大般涅槃經疏 4.6

4.6

Fourth, the Buddha's reply. There are two parts: first, he directly answers the five objections; next, he universally receives the great assembly. As for first answering the third objection regarding the four bodies and three bodies: because bodies may be separated or combined, there are four and three; since permanence is the foremost theme of this teaching, he bypasses the others to answer it first. However, Cunda had first raised the beginning of the Tripiṭaka Buddha to make his objection: for six years the Tripiṭaka Buddha practiced austerities, his vital energy nearly exhausted, and the milk-rice nourished and benefited him so that his physical strength became full; thus, it was a body of food. Such a body of food, manifested from karmic conditions, was therefore an afflicted body. With the thirty-four minds he completely severed the bonds of defilements, but the binding of retribution alone remained; this was a final body, and because it would ultimately enter extinction, it was an impermanent body. Thus he raised these as objections. Now the Buddha uses three to refute four, precisely saying that the final [body] is the same as the impermanent [body], and so combines them into one impermanent body. The four bodies you raised are what is seen by those of lesser capacity; what is viewed by those of greater capacity is without these four. Why? Radiant light is wisdom, and wisdom is permanent abiding; a body of permanent abiding is not a body of food. Furthermore, radiant light is wisdom; the light of wisdom destroys the darkness of afflictions, so it is not an afflicted body. If one has just severed afflictions and still has the binding of retribution, it is a final body; now, it was not just severed, so it is not a final body. The binding of retribution consisting of the four great elements may well be impermanent, but permanently abiding wisdom is like vajra, so it is not impermanent. What is viewed by those of greater capacity has only three and not four; how much more so for the Tathāgata, who for immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas has been without these four bodies! Both the small and the great are denied; both four and three are dismissed. That is: neither eating nor non-eating, neither permanent nor impermanent, neither afflicted nor non-afflicted, neither dharma nor non-dharma, neither final nor non-final, neither vajra nor non-vajra. Being able to respond to both capacities, he makes four or makes three, yet for the Tathāgata they are neither four nor three, profound and yet more profound. Therefore, that the retributions of the two givings are without disparity is clear.