入楞伽心玄義 1.74

1.74

初者，或有處說三身俱常，謂法身凝然、報化相續。或有處說三身俱無常，謂法身離不離，報化生滅等。或有處說法身是常，報化無常。或有處說報亦常，謂修生大智，證真同性，亦不思議常，下經具顯。若爾，何故《唯識》等論云「生者必滅，一向記故。」修生佛果豈得無有剎那滅耶？解云：此四記就相麁說。生者必滅，是就凡夫分段生死，非約佛果證理功德。何以故？若言佛果修生即令有滅，亦應滅者復生，是分別記，謂有煩惱者生、無者不生。佛果既無煩惱，剎那滅已應更不生，則便斷滅，當知不爾。故知佛地大智內同真性，一味平等，機感所須智用無盡，如置鹽水器無不消盡，然其醎味未曾有失。佛智證真相無不盡，本願應機時未曾失，是故下文「佛果大智皆非剎那」，乃至廣說。

As for the first: In some places it is said that all three bodies are permanent, meaning that the dharmakāya is immutable, while the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya are continuous. In some places it is said that all three bodies are impermanent, referring to the dharmakāya's detachment or non-detachment, and the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya arising and ceasing, and so forth. In some places it is said that the dharmakāya is permanent, while the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya are impermanent. In some places it is said that the saṃbhoga[kāya] is also permanent, meaning that the great wisdom produced through cultivation realizes the truth and becomes identical with the nature, which is also an inconceivable permanence; the sūtra below fully demonstrates this. If so, why do treatises like the Cheng Weishi Lun say: 'That which is born must perish, because this is an unequivocal declaration'? How could the Buddha-fruit produced through cultivation not have momentary cessation? Explanation: these four declarations are coarse explanations based on characteristics. That 'that which is born must perish' concerns the delimited saṃsāra of ordinary beings; it does not concern the merits of realizing principle in the Buddha-fruit. Why? If one says that the Buddha-fruit being produced through cultivation necessarily entails having cessation, then that which ceases should also be reborn; this is an analytical declaration, meaning that those with afflictions are reborn, while those without are not reborn. Since the Buddha-fruit has no afflictions, after ceasing in a moment it should not be reborn again, which would then be nihilistic annihilation; one should know it is not so. Therefore, we know that the great wisdom of the Buddha-ground internally accords with the true nature in single flavor and equality; the functioning of wisdom required to respond to capacities is inexhaustible, just as when salt is placed in a water vessel, there is none that does not dissolve, yet its salty flavor is never lost. When the Buddha-wisdom realizes the truth, there is no characteristic that is not exhausted, yet its fundamental vows responding to capacities never fail in their timing; therefore, the subsequent text states: 'The great wisdom of the Buddha-fruit is entirely non-momentary,' and so forth at length.