起信論疏筆削記 8.60

8.60

論　即是下，二、會體立名。如來者是應身，法身是真身。如來之法身，依士釋，意明心體與法身無二，故云即是。又離真無應，應即是真，故云即是。又如來法身並同真身，但以約人標法，故曰如來法身，亦是即義。上二皆持業釋，由是即字通茲三用。然初一是正，餘二是兼也，學者應知。言平等者，聖凡情器無二圓滿故。疏欲明等者，欲顯在纏之本覺，遂舉出纏之法身，此則約果以顯因也。名雖因果有殊，而真實之體無二，故論云即是也。

Regarding the treatise's "that is" and what follows: second, identifying the essence and establishing the name. The Tathāgata is the response body; the dharmakāya is the true body. "The Tathāgata's dharmakāya" is a dependent genitive compound (tatpuruṣa); the intention is to clarify that the mind-essence and the dharmakāya are non-dual, and so it says "that is". Furthermore, apart from the true there is no response, and the response is itself the true; hence it says "that is". Furthermore, the Tathāgata and the dharmakāya are both identical with the true body; it is merely that by identifying the dharma with reference to the person it is called "the Tathāgata's dharmakāya", which also conveys the sense of identity. The latter two are appositional karmadhāraya compounds. Thus, the word "is" extends across these three applications. However, the first is the primary sense, while the remaining two are secondary, as students should know. Regarding "equal": it is because ordinary beings, sages, sentient beings, and the vessel-world are non-dually complete and perfect. Regarding the commentary's "wishing to clarify" and what follows: wishing to reveal the original enlightenment that is in bondage, it consequently adduces the dharmakāya that has emerged from bondage; this is using the fruit to reveal the cause. Although the names differ as cause and fruit, the true essence is non-dual; hence the treatise says "that is".