金剛般若論會釋 3.26

3.26

第四論名相身具足義與隨形類相好文相似，皆准下次前釋，論亦可解。世親論中自下大文第三段破疑，謂上兩疑即是因前本宗起，下有四疑，皆是展轉而生。就此文中然有三段，此第一也。謂有疑云：「若諸佛以無為法得名，云何諸佛成就八十種好、三十二相而名為佛？」無著論主相、好別故，開為兩門；世親菩薩論主同破色身有疑，故合為一。彼論云，「法身畢竟體，非彼相好身，以非相成就，非彼法身故。不離於法身，彼二非不佛，故重說成就，亦無二及有」，以彼法身中無故，言即非成就；以不離彼法身故，而言成就。餘言易解。

The fourth [topic] is named in the treatise "Endowment with the Body of Major Marks"; its meaning is similar to the passage on the physical body of secondary marks and can be understood based on the previous explanation, as can the treatise. In Vasubandhu's treatise, the third major section below refutes doubts: the two doubts above arose from the initial thesis, while the four doubts below all arise successively. Within this passage, there are three sections, this being the first. Namely, there is a doubt: "If the Buddhas derive their name from unconditioned phenomena, how is it that the Buddhas accomplish the eighty secondary marks and thirty-two major marks and are named Buddhas?" The treatise master Asaṅga distinguishes marks and secondary marks, opening them into two headings; the treatise master Bodhisattva Vasubandhu refutes them together as doubts regarding the physical body, and therefore combines them into one. That treatise states: / "The ultimate substance of the dharmakāya / Is not that body of marks and secondary marks, / Because it is not an accomplishment of marks, / And is not that dharmakāya. / Yet not apart from the dharmakāya; / Those two are not non-Buddhas. / Hence accomplishment is restated, / Free from both duality and existence." / Because it does not exist within that dharmakāya, it says "which is not accomplishment"; because it is not apart from that dharmakāya, it says "accomplishment." The remaining words are easy to understand.