注維摩詰經 2.222

2.222

肇曰：無施之迹效之於前矣。曾於林下宴坐，時淨名來，以為坐法不爾也。生曰：有以致辭，非拒命也。託不拒命之辭，以取推維摩詰美也。不必是者，不言非是，但不必是耳。不言非是者，實可以為求定之筌也。不必是者，有以之致病。病所不病，可不呵哉。舍利弗誠無所復。假宜由行以軌物，所行交是彼之所病，維摩詰以其居不足之地，固可寄以為呵。然則舍利弗迹受屈矣。宴坐者，閑居之貌。

[Seng]zhao says: The trace of having nothing to apply was already demonstrated previously. When he was once sitting quietly under the trees in the forest, the Pure Name came and considered that the method of sitting was not like this.

[Dao]sheng says: Having grounds to decline is not refusing the command. By relying on words that do not refuse the command, he brought forth praise for Vimalakīrti's excellence. 'Not necessarily this' does not say it is not this, but merely that it is not necessarily this. The reason he did not say it is not this is that it can indeed serve as a fish-trap for seeking samādhi. The reason he said 'not necessarily this' is that there are ways in which it gives rise to illness. When one makes an illness out of what is not an illness, how could one not rebuke it? Śāriputra truly had no further [recourse]. It is fitting that through practice one should provide a model for beings; yet what he practiced happened to be what the other regarded as an illness. Because he abode in a deficient state, Vimalakīrti could certainly use it as an occasion for rebuke. Thus, Śāriputra's trace suffered defeat. 'Quiet sitting' is the appearance of dwelling in leisure.