大般涅槃經疏 9.30

9.30

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.