大乘玄論 3.21

3.21

次論一乘壽量果。有人言：未明常住。又難：若度五百而未常，亦應未度五百即應是常。若未度非常，則已度是常矣。又經云「佛度五百」，而言未度者，佛昔明度三百亦應未度；若昔言度三百佛實度者，今亦應實度五百也。若順經故遂度五百，則已免三相，何事非常？今所釋者，〈壽量品〉亦具明三身。《法華論》云「王宮現生、伽耶成佛，名為化佛。久已成佛，乃至復倍上數，故名為報佛。如實知見三界之相無有生死，若退若出，明法身佛。」但三身不同，若《法華論》明三身者，以佛性為法身，修行顯佛性為報佛，化眾生義為化身。若《攝大乘論》所明，隱名如來藏，顯名為法身耳。此二皆名法身。就應身中自開為二，化菩薩名報身、化二乘名化身。或云：化地上名報身、化地前名化身。《地論》、《法華論》是菩提留支所出，《攝大乘》是真諦三藏所翻，此三部皆天親之所述作。而明義有異者，或當譯人不體其意。今欲融者，會眾經及論，或二身、或三身、或四身，今總束為四句：一合本迹。如《金光明經》但辨一本迹也，故云「佛真法身，猶如虛空，應物現形，如水中月。」二開本開迹。如此。大凡論明有四佛，開本為二身：一法身、二報身，法身即佛性，報身謂修因滿。迹為二身：化菩薩名舍那、化二乘名釋迦也。三開本合迹。如《地論》、《法華論》所明，開本謂二身，謂佛性是法身、佛性顯為報身。四開迹合本。如《攝大乘論》所明，合佛性及佛性顯皆名法身。開迹身為二：化菩薩名舍那、化二乘名釋迦。此皆經論，隨義說之不違；亦皆不體其意，故起諍論耳。若常無常者，別而為言，法應二身為常，化身無常。通而為言，三身俱常俱無常。化身以大悲為體故是常，法身有隱顯故義說無常，應身始起義是無常。《金光明經》云「應化二身無常」者，開迹合本。問：三身有幾名耶？答：經論不同，法身、舍那身、釋迦身，亦名法身、報身、化身，亦名法身、應身、化身。又名佛所見身、菩薩所見身、二乘凡夫所見身。法身亦名自性身，又名法性身。問：若如是者，應有六身八身，應有一佛身、本迹二身，何故但明三身耶？答：依《法華論》，二身為自德，化身為化他德。《攝論》法身為自德，二身為化他德。若爾，法身為自德，化身為化他德，應身亦自亦化他，故立三身。亦可法身為體，報身為相，化身為用，體相用故立三身也。

Next, discussing the fruit of the lifespan of the Ekayāna. Some say: it does not clarify eternal abiding. Another objection: If crossing over five hundred [kalpas] is not yet eternal, then not yet crossing over five hundred should be eternal. If not having crossed over is impermanent, then having crossed over is eternal. Furthermore, the sūtra says "the Buddha crossed over five hundred," yet if one says he has not crossed over, then when the Buddha formerly explained crossing over three hundred, that too should have been not yet crossed over; if previously the statement of crossing over three hundred meant the Buddha truly crossed over, then now he should also truly have crossed over five hundred. If following the sūtra he thereupon crossed over five hundred, then he has already escaped the three characteristics [of conditioned phenomena]; why would he not be eternal? What is now explained is that the "Lifespan" chapter also fully clarifies the three bodies. The Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa states: "Manifesting birth in the royal palace and attaining buddhahood at Gayā is called the nirmāṇabuddha. Having attained buddhahood long ago, extending even to twice that number, is called the saṃbhogabuddha. Truly seeing and knowing the characteristics of the triple realm as having neither birth nor death, neither retreating nor emerging, clarifies the dharmakāya buddha." However, the three bodies are not the same: if according to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa's clarification of the three bodies, buddha-nature is the dharmakāya, cultivating practices to reveal buddha-nature is the saṃbhogabuddha, and the meaning of transforming sentient beings is the nirmāṇakāya. If according to what is clarified in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, when concealed it is named tathāgatagarbha, and when revealed it is named dharmakāya. Both of these are named dharmakāya. Within the response body (nirmāṇakāya) it divides into two: transforming bodhisattvas is named saṃbhogakāya, and transforming the two vehicles is named nirmāṇakāya. Alternatively, it is said: transforming those on the stages is named saṃbhogakāya, and transforming those before the stages is named nirmāṇakāya. The Daśabhūmivyākhyāna and the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa were produced by Bodhiruci; the Mahāyānasaṃgraha was translated by Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha. These three treatises were all composed by Vasubandhu. That their explanations of the meanings differ is perhaps because the translators did not fully comprehend his intent. If one now wishes to harmonize them, integrating the various sūtras and treatises—whether two bodies, three bodies, or four bodies—they may now be summarized into four propositions: First, combining root and trace. As in the Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra, which only distinguishes a single root and trace, hence saying: "The Buddha's true dharmakāya is like empty space; responding to things it manifests forms, like the moon in the water." Second, opening both root and trace. Like this: generally speaking, the treatises clarify that there are four buddhas. Opening the root into two bodies: first, the dharmakāya; second, the saṃbhogakāya. The dharmakāya is buddha-nature; the saṃbhogakāya means the fulfillment of cultivated causes. The trace is two bodies: transforming bodhisattvas is named Rocana; transforming the two vehicles is named Śākyamuni. Third, opening the root and combining the trace. As clarified in the Daśabhūmivyākhyāna and Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, opening the root means two bodies, saying that buddha-nature is the dharmakāya and the manifestation of buddha-nature is the saṃbhogakāya. Fourth, opening the trace and combining the root. As clarified in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, combining buddha-nature and the manifestation of buddha-nature both as dharmakāya. Opening the trace body into two: transforming bodhisattvas is named Rocana; transforming the two vehicles is named Śākyamuni. These are all sūtras and treatises, spoken in accordance with meaning without contradiction; it is also because people did not comprehend their intent that disputes arose. Regarding permanence and impermanence: speaking specifically, the dharma and response bodies are permanent, while the transformation body is impermanent. Speaking comprehensively, all three bodies are both permanent and impermanent. Because the transformation body takes great compassion as its essence, it is permanent; because the dharmakāya has concealment and manifestation, it is conceptually spoken of as impermanent; the response body has the meaning of initial arising, so it is impermanent. When the Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra states that "the response and transformation bodies are impermanent," it opens the trace and combines the root. Question: How many names do the three bodies have? Answer: Sūtras and treatises differ: dharmakāya, Rocana body, and Śākyamuni body; also called dharmakāya, saṃbhogakāya, and nirmāṇakāya; also called dharmakāya, response body, and transformation body. Also called the body seen by buddhas, the body seen by bodhisattvas, and the body seen by the two vehicles and ordinary beings. The dharmakāya is also called the svabhāvakāya (own-nature body), and also called the dharmatākāya (dharma-nature body). Question: If so, there should be six bodies or eight bodies, or there should be one buddha body, or the two bodies of root and trace; why clarify only three bodies? Answer: According to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, two bodies are for one's own virtue, and the transformation body is for the virtue of transforming others. In the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, the dharmakāya is for one's own virtue, and two bodies are for the virtue of transforming others. If so, the dharmakāya is for one's own virtue, the transformation body is for the virtue of transforming others, and the response body is both for oneself and for transforming others; therefore, three bodies are established. It may also be that the dharmakāya is the substance, the saṃbhogakāya is the characteristic, and the nirmāṇakāya is the function; because of substance, characteristic, and function, three bodies are established.