大般涅槃經疏 9.30

9.30

二「迦葉白」下，是論義。上明三義，此但論兩。初二番問答，論無創疣義，如文。後三番問答，論解脫處。初番如文。次番問答為二：初問雙標，次答中二：初雙釋、次雙結。舊解常住佛果有色而引此文。又一師云：佛果無色而言色者，妙慧顯然故名為色。二能應為色。又有說云：三聚之中二聚非色、一聚是色，取色聚顯然，喻佛果解脫。興皇云：若定有色定無色者，不應安或，或者無緣作色無色。然法身非色非無色，而或色者是無色色，或無色者是色無色。以是義故，二乘不解，非其境界。聲聞無色者，小乘患色猶如桎梏，為說無色。菩薩能體色無色，故言妙色湛然。今皆不然。解脫之體何曾是色及與非色，下文云「不可說色及以非色，不可說空及與不空。為兩緣故，言色非色。非色亦色、色亦非色，色非色不可思議。」第三問答正顯此義。乃是諸佛境界，非聲聞緣覺所知，即其義也。

Second, from "Kāśyapa addressed [the Buddha]" downward is the doctrinal discussion. The preceding explained three meanings; here only two are discussed. The first two rounds of questions and answers discuss the meaning of the absence of wounds and warts, as in the text. The latter three rounds of questions and answers discuss the locus of liberation. The first round is as in the text. The next round of question and answer has two parts: first, the question sets out both [alternatives]; next, the answer has two parts: first, explaining both; next, concluding both. An old interpretation cited this text to argue that the permanently abiding Buddha-fruit possesses form (rūpa). Another master said: "The Buddha-fruit lacks form; that it is said to have form means that wonderful wisdom is manifest, hence it is called form. Second, being able to respond [to beings] is form." Still another said: "Among the three aggregates, two aggregates are non-form and one aggregate is form; taking the form aggregate as manifest is a metaphor for the liberation of the Buddha-fruit." Xīnghuáng said: "If it were definitively with form or definitively without form, the word 'perhaps' (huò) should not have been used; 'perhaps' means that without conditions, it acts as form or non-form. However, the dharmakāya is neither form nor non-form, yet its 'perhaps having form' is the form of non-form, and its 'perhaps lacking form' is the non-form of form. For this reason, the two vehicles do not understand it; it is not their realm. As for the śrāvaka lacking form, the small vehicle loathes form like fetters and handcuffs, so non-form is preached for them. Bodhisattvas are able to realize that form is non-form, hence it is said that 'sublime form is tranquil and clear.'" Now, none of these is correct. How could the essence of liberation ever be form or non-form? The text below says: "It cannot be spoken of as form or non-form; it cannot be spoken of as empty or non-empty. For the sake of two conditions, it is said to be form and non-form. Non-form is also form, form is also non-form; form and non-form are inconceivable." The third question and answer precisely reveals this meaning. That it is indeed the realm of the Buddhas, not what is known by śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, is precisely this meaning.