御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.192

2.192

釋云。若如來有去來差別即不得言常。如是住常。如是住者。不變不異義故。演曰。頌初句化有去來。次句真無去來。後之二句明化。與真不一不異。性相別論故不一。攝相歸性故不異。問。自受用身由遍滿故亦無來去。何故不約自受用說唯據法身。答。彼論前後多依法身。具約真如說無來去不障自受。亦無來去又無去來。約法報化因緣唯識無相真如。此等觀門皆來去。經中且依法身真如理實報化。唯識等門皆可通說。

The commentary says: "If the Tathāgata had the distinctions of coming and going, one could not speak of constancy. Abiding like this is constancy, because of the meaning of being unvarying and non-different." / [Exposition:] The first line of the verse shows that transformation has coming and going; the next line shows that the real has no coming or going. The final two lines clarify that transformation and reality are neither one nor different. Discussing nature and characteristics separately, they are not one; subsuming characteristics into the nature, they are not different. / Question: "The self-enjoyment body (svasaṃbhogakāya), being all-pervading, also has no coming or going. Why is it not explained in terms of the self-enjoyment body, but solely based on the dharmakāya?" / Answer: "That treatise, before and after, mostly relies on the dharmakāya. Fully explaining the absence of coming and going in terms of tathatā does not obstruct the self-enjoyment body from also having no coming or going. Furthermore, 'no coming or going' may be explained through the approaches of contemplation of the dharma-, saṃbhoga-, and nirmāṇa-[kāyas], conditioned arising, consciousness-only, signlessness, and tathatā—all of these approaches encompass coming and going. The sūtra temporarily relies on the dharmakāya and tathatā; in principle and reality, the saṃbhoga, nirmāṇa, consciousness-only, and other approaches can all be comprehensively applied."