釋淨土群疑論 2.9

2.9

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.