[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [釋淨土群疑論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960) › 2.9 # 釋淨土群疑論 2.9 釋淨土群疑論 2.9 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.9) 釋曰：此之諍論，非唯今日。一般大德涅槃學者言：三身並常，不生不滅，廣引《涅槃經》文及《菩薩本業瓔珞經》等證三身並常，此多依教也。有一般大德依《攝大乘論》等，釋佛有三身、常有三種：一凝然常，謂法身佛；二不斷常，謂受用身佛；三相續常，謂變化身佛。雖各名常，義有差別，以後二身從生因生，般若論說，報化二身生因生故，諸所作者皆是無常。若是凝然，應同法身了因所證，又應非陰亦無緣慮言說動作。以此眾多義理推之，非凝然常也。廣如《唯識論》等成立。又約遍計所執，眾生橫計佛有去來，為破妄執心外有佛、有往有來，為破妄情故言不來不去。故《維摩經》言「善來。文殊師利！不來相而來，不見相而見。」如是等。今此《觀經》說有往來，與諸大乘經不相違也。各據一義，悉為妙說。 > I explain: This controversy is not of today alone. One group of venerable scholars of the Nirvāṇa \[Sūtra\] says: 'The three bodies are all permanent, neither arising nor ceasing.' They broadly cite passages from the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, the Bodhisattva Benye Yingluo Jing, and the like to prove that the three bodies are all permanent; this mostly relies on the teachings. Another group of venerable masters relies on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and the like, explaining that the Buddha has three bodies and there are three kinds of permanence: first, solidified permanence, referring to the dharmakāya Buddha; second, uninterrupted permanence, referring to the saṃbhogakāya Buddha; third, continuous permanence, referring to the nirmāṇakāya Buddha. Although each is named 'permanent', their meanings are distinct. Because the latter two bodies arise from generative causes, the Prajñā treatises say that since the saṃbhoga and nirmāṇa bodies arise from generative causes, whatever they do is impermanent. If they were solidified, they would be identical to the dharmakāya realized through revealing causes; furthermore, they would not be aggregates, nor would they have cognition, speech, or action. Deducing from these many principles, they are not of solidified permanence. This is extensively established in works such as the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. Furthermore, with reference to the imagined nature (parikalpita), sentient beings falsely calculate that the Buddha has going and coming; in order to break the false clinging to a Buddha existing outside the mind who has going and coming, for the purpose of refuting false sentiments, it is said that he neither comes nor goes. Thus the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: 'Welcome, Mañjuśrī! Coming without the characteristic of coming, seeing without the characteristic of seeing,' and so forth. Now, what this Guan jing says about having going and coming does not contradict the various Mahāyāna sūtras. Each relies on a particular meaning, and all are wondrous teachings. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.8) - [Next: 2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.10) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960~en-mt.2.9) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1960.2.9) · Pramāṇa