大乘義章 19.8

19.8

次第四門約身明土。於中由有三門分別：一明身土相依本末、二明身土相依廣狹、三明身土相依總別。言本末者，隨相言之，身報依土；窮實論之，國土依身。故《花嚴》云「寶花雲香諸莊嚴具，皆從如來法身中出。」又彼亦言「三世劫數及諸佛剎，於一佛身一切悉現。」此即是其土依身也。佛土既然，凡土亦爾。隨相論之，身報依土，窮實亦是國土依身。故經云「宣說三界虛妄，唯一心作。」本末如是。次明廣狹。其義不定，分別有四：一土寬身狹。如常所見，良以身是自己別報，所以局狹。土是共果，彼此同依，所以寬廣。二身寬土狹。如經中說「或有佛土，在佛菩薩毛孔中住、或在菩薩衣文中住、或在菩薩天冠中住。」如是等也。三身土俱寬。據實以論，身如虛空，土亦如之。四身土俱狹。隨化眾生，或現小身、或居方便土。廣狹如是。次明身土相依總別。總相論之，三身一身三土，以一佛身依一佛土。隨義別分，用彼三身別依三土，法性之身依法性土，實報之身依實報土，應化之身還依應土。問曰：法身與法性土有何差別，與說相依？釋言：身土性雖無別，隨相分異，故得相依。身之實性名法性身，土之實性名法性等，此亦同體義別相依，如海十相同體相依。問曰：應身還依應土。能依應身初時現凡，後則現聖。所依之土，何不如是初穢後淨，始終恒定？釋言：為化差別不等，或土隨身，如彌陀佛未成佛前國土鄙穢，成佛後國界嚴淨，彼佛現居。不定境故，如是一切。或身隨土，如此釋迦雖久成佛，而於過去無量世中身居穢國，示為凡俗不取正覺，如是一切。或身異土，如今釋迦身居穢國而現成佛，土現為報，報定難改，故始終恒穢。如佛色身，現為報故，始終恒定。智行功德，方便非報，所以後轉，故初現凡後轉為聖。身土相對，分別麁爾。

Next, the fourth section clarifies the land in relation to the body. Within this, there are likewise three divisions: first, clarifying the root and branch of the mutual reliance of body and land; second, clarifying the breadth and narrowness of the mutual reliance of body and land; third, clarifying the general and specific of the mutual reliance of body and land. As for root and branch: spoken according to characteristics, the body's reward relies on the land; investigated to the reality, the realm relies on the body. Therefore the Avataṃsaka says: 'Precious flowers, clouds, incenses, and all ornaments all emerge from the Tathāgata's dharmakāya.' It also says: 'The numbers of kalpas of the three times and all Buddha-realms all fully appear within the single body of a Buddha.' This is precisely the land relying on the body. If this is so for the Buddha land, it is also so for the worldly land. Discussed according to characteristics, the body's reward relies on the land; investigated to reality, the realm also relies on the body. Therefore a sūtra says: 'It is proclaimed that the three realms are false and deceptive, made by mind alone.' Root and branch are thus. Next, clarifying breadth and narrowness: its meaning is unfixed, having four divisions: First, the land is broad and the body is narrow. As is commonly seen, precisely because the body is one's own distinct retribution, it is limited and narrow. The land is a shared effect, relied upon collectively by one and all, and is therefore broad. Second, the body is broad and the land is narrow. As stated in the sūtras: 'There are Buddha lands that abide within the pores of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas, or abide within the folds of a bodhisattva's robes, or abide within a bodhisattva's heavenly crown,' and so forth. Third, both body and land are broad. Discussed according to reality, the body is like empty space, and the land is also like it. Fourth, both body and land are narrow. Accordant with transforming sentient beings, sometimes a small body is manifested, or sometimes one dwells in an expedient land. Breadth and narrowness are thus. Next, clarifying the general and specific of the mutual reliance of body and land: discussed in terms of general characteristics, the three bodies are one body and the three lands [are one land], whereby a single Buddha-body relies on a single Buddha land. Differentiated according to sense, those three bodies separately rely on three lands: the dharmatā body relies on the dharmatā land, the true reward body relies on the true reward land, and the response and transformation body in turn relies on the response land. Question: What difference is there between the dharmakāya and the dharmatā land, such that they are spoken of as mutually relying? Explanation: Although the nature of body and land is not different, they are distinguished according to characteristics, and thus can mutually rely. The real nature of the body is called the dharmatā body, and the real nature of the land is called the dharmatā [land]; this is also a mutual reliance of distinct meanings within the identical substance, just as the ten characteristics of the ocean mutually rely within an identical substance. Question: The response body in turn relies on the response land. The response body that relies initially manifests as ordinary and later manifests as noble. Why is the relied-upon land not likewise initially defiled and later pure, but rather constantly fixed from beginning to end? Explanation: For the sake of transforming [beings], the differences are not uniform: Sometimes the land follows the body, as with the Buddha Amitābha: before becoming a Buddha, his realm was base and defiled; after becoming a Buddha, the realm became adorned and pure, where that Buddha currently dwells. Because the realm is unfixed, everything is like this. Sometimes the body follows the land, as with Śākyamuni here: although he achieved Buddhahood long ago, throughout countless past ages his body dwelt in a defiled realm, manifesting as an ordinary mortal without attaining correct enlightenment; everything is like this. Sometimes the body differs from the land, as with Śākyamuni now: his body dwells in a defiled realm yet manifests the attainment of Buddhahood; the land is manifested as retribution, and retribution is fixed and difficult to change, so it is constantly defiled from beginning to end. Just as the Buddha's physical body is manifested as retribution and is thus constantly fixed from beginning to end. The merits of wisdom and practice are expedient means and not retribution, which is why they subsequently transform; therefore he initially manifested as ordinary and later transformed into noble. Comparing body and land, this is a rough analysis.