金光明最勝王經疏 3.11

3.11

贊曰：第七、有依非依門。文亦分三。此意令知本末差別，謂變化身從應身起，應依如起，復他受用從他起化。《華嚴經》說是摩菟摩化，謂從他起化，法身本有不依他起，故是真實。若自受用亦名法身，非從他變，故無依處。又遍法界，亦無別方所依之處。或可此門約性相別，自受用身亦應身攝。如為依持，始從彼起，緣生非實。故《大莊嚴論》第三云「平等謂自性身，一切諸佛等無別故。受用身謂食身，此身與平等食，由依起故。應知受用身復是化身因。」又云「食身以自利為相，化身以利他為相，故通二說。」論云「言食身者，於大眾中作法食故。」

Commentary: Seventh, the gate of having a reliance and lacking a reliance. The text is also divided into three. The intent here is to make known the distinction between root and branches: the nirmāṇakāya arises from the saṃbhogakāya, the saṃbhoga arises based on tathatā, and further, parasambhoga gives rise to transformation from another. The Avataṃsakasūtra speaks of this as *māyopama transformations, meaning arising transformations from another. The dharmakāya is fundamentally existing and does not arise in reliance on another; therefore it is truly existent. If svasambhogakāya is also called dharmakāya, it is not transformed from another, and so has no locus of reliance. Furthermore, it pervades the dharmadhātu, and also has no separate spatial locus of reliance. Alternatively, this gate may distinguish nature and characteristics: the svasambhogakāya is also subsumed under the saṃbhogakāya. Taking tathatā as support, it newly arises from that, and what is dependently arisen is not truly real. Thus the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, fascicle three, says: 'Sameness refers to the svābhāvikakāya, because all Buddhas are equal and non-different. The saṃbhogakāya refers to the enjoyment-body; this body provides enjoyment with sameness, because it arises in reliance upon it. It should be known that the saṃbhogakāya is furthermore the cause of the nirmāṇakāya.' It also says: 'The enjoyment-body takes svārtha as its characteristic, and the nirmāṇakāya takes parārtha as its characteristic; hence both explanations are valid.' The treatise says: 'Speaking of an enjoyment-body means creating the food of the Dharma within the great assembly.'