[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [維摩義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776) › 2.10 # 維摩義記 2.10 維摩義記 2.10 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.10) 自下第二教防過儀。「以空聚想入聚落」者，就入聚時教離人想。觀聚無人，故名為空。入聚多起男女等結，故教修空。「所見色」下，就行乞時教離法想。於乞食時多於六塵而生諸結，故教防離。然此文中於六塵境治法各異，於色塵境教觀根空而為對治，於聲塵境教觀境虛而為對治，於香塵境教類麁事而為對治，於味塵境教離取心而為對治，於觸塵境教離能取及所取事而為對治，於法塵境教觀境空而為對治。立從皆得，為約此六教人多治，顯隱異論。初言「見色與盲等」者，盲人無根，於色不著。行者應爾，觀眼體空，同盲無根於色不取。故下文言「若知眼性，於色不貪不恚不癡」，餘亦應然。言所「聞聲與響等」者，響虛無，無可貪取。觀聲似彼虛假無實，無可貪取，餘亦應爾。言「所嗅香與風等」者，風事浮麁，人多不著。觀香似彼，莫生貪著，餘皆應然。言「所食味不分別」者，標杓無心，雖在諸味不生分別。行者應爾，當如標杓除去心想，莫生分別，餘悉應爾。言「受諸觸如智證」者，智證法時不見己心以為能取，不見前境以為所取。行者應爾，知身體空無其能覺，亦觀境空無其所覺，故如智證，餘亦應然。「知法如幻無自他性」，教觀性空。幻無定性，諸法像此幻法無體，名無自性。此幻法中，亦無妄計我人等實，名無他性。「本自不然今亦不滅」，教觀相空。如彼幻化因緣法相，畢竟空寂，何但無性，相亦不有。以無相故，無法可生，故本不然；無法可盡，故今不滅。又知如幻，明法非無。無自性等顯法非有，無自他性明非性有。本自不然今亦不滅，明非相有。義如前解。又復知法如幻相者，明知世諦。無自性等，明解真諦。無自他性，性空真諦。本自不然今亦不滅，相空真諦。亦如上釋。觀法既然，餘塵類爾。上來第二於乞食時教防過儀。 > From here below is the second \[part\], instructing on the deportment of guarding against faults. "Entering a village with the thought of an empty village" instructs on leaving the perception of persons when entering a village. Contemplating the village as having no persons is therefore called "empty". Entering a village often gives rise to fetters regarding men, women, and so on; hence he instructs on cultivating emptiness. From "the sights seen" onward, he instructs on leaving the perception of dharmas when going begging. When begging for food, one often generates various fetters regarding the six sense-objects; hence he instructs on guarding against and leaving them. However, in this text, the antidotes for the six objective realms are each distinct: for the realm of sight-objects, he instructs on contemplating the emptiness of the sense-faculty as the antidote; for the realm of sound-objects, he instructs on contemplating the unreality of the realm as the antidote; for the realm of scent-objects, he instructs on assimilating them to coarse phenomena as the antidote; for the realm of taste-objects, he instructs on leaving the mind of grasping as the antidote; for the realm of touch-objects, he instructs on leaving both the grasper and the grasped as the antidote; for the realm of dharma-objects, he instructs on contemplating the emptiness of the realm as the antidote. Constructing it in this way is all permissible; based on these six, he instructs people on multiple remedies, with implicit and explicit differences in discussion. First, saying "seeing visible forms as equal to the blind": a blind person lacks the sense-faculty and does not cling to visible forms. The practitioner should be like this: contemplating the eye's nature as empty, like the blind who lack the faculty and do not grasp at forms. Thus the text below says: "If one knows the nature of the eye, one is without greed, without anger, and without delusion toward forms"; the rest should also be like this. Saying "sounds heard are equal to an echo": an echo is unreal and non-existent, with nothing to be covetously grasped. Contemplating sound as like that, unreal and without substance, with nothing to be covetously grasped; the rest should also be like this. Saying "scents smelled are equal to the wind": the phenomenon of wind is floating and coarse, and people mostly do not cling to it. Contemplating scent as like that, do not give rise to greed and clinging; all the rest should be like this. Saying "tastes eaten are not differentiated": a ladle has no mind; although it is in various tastes, it does not generate differentiation. The practitioner should be like this: one should be like a ladle, eliminating conceptual thought and not generating differentiation; all the rest should be like this. Saying "experiencing various tangibles is like realization through wisdom": when wisdom realizes dharmas, it does not see one's own mind as the grasper, nor does it see the preceding realm as the grasped. The practitioner should be like this: knowing that the body's nature is empty and lacks that which senses, and also contemplating the realm as empty and lacking that which is sensed; therefore it is like realization through wisdom; the rest should also be like this. "Knowing dharmas to be like illusions, without self-nature or other-nature" instructs on contemplating the emptiness of nature. An illusion has no fixed nature; dharmas resemble this illusory dharma in lacking substantial entity, which is called "having no self-nature". Within this illusory dharma, there is also no reality falsely imputed to a self or person, which is called "having no other-nature". "Originally not burning, and now also not extinguished" instructs on contemplating the emptiness of characteristics. Like the dharmic characteristics of causes and conditions in those illusory transformations, they are completely empty and quiescent; not only are they without nature, their characteristics also do not exist. Because they are signless, no dharma can be born, hence originally not burning; no dharma can be exhausted, hence now also not extinguished. Furthermore, knowing them to be like an illusion clarifies that dharmas are not non-existent. Having no self-nature and so on reveals that dharmas are not existent; having no self- or other-nature clarifies that they do not exist by nature. Originally not burning and now also not extinguished clarifies that they do not exist by characteristics. The meaning is as explained before. Furthermore, knowing the characteristics of dharmas to be like an illusion clarifies understanding conventional truth. Having no self-nature and so on clarifies understanding ultimate truth. Having no self- or other-nature is the ultimate truth of the emptiness of nature. Originally not burning and now also not extinguished is the ultimate truth of the emptiness of characteristics. This is also as explained above. Contemplating dharmas being like this, the remaining sense-objects are analogous. The above is the second \[part\], instructing on the deportment of guarding against faults at the time of begging for food. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.9) - [Next: 2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.11) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776~en-mt.2.10) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.10) · Pramāṇa