大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經略疏 1.753

1.753

者字貫通兩句，謂對垢者菩薩也，說名者佛也。既無對治之智，何有起智之人？深淺之執本無，何有說教之者？故俱無也。對機之佛亦不可得方見法身，法身說經義在斯矣。然上人、法各三，三對六隻，盡是所拂之迹也。謂法有執垢、離垢及與名數，人有眾生、菩薩及佛。問曰：「人自有差，法本無異，何說三名？」答：「克體雖無，義說即有，為對人、法各分能、所故也。」

The word 'one who' connects both phrases, referring to the one who counterparts grime as the bodhisattva, and the one who speaks of names as the Buddha. Since the wisdom that serves as an antidote does not exist, how could there be a person who gives rise to wisdom? Since deep and shallow graspings are fundamentally absent, how could there be one who teaches? Therefore both do not exist. Only when the Buddha who responds to capacities is also unobtainable is the dharmakāya seen; the meaning of the dharmakāya expounding the sūtra lies precisely in this. Now, above, persons and dharmas each have three, making three pairs and six items, all of which are the traces that are swept away. That is, dharmas comprise grasping at grime, leaving grime, and the nominal designations; persons comprise sentient beings, bodhisattvas, and buddhas. Question: 'Persons naturally have differences, but dharmas are fundamentally non-different; why speak of three names?' Answer: 'Although in intrinsic substance they do not exist, conceptually they do exist, in order to distinguish subject and object respectively for persons and dharmas.'