維摩義記 2.7.3

2.7.3

後三句中，約如、法性、實際三藏以顯即實。 此三何異？ 於真法中空名為如，有名法性，非有非無說實際。 真云何空？ 離相離性。 云何不空？ 具諸佛法。 云何復名非有非無？ 有無同體。 此如、法性、實際之義，廣如別章，此應具論。 所顯真法共此三門同體義分，故得以法即如、法性、實際等也。 就初句中，「法同法性」，當相正辨。 如來藏中一切佛法名為法性，所辨真法與彼一體，一而不異故說為同。 法性云何而說同乎？ 法性清淨常恒不變，所辨亦爾，故說同矣。 「入諸法故」，釋以顯同。 入猶順也。 順諸法性，故名為同。 此一體法，云何名順？ 云何名入？ 體性雖一，義門恒別。 義別體同，故得云入。 下皆同爾。 第二句中，「法隨於如」，當相正辨不異如義。 法界雖別，空理不異，故說為如。 所辨之法順彼如理，故名為隨。 此與如一，何得言隨？ 義如前解，門別義同故得說隨。 前同此隨，言左右耳。 「無所隨故」，釋成隨義。 以於有法無有隨故，隨順如也。 第三句中，「法住實際」，當相正辨。 際謂際畔，處之別稱。 窮實之處，名為實際。 所辨真法即於實際，名之為住。 前隨此住，言左右耳。 「諸邊不動」，釋成住義。 不為有無二邊傾動，故住實際。 其次五句明識空中，前二破相，後三即實。 前兩句中，初約塵以明識空，後句正就識體明空。 就初句中，「法無動搖」，正明理無。 六識之心往來取塵，名為動搖； 真法常住，不同於彼，名不動搖。 「不依六塵」，釋以顯無。 不同六識六塵生，故無動搖。 就後句中，「法無去來」，正明理無。 六識之心三世流轉，名為去來，去是過去、來是未來； 真法不爾，故無去來。 「常不住故」，釋以顯成。 現在名住，若使真法曾住現在，故可對之說去說來。 法無現住，知復望何說去說來？ 此二遣相，下三即實，即三脫門。 三脫之門，義如後解。 「法順空」者，順空門也。 「隨無相」者，隨無相門。 「應無作」者，應無作門。 前順、次隨、後說其應，亦綺言耳。 亦以真法與此三門義異體同，故得說順說隨說應。 就後七句明塵空中，初有四句，正就塵體以說其空； 次有一句，約根辨空； 次有一句，復說塵體以明其空； 末後一句，約識論空。 就初四中，「法離好醜」，明離塵相。 於事分齊，塵有美惡，美名為好惡為名醜； 真法無此，故說為離。 「法無增損」，明離塵用。 順益名增，違總稱損； 真法離此，名無增損。 「法無生滅法無所歸」，明離塵體。 六塵之體有起有盡，說為生滅，屬人曰歸； 真法無此，故無生滅，亦無所歸。 此一分竟。 「法過眼耳鼻舌身心」，約對六根以明塵空。 於事分齊，六塵是其六根所行，不名為過； 真中無塵，根等不及，故名為過。 此兩分竟。 「法無高下」，還就塵體以辨其空。 於事分齊，塵有勝劣，上地塵勝名之為高，下地塵劣說以為下； 真法離此，故無高下。 「常住不動」，釋無高下。 此三分竟。 「法離觀行」，約識辨空。 於事分齊，塵為識緣，不離觀行； 於真法中無塵可緣，是故名離一切觀行。 上來別教。 「法相如是豈可說」者，以理反責。 牒前所辨，名法如是。 名相但絕、心行亦無，豈可宣說？ 上來得就所說以教。 下次約就能說以教。 於中先教離四種心，「然後說」下結勸宣說。 何者四心？ 一、教除見心； 二、「當了」下教離癡心； 三、「以大悲」下教捨小心； 四、「念報恩」下教遠凡心。 初句之中，教令遠離我人之報，名除見心。 於中初先法說以教。 「夫說法者無說無示」，明無說人。 將言對法，名之為說； 以言對人，目之為示。 於理實無，名無說示。 「夫聽法者無聞無得」，明無聽人。 以聽對言，目之為聞； 將聽對法，說以為得。

In the latter three lines, it relies on the three treasuries (garbha) of thusness, dharma-nature, and the reality-limit to reveal that they are identical with true reality. How do these three differ? In the true Dharma, emptiness is called 'thusness', existence is called 'dharma-nature', and neither existence nor non-existence is called the 'reality-limit'. How is the true empty? It is free from characteristics and free from essential nature. How is it not empty? It is endowed with all Buddha-dharmas. How is it further called neither existence nor non-existence? Existence and non-existence share the same substance. The meanings of this thusness, dharma-nature, and reality-limit are extensively [treated] in a separate chapter, which should be discussed fully. The true Dharma revealed shares the same substance with these three gates while differing in aspect; therefore, the Dharma is identical with thusness, dharma-nature, the reality-limit, and so on. In the first line, 'the Dharma is identical with dharma-nature' directly explains it in terms of its characteristics. All Buddha-dharmas within the tathāgatagarbha are called dharma-nature; the true Dharma explained is of one substance with that, being one and not different, hence it is said to be identical. Why is it said to be identical with dharma-nature? Dharma-nature is pure, constant, and changeless, and what is explained here is also like that; hence it is said to be identical. 'Because it enters all dharmas' is an explanation to reveal identity. 'Entering' is like according with: according with the nature of all dharmas, it is therefore called identical. With respect to this Dharma of one substance, how is it called according with? How is it called entering? Although its substantial nature is one, the aspects of meaning are ever distinct. With distinct meanings and one substance, one can therefore speak of 'entering'. The following are all like this. In the second line, 'the Dharma conforms to thusness' directly explains its non-differentiation from the meaning of thusness in terms of its characteristics. Although the dharmadhātu has distinctions, the principle of emptiness is not different, hence it is called thusness. The Dharma explained accords with that principle of thusness, hence it is said to 'conform'. Since this is one with thusness, how can one speak of conforming? The meaning is as explained above: with distinct gates and one meaning, one can speak of conforming. 