金光明經玄義 1.23

1.23

三、料簡者，初、料簡三德。若指太子相好體為法身，法身在前，樹王下時明無漏慧三十四心為般若。般若在中，八十滅度燒身不受後身為解脫。解脫在後，異而且縱。法身時無般若，般若時無解脫，解脫時無般若法身。此即三法各異，斯乃阿含、三藏、數家所用。此之三意，悉不得稱常樂我淨也。若指空境為法身，法身是本有。照真之慧為般若，般若是今有。子果兩縛盡為解脫，解脫是當有。異而且縱，斯乃三乘通教中所說，前代探明大乘人所用，亦不得稱常樂我淨。若如真諦師明，法身具四德，般若解脫各二，此乃橫而且異，乃別教一途所明，而真諦師偏用。當知法身可稱為德，般若解脫無德可稱，不會無量甚深之高廣，亦不得稱為經王。今所明三德如上說，一一皆具常樂我淨，論廣則無量、論高則甚深。若諸學人聞諸經之王、四佛所護，不解此意，如牛羊心眼不足論道也。

Third, the critical distinctions. First, the critical distinction of the three virtues: If one points to the crown prince's body of marks and signs as the dharmakāya, the dharmakāya is in front; when under the king of trees, explaining the thirty-four mind[-moments] of undefiled wisdom as prajñā, prajñā is in the middle; at eighty years of age passing into extinction, burning the body and not receiving a subsequent existence as vimokṣa, vimokṣa is behind. They are distinct and furthermore sequential: at the time of the dharmakāya there is no prajñā; at the time of prajñā there is no vimokṣa; at the time of vimokṣa there is neither prajñā nor dharmakāya. These three dharmas are each distinct; this is what is used by the Āgamas, the Tripiṭaka [teachings], and the Sarvāstivādin Abhidharmikas. These three ideas can in no way be called permanence, bliss, self, and purity. If one points to the realm of emptiness as the dharmakāya, the dharmakāya is fundamentally existent; the wisdom illuminating the real as prajñā, prajñā is presently existent; the exhaustion of the two bonds of afflictions and fruition as vimokṣa, vimokṣa is existent in the future. They are distinct and furthermore sequential; this is what is expounded in the shared teaching of the three vehicles, used by those of former generations who investigated and clarified the Mahāyāna, and likewise cannot be called permanence, bliss, self, and purity. If, as Master Paramārtha clarifies, the dharmakāya is endowed with the four virtues, while prajñā and vimokṣa each have two, this is both horizontal and distinct; it is what is explained by one approach within the distinct teaching, and Master Paramārtha used it exclusively. One should know that the dharmakāya could be called a virtue, but prajñā and vimokṣa would have no virtues worthy of the name, failing to accord with the immeasurable, profound height and breadth, nor could this be called the king of sūtras. What is clarified here concerning the three virtues is as explained above: each and every one is endowed with permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Discussing breadth, they are immeasurable; discussing height, they are profound. If practitioners hear of the king among all sūtras, protected by the four Buddhas, yet do not understand this meaning, they have the minds and eyes of cattle and sheep, inadequate for discussing the Way.