大乘法苑義林章 7.5

7.5

Second, concerning the identification of the essential nature [of the bodies], there are six textual accounts in brief. First, one interpretation holds: Both the *Cheng weishi [lun]* and the *Buddhabhūmi[-sūtra-śāstra]* state that 'the Tathāgata’s bodies and lands of virtue are profoundly deep and subtle, neither existent nor non-existent, separated from all conceptual construction, cutting off all discursive proliferation, and not subsumed under the Dharma-teachings of dhātus, āyatanas, and so forth. Therefore, in the paramārtha-satya, being neither body nor non-body, how could there be three kinds? In reliance on saṃvṛti-satya, manifested in accordance with the capacities of sentient beings, three bodies are taught: the dharmakāya is the emptiness principle; the recompense body is the emptiness wisdom; and what is manifested to benefit creatures is called the transformation body.' Masters such as Bhāviveka all held this view. Second, one interpretation holds: The dharmakāya takes solely tathatā as its nature. Among the eighteen dhātus, only the last three are admitted as subsumed under the anāsrava. Therefore, through the predominance of the Buddha’s three dharmas—great samādhi, wisdom, and compassion—the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses together with their associated factors constitute the self-enjoyment body. In accordance with the needs of the ten stages, the wisdom of equality manifests the marks of the other-enjoyment body and pure lands. In accordance with the needs of the three vehicles, the wisdom of accomplishing activity can generate the marks of the transformation body and lands. Because these two bodies and lands are produced from subtle samādhi, they are subsumed under the rūpa of the dharmadhātu. Although the five consciousnesses of non-buddhas transform in dependence on these, because they differ in coarseness and subtlety, they are not subsumed under the five sense fields. The wisdom of accomplishing activity is associated either with the sixth or the seventh [consciousness]. If it is associated with the sixth, contemplating the specific and universal characteristics is called the wisdom of marvelous observation, while generating transformative functions is called the wisdom of accomplishing activity; their arising distinctly before and after does not contradict principle. Dividing them as functions of the same essence also incurs no fault. If it accompanies the seventh [consciousness], transforming the other-enjoyment is called the wisdom of equality, while generating transformations is called the wisdom of accomplishing activity. The Buddha is constantly in samādhi, whereas the nature of the five consciousnesses is scattered, so the first fifteen dhātus do not exist in the Buddha. Although one transforms the five consciousnesses to attain the wisdom of accomplishing activity, the essence of the wisdom of accomplishing activity is not the five consciousnesses. Just as by transforming saṃsāra one is said to attain nirvāṇa, yet that nirvāṇa is not subsumed under the five aggregates. Third, one interpretation holds: The Tathāgata's bodies and lands of virtue are subsumed as appropriate under the aggregates, āyatanas, and dhātus, all three of which admit of being sāsrava and anāsrava, up to the extensive explanation. Within this explanation there are four interpretations in brief: First, one interpretation holds: Both the *Cheng weishi [lun]* and the *Buddhabhūmi[-sūtra-śāstra]* say that the pure dharmadhātu is the svabhāvakāya. The *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* states that pure tathatā is the svabhāvakāya. The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha*, in its treatment of the superiority of wisdom, says that by transforming and discarding the ālayavijñāna one attains the svabhāvakāya. The *[Mahāyānasūtra-]alaṃkāra* states that by transforming the eighth consciousness one attains the mirror wisdom. Therefore, combining these two dharmas makes the svabhāvakāya, while the wisdom of equality and the wisdom of marvelous observation constitute the saṃbhogakāya. The *Alaṃkāra* and other texts state that the wisdom of equality manifests the buddha-body for bodhisattvas in purely purified lands, and states that the wisdom of observation manifests mastery by teaching the Dharma and severing doubts in great assemblies; this demonstrates that these two wisdoms are for other-enjoyment. The *Alaṃkāra* further states that by transforming the active consciousnesses (pravṛttivijñāna) one attains the saṃbhogakāya; this demonstrates that these two wisdoms are for self-enjoyment, while the wisdom of accomplishing activity is the transformation body. The *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* states that the wisdom of accomplishing activity manifests immeasurable kinds of inconceivable transformations in the lands of the ten directions. Moreover, because the superiority of wisdom comprehensively subsumes the three bodies, we know that all three bodies have real wisdom. This interpretation is incorrect. The *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* states that the pure dharmadhātu is the svabhāvakāya, shared in common by all buddhas; it is eternally of self-nature, and is realized in part throughout the ten stages. If the mirror wisdom were the svabhāvakāya, this principle would not hold. The *Suvarṇaprabhāsa* states that both tathatā and the wisdom of tathatā are called dharmakāya. If the conditioned virtues were originally explained as the mirror wisdom being the dharmakāya, it should follow that text in holding