'Identical with' previously and 'conforming to' here are merely variations in phrasing. 'Because there is nothing it conforms to' explains and establishes the meaning of conforming. Because it does not conform to existent dharmas, it conforms to thusness. In the third line, 'the Dharma abides in the reality-limit' directly explains it in terms of its characteristics. 'Limit' means boundary, which is another name for a place. The place where true reality is exhausted is called the 'reality-limit'. The true Dharma explained is identical with the reality-limit, which is called 'abiding'. 'Conforming' previously and 'abiding' here are merely variations in phrasing. 'Unmoving at all extremes' explains and establishes the meaning of abiding. Because it is not shaken by the two extremes of existence and non-existence, it abides in the reality-limit. Next, the five lines clarify that consciousness is empty: the first two refute characteristics, and the latter three identify with true reality. In the first two lines, the former first clarifies the emptiness of consciousness in relation to dust-objects, and the latter line directly clarifies emptiness in terms of the substance of consciousness. In the first line, 'the Dharma has no agitation' directly clarifies that the principle is absent [of it]. The mind of the six consciousnesses goes back and forth grasping at dust-objects, which is called 'agitation'; the true Dharma is permanently abiding and unlike that, so it is called 'without agitation'. 'Not relying on the six dust-objects' explains to reveal this absence. Because it does not, like the six consciousnesses, arise from the six dust-objects, it is without agitation. In the latter line, 'the Dharma has no coming or going' directly clarifies that the principle is absent [of it]. The mind of the six consciousnesses transmigrates through the three times, which is called 'coming and going', where 'going' is the past and 'coming' is the future; the true Dharma is not like that, hence it has no coming or going. 'Because it is permanently non-abiding' explains to establish this. The present is called 'abiding'; if the true Dharma had once abided in the present, one could speak of going and coming in relation to it. If the Dharma has no present abiding, in reference to what could one speak of going and coming? These two dispel characteristics; the three below identify with true reality, namely the three gates of liberation. The meaning of the three gates of liberation will be explained later. 'The Dharma accords with emptiness' means according with the gate of emptiness. 'Conforms to signlessness' means conforming to the gate of signlessness. 'Responds to aimlessness' means responding to the gate of aimlessness. Speaking of 'accords with' first, 'conforms to' next, and 'responds to' later is also varied phrasing. Furthermore, because the true Dharma differs in aspect but is identical in substance with these three gates, one can speak of according with, conforming to, and responding to. In the latter seven lines clarifying that dust-objects are empty, the first four lines directly address the substance of dust-objects to explain their emptiness; the next line explains emptiness in relation to the sense-faculties; the next line again addresses the substance of dust-objects to clarify their emptiness; and the final line discusses emptiness in relation to consciousness. In the first four, 'the Dharma is free from good and bad' clarifies freedom from the characteristics of dust-objects. