金光明最勝王經疏 1.13

1.13

二、明經之宗體者，初明經宗、後明經體。言經宗者，傳真諦釋云「此經示三身本有、顯四德無生，開果果忘緣、解如如真實。」又有說云：此經菩提涅槃因果為宗，究暢本始二果、備顯緣正兩因。二俱有過。初云三身本有，據因可爾，說果即非。何者？豈報化身未修已得？如在因位名如來藏，非名法身故。四德無生，據法身說，理即為正；約報化說非定無生，如《涅槃經》說「如來有八自在我」等，據遍計說理亦無違。有說言暢本始二果明緣正兩因。理亦有失。何者？真如雖是本有，在因不得名果；報化必在修成，何名本始二果？又因雖有緣正，舊說多以真如為三身之正因，此不應理，如《能顯中邊慧日論》中廣辨。今辨經宗，略有二解。一云：唯以菩提因果為經正宗。何以故？但說壽量及三身差別。又此經第四卷但問菩提心因，佛答但說十度之行。又〈付囑品〉云「汝等當知，我於無量無數大劫勤修苦行，獲甚深法。菩提正因已為汝說。」故知但以菩提因果為經正宗。一云：亦說涅槃因果為宗，故〈壽量品〉中以三復次各十義故名為涅槃。又辨如來十種行已，云「善男子如是當知，如來、應、正等覺說有如是無邊正行。汝等當知，是謂涅槃真實之相。」又〈十方菩薩讚歎品〉云「常為宣說第一義，令證涅槃真寂靜。佛說甘露殊勝法，能與甘露微妙義。引入甘露涅槃城，令受甘露無為樂。」

Second, explaining the central theme and essence of the sūtra: first explaining the sūtra's theme, and later the sūtra's essence. Regarding the sūtra's theme, it is transmitted that Paramārtha explained: 'This sūtra shows that the three kāyas are fundamentally inherent, reveals the four virtues as unborn, opens the fruit of fruits that forgets conditions, and explains suchness as real.' Another says: 'This sūtra takes the cause and fruit of bodhi and nirvāṇa as its theme, thoroughly articulating the two fruits—fundamental and emergent—and fully displaying both causes—auxiliary and direct.' Both have flaws. The first says the three kāyas are fundamentally inherent: in terms of cause, this is admissible, but to say they are fruit is not. How so? Could the reward and transformation bodies be attained without cultivation? Because at the causal stage it is called tathāgatagarbha, not dharmakāya. The unborn nature of the four virtues, explained with reference to the dharmakāya, is logically correct; but with regard to the reward and transformation bodies, it is not definitely unborn; as the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra* states, 'The Tathāgata has eight sovereign Selves', etc., which is also logically uncontradicted when said with reference to the conceptualized nature. The other explanation says it articulates the two fruits—fundamental and emergent—and explains both causes—auxiliary and direct. This also has flaws. How so? Although tathatā is fundamentally inherent, at the cause it cannot be called a fruit; the reward and transformation [bodies] must be achieved through cultivation, so how can they be called fundamental and emergent fruits? Furthermore, although causes are auxiliary and direct, old interpretations mostly take tathatā as the direct cause of the three bodies; this is unreasonable, as extensively analyzed in the *Treatise of the Wisdom-Sun Illuminating the Middle and Extremes*. Now, in analyzing the theme of the sūtra, there are briefly two explanations. One says: it takes only the cause and fruit of bodhi as the correct theme of the sūtra. Why? It only expounds lifespan and the distinctions of the three bodies. Moreover, fascicle four of this sūtra only asks about the causal bodhicitta, and the Buddha answers by only expounding the practice of the ten pāramitās. Furthermore, the chapter 'Entrustment' states: 'You should know that for immeasurable, incalculable great kalpas I diligently cultivated austerities and obtained profound Dharma; the direct cause of bodhi has already been spoken to you.' Therefore, we know it takes only the cause and fruit of bodhi as the sūtra's correct theme. Another says: it also states the cause and fruit of nirvāṇa as the theme. Therefore, in the chapter 'Span of Life', through three iterations of ten meanings each, it is called nirvāṇa. Moreover, after analyzing the Tathāgata's ten kinds of conduct, it says: 'Good sons, you should know that the Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksambuddha expounds having such boundless correct conduct. You should know that this is the true characteristic of nirvāṇa.' Furthermore, the chapter 'Praise by Bodhisattvas of the Ten Directions' states: 'He constantly proclaims the primary truth for their sake, / causing them to realize the true tranquility of nirvāṇa. / The Buddha expounds the supreme Dharma of amṛta, / able to bestow the subtle meaning of amṛta, / leading them into the amṛta city of nirvāṇa, / causing them to experience the unconditioned bliss of amṛta.'