止觀輔行傳弘決 8.18

8.18

次明三十六身者，準前引論為問答中，如法觀佛，佛即法身，法身義當涅槃般若，所應所照義當煩惱諸法，故得名為是三一相。若不別而別，此中正當法身德也。身身相望成三十六。若名異義同不勞分別，具如第二卷末以三般若而對三身。境智既其互發互照，故使身亦互起互入，照境如入、發智如起。今若更約別義分別，直於佛身作三十六，從應更開出於化身，以對法報故得為四。言「出入」者，化興為出、化息為入。問：但聞三身從法身起，不聞餘三從化身起，及以法報從應身起。答：從勝起劣即是施權，從劣起勝即是開權。跨節明義不可思議，無非法界，故得相起相入無妨。其相云何？如化應自說吾今此身是法身，況不是報。能起既然，相入例此。理無起入，約化緣明，豈可從緣而亡於理？又應以《玄》文三十六句感應對之。化應報三名之為顯，法即是冥。又報身者，亦得是冥亦得是顯，報身分於自他受用不同故爾。是故今文與論冥合。論云「是三一相」，是故義同。雖一而三，故復別說。

Next, regarding the explanation of the thirty-six bodies: according to the previous citation of the treatise (*Dazhidulun*) in the catechism, contemplating the Buddha according to the Dharma means that the Buddha is the Dharma body, and the meaning of the Dharma body corresponds to nirvāṇa and prajñā, while that which is responded to and illumined corresponds to defilement and all phenomena; hence they can be called 'these three being of one mark.' If differentiated where there is no difference, this precisely corresponds to the virtue of the Dharma body. Looking from body to body, they form thirty-six. If they are different in name but identical in meaning, there is no need to distinguish them, as fully set forth at the end of the second fascicle, pairing the three prajñās with the three bodies. Since object and wisdom mutually manifest and mutually illumine, this causes the bodies also to mutually arise and mutually enter: illumining the object is like entering, and manifesting wisdom is like arising. Now, if we further distinguish them according to a different meaning, directly forming thirty-six within the Buddha's body, by further opening the transformation body out of the response [body] so as to pair them with the Dharma and reward [bodies], they make four. Regarding 'emerging and entering': the flourishing of transformation is emerging, and the cessation of transformation is entering. Question: One has only heard that the three bodies arise from the Dharma body; one has not heard that the other three arise from the transformation body, or that the Dharma and reward [bodies] arise from the response body. Answer: Arising from the superior to produce the inferior is applying the provisional; arising from the inferior to produce the superior is opening the provisional. Explaining the meaning by leaping over distinctions is inconceivable; there is nothing that is not the dharma-dhātu, and therefore they can mutually arise and mutually enter without obstruction. What is its characteristic? Just as the transformation and response [bodies] themselves say, 'My present body is the Dharma body,' how much more is it not the reward [body]! The capacity to arise being such, mutual entering is patterned after this. In principle there is neither arising nor entering; it is explained in terms of conditions for transformation—how could one, on account of conditions, obliterate the principle? Furthermore, one should correlate them with the thirty-six phrases of stimulus and response in the text of the *Xuan[yi]*. The three—transformation, response, and reward—are termed manifest, while the Dharma is concealed. Furthermore, the reward body can be both concealed and manifest, because the reward body is divided into the difference between enjoyment for self and enjoyment for others. Therefore, the present text accords in secret with the treatise (*Dazhidulun*). The treatise says, 'These three are of one mark,' and therefore their meaning is identical. Although one, they are three, and so they are explained distinctly once again.