that the factors of all four real wisdoms are the dharmakāya. Furthermore, it is said that by transforming the active consciousnesses one attains the saṃbhogakāya; if the wisdom of accomplishing activity were not saṃbhoga, it ought not to be an active consciousness. If the wisdom of accomplishing activity were the transformation [body], when the *Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra* asks whether the transformation body is conscious or non-conscious, the sūtra should have definitively replied that the transformation body is conscious, because the Buddha's five consciousnesses are said to be this body. Why then does the sūtra state: 'One cannot say it is conscious, because it lacks a consciousness reliant on itself; nor can one say it is non-conscious, because it has a consciousness reliant on another'? From this we know that the essence of the transformation body is not real wisdom. Yet when examining the Buddha's body: principle and phenomena differ; coarse and subtle virtues are distinct; essence is one while functions differ. They are distinctly spoken of as three; how could one divide the four wisdoms to each separately constitute a body? Second, one interpretation holds: The *Cheng weishi [lun]* states that the pure dharmadhātu is the svabhāvakāya. The *Alaṃkāra* and other treatises state that the svabhāvakāya is intrinsically eternal. The *Buddhastotra-śāstra* states that the Buddha's svabhāvakāya is without origination or cessation. Asanga's *Vajracchedikā-śāstra* states that the merit of upholding and expounding that sūtra is the cause of realization for the Buddha's dharmakāya, and the cause of generation for the other two bodies; hence that sūtra says: 'All dharmas of all buddhas emerge from this sūtra; all Tathāgatas are born from this sūtra.' Various sūtras and treatises state that the ultimate transformation of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti) constitutes the dharmakāya, and the transformation of the basis is precisely pure tathatā; therefore we know that the dharmakāya has the dharmadhātu as its nature. However, regarding the statement that it is attained by transforming and discarding the storehouse consciousness, this means that by transforming and eliminating the coarse heaviness of the two hindrances in the eighth consciousness, one realizes tathatā and reveals the dharmakāya. The mention of the dharmakāya within the superiority of wisdom means that it is the support of that [wisdom] and its real nature; it is not truly subsumed under wisdom. The saṃbhogakāya has two: first, self-enjoyment; second, other-enjoyment. The real virtues within the four wisdom factors, and the eternal and pervasive form-body generated by the mirror wisdom, constitute the self-enjoyment [body]. The *Alaṃkāra* states that the great mirror wisdom is the enjoyment buddha. The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* states that by transforming the active consciousnesses one attains saṃbhoga. Although transforming the storehouse consciousness actually attains saṃbhoga, because the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* explains that transforming it reveals the dharmakāya, it briefly omits mentioning the attainment of saṃbhoga. Since the dharmakāya is said to be without origination or cessation, attained solely through the cause of realization, and is not matter, mind, and so forth, the factors of the mirror wisdom contradict this; if it were not saṃbhoga, under which body would it be subsumed? This saṃbhogakāya subsumes the Buddha's uncommon real conditioned virtues; therefore the real form and mind of the four wisdom factors are all self-enjoyment. The buddha-body manifested by the factors of the wisdom of equality is the other-enjoyment. The various physical marks manifested by the factors of the wisdom of accomplishing activity in accordance with various classes are the transformation body. Although the transformation body is said to be subsumed under the superiority of wisdom, it appears like wisdom or is produced by wisdom; its being called wisdom means its essence is not actually wisdom, but only that the wisdom of equality can manifest enjoyment, and the wisdom of accomplishing activity manifests the transformation body of the three karmas. It does not say that the two bodies are themselves the two wisdoms. Therefore, the two real wisdoms are subsumed under self-enjoyment, and the two manifested marks are called the two bodies. Although these two bodies are both the marks of the four wisdoms and manifested by the four wisdoms, because the physical marks manifested for the noble ones of the ten stages and the three vehicles prior to the stages differ in coarseness and subtlety, they are distinguished as two bodies. However, because the body manifested by the wisdom of equality resembles selflessness and equality, manifesting an increase in Dharma bliss to cause others to enjoy it, only the buddha-body manifested by equality is said to be other-enjoyment. Because the wisdom of accomplishing activity manifests an increase in the transformations of the three karmas, only the physical marks manifested by the wisdom of accomplishing activity are called the transformation body; thus it does not contradict principle. Third, one interpretation holds: The first fascicle of the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra* states: 'How does a bodhisattva comprehend the transformation body? Good son! When the Tathāgata was formerly on the stage of cultivation, he cultivated various practices for sentient beings until his cultivation was fulfilled, up to