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects have the fine and the foul, where the fine is called 'good' and the foul is called 'bad'; the true Dharma has neither, hence it is said to be free from them. 'The Dharma has no increase or decrease' clarifies freedom from the functions of dust-objects. Complying and benefiting is called 'increase', while obstructing and diminishing is called 'decrease'; the true Dharma is free from these, hence it is called 'without increase or decrease'. 'The Dharma has no arising or ceasing; the Dharma has no place to return' clarifies freedom from the substance of dust-objects. The substance of the six dust-objects has arising and termination, which is called arising and ceasing, and belonging to a person is called returning; the true Dharma has neither, hence it has no arising or ceasing, nor any place to return. This concludes one section. 'The Dharma surpasses the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind' clarifies the emptiness of dust-objects in contrast to the six sense-faculties. In the domain of phenomena, the six dust-objects are the realms of action of the six sense-faculties, which is not called surpassing; within the true, there are no dust-objects, and the sense-faculties and the like cannot reach it, hence it is called 'surpassing'. This concludes two sections. 'The Dharma has no high or low' returns to the substance of dust-objects to explain their emptiness. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects have superior and inferior [qualities]: dust-objects of the higher stages are superior and called 'high', while those of the lower stages are inferior and called 'low'; the true Dharma is free from this, hence it has no high or low. 'Permanently abiding and unmoving' explains the lack of high and low. This concludes three sections. 'The Dharma is free from contemplative practice' explains emptiness in relation to consciousness. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects are the conditions for consciousness, not being free from contemplative practice; in the true Dharma, there are no dust-objects to be conditioned, therefore it is called free from all contemplative practice. The above was the specific instruction. 'When the characteristics of dharmas are like this, how can they be spoken of?' rebukes with the principle. Citing what was explained above is called 'the Dharma is like this'. Since names and characteristics are entirely severed, and the activities of the mind are also absent, how could they be proclaimed? The above was instruction regarding what is spoken. Next is instruction regarding the speaker. Herein, it first instructs on abandoning four kinds of minds, and from 'then speak' onward concludes with an exhortation to proclaim. What are the four minds? First, instructing on eliminating the mind of views; second, from 'one should understand' onward, instructing on leaving behind the mind of folly; third, from 'with great compassion' onward, instructing on relinquishing the small mind; fourth, from 'mindful of repaying kindness' onward, instructing on keeping distant from the ordinary mind. In the first line, instructing them to distance themselves from the retribution of self and person is called eliminating the mind of views. Therein, it first instructs with an exposition of the Dharma. 'One who speaks the Dharma has neither speaking nor showing' clarifies that there is no speaker. Applying words to dharmas is called 'speaking'; applying words to persons is termed 'showing'. In ultimate principle, neither truly exists, which is called 'neither speaking nor showing'. 'One who listens to the Dharma has neither hearing nor obtaining' clarifies that there is no listener. Applying listening to words is termed 'hearing'; applying listening to dharmas is said to be 'obtaining'.