佛祖統紀 3.57

3.57

華嚴教主。述曰。論華嚴教主者。準四明解謗之說。於尊特身有須現不須現二者之分故。須現則如梵網華嚴及觀經等相多身大。不須現即以力加。令於劣身不取分齊見三十一相即無有邊。以知丈六是法界故。今詳此說。考之經文。則有二義。一約補處。謂菩提樹下初成正覺。若非補處。豈曰初成。又偈云。迦葉曾來住此殿。是故此處最吉祥。如是十偈。讚過去十佛。既佛佛俱有補處。則知藏塵相好之佛。須是分段生滅之身。與同居應更無少異。二約上升。謂是時世尊不離菩提樹下上升須彌（華嚴骨目云。不動而升。赴機得處）向帝釋殿說法（即前迦葉十佛曾住之殿。上升即是現起之義）豈非華嚴是千百億應身所說。此身既被別圓之機。見是尊特。何須獨指華臺受職身耶。此即破淨覺指實報土藏塵尊特橫應同居之說。蓋大師說三品相海皆稱機而現。別教則用別修緣了。成就此相。即修成之尊特。故名報身。圓教能了二修即性。修德無功。乃性具之尊特。故名法身。據此則知。即性而論本名法身。取土同居則名應身。被機現起則名尊特。永異淨覺修成尊特橫應同居之說。然則今師約機約教以定身者。正是樹下生身現起尊特。以應別圓之機。正合妙玄釋迦最初頓說（釋迦是生身說頓是舍那）亦合四教儀如來現盧舍那身說法之言（如來是釋迦生身現起尊特故轉名舍那）世有取月堂之說云。境本定身則是釋迦。機感見相則是舍那。蓋有得於此云。

The Lord of Teaching of the Avataṃsaka. The commentary states: In discussing the Lord of Teaching of the Avataṃsaka, according to the explanation in Siming's Jiebāng, regarding the Venerable and Special Body, there is a distinction between whether it must be manifested or need not be manifested. When it must be manifested, as in the Brahmājāla, Avataṃsaka, and the Guan jing, its marks are numerous and its body is vast. When it need not be manifested, through spiritual power, he causes them not to grasp delimitation regarding his inferior body, seeing the thirty-two marks as having no boundaries, thereby knowing that the sixteen-foot body is the Dharma realm. Now, carefully examining this explanation and testing it against the sūtra texts, there are two meanings. The first is in terms of being one birth away from Buddhahood: achieving sambodhi for the first time beneath the bodhi tree. If he were not one birth away from Buddhahood, how could it be called 'first achieved'? Furthermore, a gāthā says: 'Kāśyapa once came to dwell in this palace, / Therefore this place is the most auspicious.' In this way, ten gāthās praise the past ten Buddhas. Since each Buddha is one birth away from Buddhahood, one knows that the Buddha possessing marks and characteristics numerous as particles of dust in the treasury must be a body of delimited birth and death, no different at all from the response body of the Shared Dwelling [realm]. The second is in terms of ascending: that is, at that time the World-Honoured One, without leaving the foot of the bodhi tree, ascended Mount Sumeru (the Avataṃsaka Gumu says: 'Ascending without moving, responding to capacities and finding the place') and went toward Śakra's palace to preach the Dharma (namely, the aforementioned palace where the ten Buddhas including Kāśyapa once dwelt; ascending precisely means manifesting). How could the Avataṃsaka not be preached by hundreds of thousands of myriads of response bodies? Since this body addresses the capacities of the distinct and round [teachings] and is seen as the Venerable and Special, why must one point exclusively to the body receiving the office upon the lotus pedestal? This refutes Jingjue's claim that the Venerable and Special of the particles of dust in the treasury of the True Reward Land horizontally responds to the Shared Dwelling realm. For the Great Master stated that the three grades of oceans of marks are all manifested in accordance with capacities. In the distinct teaching, one uses separate cultivation of the conditional and complete [causes] to achieve these marks; this is the Venerable and Special produced by cultivation, and is thus called the reward-body. In the round teaching, one can understand that the two kinds of cultivation are identical to the nature, and cultivation's virtue is without effort; this is the Venerable and Special inherent in the nature, and is thus called the Dharma-body. Relying on this, one knows: speaking in terms of nature, it is originally called the Dharma-body; taking the land of Shared Dwelling, it is called the response-body; manifesting in response to capacity, it is called the Venerable and Special. This is forever different from Jingjue's theory of the cultivated Venerable and Special horizontally responding to the Shared Dwelling realm. Thus, when the present master determines the body in terms of capacity and teaching, it is precisely the physical body beneath the tree manifesting the Venerable and Special to respond to the capacities of the distinct and round [teachings]. This perfectly tallies with the Miaoxuan's 'Śākyamuni initially preaching the sudden' (Śākyamuni is the physical body; preaching the sudden is Vairocana). It also tallies with the Si jiaoyi's statement: 'The Tathāgata manifests the body of Rocana to preach the Dharma' (the Tathāgata is Śākyamuni's physical body, manifesting the Venerable and Special, and thus transformed in name to Rocana). In the world, some adopt the explanation of Yuetang, who says: 'The fundamental body of the object is Śākyamuni; the marks perceived through the stimulus of capacities are Rocana.' This indeed captures the point.