddha.' Again, the thirty-eighth fascicle says, 'Because this Jambudvīpa is evil, Śākyamuni's lifespan should respond by being short. Because other places are good, the Buddha's lifespan should respond by being long.' Thus the twenty-second fascicle of the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* says, 'Westward from here, past sands of thirty-two Gaṅgā rivers, there is an Invincible Land, whose adornments are like the World of Peace and Joy; I appear in the world in that land.' These all accord with and follow beings' capacities. Second, from 'However' downwards integrates and identifies [them] based on principle. The preceding distinguished the three bodies: the Dharma[-body] is fundamentally inherent, the reward[-body] is in terms of cultivated accomplishment, and the response[-body] is discussed as manifesting and departing. Those words seem vertical, but one must know that the two kinds of cultivation—reward and response—are fundamentally possessed in inherent virtue. Although they are inherent virtue, the marks of cultivation are clearly present; fully activating cultivation from within nature, cultivation resides entirely in nature; the three and the one are tacitly extinguished, beyond the reach of thought or speech. Regarding 'cannot' and so forth: discussing them vertically as above demonstrates that they are not horizontally aligned as one. If one says that inherent nature possesses the three bodies and their spans of life, it demonstrates that they are not differentiated and distinct. If one forms an understanding of horizontal alignment, distinction, oneness, or difference, one goes against the round and eternal reality of what is expressed: being identical to one yet three, it is not horizontal; being identical to three yet one, it is not vertical; being neither vertical nor horizontal, it is inconceivable. Only one who understands in this way can comprehend the profound and wondrous text of what expresses it.