the extensive explanation. In accordance with the intentions of sentient beings and according to their practice and realms without waiting for time to pass, he is able to manifest various bodily forms; this is called the transformation body. Good son! For the sake of bodhisattvas attaining penetration, these Tathāgatas speak of the true truth, up to the extensive explanation. Because it serves as the root for boundless buddha-dharmas, through the Tathāgata's associated tathatā and the aspirational power of the wisdom of tathatā, this body comes to be manifested, replete with the thirty-two marks, eighty minor signs, and a round nimbus of light behind the neck; this is called the response body (pratibimbakāya). Good son! In order to extinguish and eliminate all hindrances such as the kleśas, and in order to become replete with all wholesome dharmas, there is only tathatā and the wisdom of tathatā; this is called the dharmakāya. The first two bodies exist as conventional designations, while this third body is called truly existent, serving as the basis for the first two bodies. Because apart from the tathatā of dharmas and apart from non-conceptual wisdom, all buddhas have no other dharma. Why? Because all buddhas are fully endowed with wisdom, because all kleśas are ultimately eliminated, and because they have attained the pure buddha-ground. Therefore, the tathatā of dharmas and the wisdom of tathatā encompass all buddha-dharmas.' The intention of that sūtra is to state: The pure dharmadhātu, together with the eternal and pervasive form-body and the real conditioned and unconditioned virtues of the four wisdom factors, are called the dharmakāya, because they are the root of conditioned and unconditioned virtues. Due to the aspirational power of the Tathāgata's associated tathatā and wisdom of tathatā, the manifested marks, signs, and round nimbus—the body manifested for those prior to the stages, the three vehicles, and the bodhisattvas of the ten stages—are called the response body. The buddha-body manifested to transform the three vehicles and the other-enjoyment body manifested to transform the ten stages are both called response bodies, because they manifest buddha-bodies in response to the capacities and needs of others. When cultivation of aspirational practice is fulfilled, without waiting for time or place, manifesting bodies in the five destinies in accordance with the classes of sentient beings is called the transformation body, because it manifests transformations without manifesting a buddha-form. In the *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra*, the transformation bodies in the five destinies are also subsumed under the transformation body, because they mostly manifest supernatural transformations. The other-enjoyment body is also called the response body. The self-enjoyment body itself enjoys Dharma bliss, and is not manifested in response to capacities and needs; the other-enjoyment body can cause bodhisattvas to enjoy Dharma bliss. Though self and other differ, in experiencing bliss there is no distinction, so together they are called enjoyment. Although the self-enjoyment body is the root of conditioned virtuous dharmas, it is not shared in common by buddhas, being an individual entity; it is not the true nature of dharmas, not the svabhāvakāya, and not the root of virtues of the unconditioned realm, so it is not called the dharmakāya. Together with the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa*, each is based on a single rationale and they also do not contradict each other. Fourth, one interpretation holds: The *Buddhabhūmi[-sūtra-śāstra]* states: 'The pure dharmadhātu is the svabhāvakāya; the four wisdoms, associated and coexistent with their own nature, together with the eternal and pervasive form-body of real virtues, constitute the self-enjoyment body, because it is accomplished through cultivation over three incalculable eons.' The first fascicle of Vasubhandu's *Prajñāpāramitā[-sūtra-śāstra]* states: 'It is also called the recompense buddha; this is manifested for bodhisattvas of the ten stages. A portion of subtle marks serves as the other-enjoyment, in order to let bodhisattvas experience Dharma bliss. That which is manifested for sentient beings of the three vehicles, a portion of coarse marks, constitutes the transformation body; what the three vehicles prior to the stages should see is coarse, not real virtues accomplished through cultivation, but merely transformative function. Yet these two bodies are both marks of the four wisdoms; divided into two classes according to whether the sentient beings to be transformed should see coarseness or subtlety. The three vehicles prior to the stages rely only on transformative function to produce the aspiration and practice, but have not yet been able to realize broad and vast Dharma bliss; hence this transformation body is not called enjoyment.' Among these six interpretations, the first three accounts contradict principle, as is clearly evident from the treatises themselves. The fourth interpretation and the sixth account, though slightly different in wording, do not contradict each other in principle. In the fourth account, the two bodies are said to be subsumed according to the predominance of the two wisdoms, not that the two bodies are manifested solely by the two wisdoms. At first glance the texts differ, but in meaning there is truly no difference. In the fifth text of the sūtra, the meaning and principle are without fault. Thus, although praises and critiques form six accounts, three principles are free from error.