維摩經略疏 5.102

5.102

「當知至欲身」，此釋法身斷德。思即是行，欲即是愛，若與行合潤業受生。法身界內界外業煩惱斷，故言非思欲身。即破三藏有餘報身猶是界內業煩惱果，故有小疾。若執此說，即成增謗。「佛為世尊過於三界」，此釋法身智德出於二種三界之外，豈有界內三界之疾？此破三藏有餘生身猶有界內報身，故有疾也。若執此說，即成損謗。「佛身無漏諸漏已盡」，此重釋法身斷德無界內外二種三漏，故不漏落二種生死，豈有界內有漏之果而有疾也。此破三藏有餘生身是有漏果，故有小疾。執此而說，即是增謗。「佛身無為不墮諸數」，此重釋法身智德無為，非界內外有為，即無二種陰入數法，豈有界內陰界入法，依此有疾？即破三藏生身之佛猶有果報陰界入等諸數之法，故有疾也。若執此說，即成損謗。「如此之身當有何疾」，此總結法身智斷既無此四過，豈得有疾？破阿難說致成二謗。前釋須菩提章明謗佛義，至此意顯。

"You should know" down to "body of desire": this explains the dharmakāya's virtue of severance. "Volition" is action (saṃskāra), and "desire" is craving (tṛṣṇā); when joined with action, they moisten karma and bring about birth. In the dharmakāya, karma and afflictions inside and outside the realms are cut off, hence it is said to not be a body of volition and desire. This refutes the Tripiṭaka's remainder-retribution body as still being the fruit of karma and afflictions within the realms, which is why it has slight illness. Grasping at this in speech constitutes the slander of addition. "The Buddha is the World-Honoured One, transcending the three realms": this explains that the dharmakāya's virtue of wisdom surpasses both kinds of three realms; how could it have the illnesses of the three realms within the realms? This refutes the Tripiṭaka's remainder birth body as still having a retribution body within the realms, hence having illness. Grasping at this in speech constitutes the slander of subtraction. "The Buddha's body is uncontaminated, all contaminations are exhausted": this re-explains that the dharmakāya's virtue of severance is devoid of the two kinds of three contaminations inside and outside the realms, and therefore does not fall into the two kinds of birth and death; how could it have an illness that is an uncontaminated fruit within the realms? This refutes the Tripiṭaka's remainder birth body as being a contaminated fruit, hence having slight illness. Grasping at this in speech constitutes the slander of addition. "The Buddha's body is unconditioned, not falling into any categories": this re-explains that the dharmakāya's virtue of wisdom is unconditioned and not conditioned inside or outside the realms, meaning it lacks the two kinds of aggregates and entrances that belong to categories; how could it have the aggregates, realms, and entrances within the realms, and rely on these to have an illness? This refutes the Tripiṭaka's Buddha of the birth body as still having the categories of fruitional aggregates, realms, and entrances, hence having illness. Grasping at this in speech constitutes the slander of subtraction. "What illness could such a body have?": this summarizes that since the dharmakāya's wisdom and severance are free from these four faults, how could it have an illness? It refutes Ānanda's speech leading to the two slanders. The earlier explanation in the chapter on Subhūti concerning slandering the Buddha is made clear here.