‘What do you think then, O Subhuti, is a Tathagata to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body?’ Subhuti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathagata is not to be seen (known) by the shape of his visible body. And why? Because, what was preached, O Bhagavat, as the shape of the visible body, the shape of the visible body indeed, that was preached by the Tathagata as no-shape of the visible body, and therefore it is called the shape of the visible body.’
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhuti, should a Tathagata be seen (known) by the possession of signs?’ Subhuti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathagata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs. And why? Because, what was preached by the Tathagata as the possession of signs, that was preached as no-possession of signs by the Tathagata, and therefore it is called the possession of signs.’ (20)
Bhagavat said: ‘What do you think, O Subhuti, should a Tathagata be seen (known) by the possession of signs?’ Subhuti said: ‘Not indeed, O Bhagavat, a Tathagata is not to be seen (known) by the possession of signs. And why? Because, what was preached by the Tathagata as the possession of signs, that was preached as no-possession of signs by the Tathagata, and therefore it is called the possession of signs.’ (20)