御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.192

2.192

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."