宗鏡錄 16.37

16.37

The explanation has three meanings: First, in terms of capacity, not seeing is the fault of the blind. Second, not seeing is seeing: seeing the space-like body, because space cannot be seen; if one does not see it, one truly sees space. Third, it also pervades the places where it is not seen: this clarifies that if it were [only] seen, it would not be all-pervading. Why so? Because both the visible and the invisible are the body of Samantabhadra. If it were required that the visible constitute the body, then Samantabhadra's body would not pervade all existing things. Just as wisdom cannot be seen, is it not a wisdom-body? Thus we clearly know that it is precisely because there are places where it is not seen that we know it is all-pervading. As for this third body, who can see it? Only the wisdom-eye sees it; it is not what is seen by the physical eye. Such a wisdom-eye has neither seeing nor non-seeing.