[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) › 2.7 # 維摩義記 2.7 維摩義記 2.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.7.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7.1) 次告目連令往問疾。 目連性字𤘽律陀。 父先無子，從𤘽律陀樹神求得，因與立稱名𤘽律陀。 是王舍城輔相之子，先與舍利同事那若，心專求道而無所得，設謂無道。 那若垂終，病中微嘆。 二人請問：「師何所嘆？ 」那若答曰：「吾念世人恩愛所縛。 其南天竺金地國王身喪火殯，夫人戀憶投火而死。 吾為之嘆。 」二人私記。 那若死後，有諸商人金地國來，二人訪問，如那若語。 二人便言師定得道，但我非人。 遂共要契：「若有所得，必相告語。 」為要之後，佛始出世。 頞鞞比丘入城乞食，舍利見其進止異常，知有勝師。 待乞迴還，舍利便問：「汝師是誰？ 」頞鞞答言：「是大沙門。 」重問：「汝大沙門何所宣說？ 」頞鞞答言：「諸法因緣生，大沙門所說。 諸法因緣滅，大沙門所說。 」舍利聞之豁然悟解，即於言下道證初果。 迴至本處，目連遙見即知有得，尋便問之。 舍利還以所聞具答，目連聞之亦悟初果。 二人因即投佛出家，徒眾亦從往至佛所，並得羅漢。 目連於佛弟子之中神通第一，今命問疾。 於中先告，後辭不堪。 辭中初總，「所以」下釋，「是故」下結。 初總了知，釋中所以自徵起後，下正辨釋。 於中有四：一、舉己昔被呵由緣； 二、「時維摩」下，彰被呵辭； 三、「說是法時八百居士發菩提」下，教呵利益； 四、「我無此辨」，自申卑𨷂，彰彼難及。 初中「憶昔」，舉被呵時。 「入毘耶離於里巷中」，出被呵處。 「為居士說」，陳被呵事。 說何等法？ 文中不辨，當應為彼白衣居士說戒說施生天法等，故下被呵。 自下第二，明教呵辭。 何故須然？ 為益目連及諸居士，所以教呵。 文中「維摩來謂」，總舉。 「唯」下，是別。 別中「不當如仁者說」，是呵辭也。 教不應法，故曰不當。 又不應機，亦是不當。 夫「說法」下，教其正說。 於中有二：一、約所說法體以教； 二、「夫說法者無說無示」下，約就能說之儀以教。 前中廣顯法寶之相令人證入。 於中初總，「法無」下別。 「法相如是豈可說」下，以理及責。 就初總中，「夫說法者」，總舉說事。 「當如法說」，總以教勸，當如法寶體性而說。 「法無生」下，隨法別教。 於中廣顯法寶體相，令依宣說。 法寶體相，如《涅槃經》念法中說：妙寂離相，圓具眾義，諸佛菩薩所遊行處，常恒不變。 此即經中佛性真法如來藏矣。 藏是一切諸法實性，是實性中無諸法相，故此文中破相顯之，宣說無生亦無諸法。 言雖說空，約實而辨，故下文中皆就法體說無眾生、無壽命等。 然法虛融，義無不在，今此且約五陰及與十八界門而演說之，餘類可知。 先就五陰明法離相、法無我所。 「離我所」下，就十八界明法離相。 眾生起計多在此處，故就論之。 前五陰中，句別有十，辨義唯二：前之四句明人無我，後之六句明法無我。 二無我義，廣如別章，此應具論。 人無我中，四句何別？ 初句明其真法體中無有眾生，第二無我，第三無壽，第四無人。 此即是彼《勝鬘經》中如來藏者非我眾生、非命非人四種義也。 我眾生等四種何異而須別遣？ 通釋一物其猶眼目，於中別分非無差異。 異相如何？ 宣說陰體以為神主，名之為我。 和合之中計有定實，說為眾生。 相續之中計有神性任持不斷，名為壽命。 作用之中立有主宰，說之為人。 翻對彼故，說無我人眾生壽命。 故彼《轉女身經》說云「觀內無我、外無眾生、內外和合無其壽命，畢竟清淨。 」所以無人，觀內無我，陰體非神。 外無生者，五陰集用，望其陰體名之為外，於中無實，名無眾生。 內外和合無壽命者，陰共假生，相續名命，無別命體，畢竟清淨。 名無人者，宰用名人，以無我體，人用亦無，畢竟淨。 文中初言「法無眾生」，正明理無，謂於真實法寶體中無有眾生。 > Next, \[the Buddha\] told Maudgalyāyana to go and inquire after \[Vimalakīrti's\] illness. Maudgalyāyana's family name was Kolita. His father had originally been childless and, praying to a kolita tree-spirit, obtained him; hence he was given the name Kolita. He was the son of a chief minister in Rājagṛha. Formerly, together with Śāriputra, he was a student of Sañjaya. With their minds exclusively set on seeking the Way, they attained nothing, and supposed there was no Way. Sañjaya was approaching the end of his life and, while ill, sighed softly. The two disciples inquired, "Master, what are you sighing for?" Sañjaya answered, "I am thinking of how worldly people are bound by love and affection. The king of the country of Suvarṇabhūmi in South India has passed away, and during his cremation by fire, the queen, pining for him, threw herself into the flames and died. That is what I was sighing about." The two men made a private mental note of it. After Sañjaya died, merchants arrived from Suvarṇabhūmi; the two men made inquiries, and it was just as Sañjaya had spoken. The two men then remarked that their master had certainly attained the Way, but they themselves were not the right sort of people. They then made a pact together: "If either attains anything, he must inform the other." After making this pact, the Buddha had only just appeared in the world. The monk Aśvajit entered the city to beg for alms; Śāriputra saw his deportment was extraordinary and knew he had an exceptional master. Waiting until he was returning from begging, Śāriputra asked him, "Who is your master?" Aśvajit answered, "He is a great śramaṇa." Śāriputra asked again, "What does your great śramaṇa proclaim?" Aśvajit answered: "Of all dharmas that arise from causes and conditions, the great śramaṇa has spoken their cause; of all dharmas that cease from causes and conditions, the great śramaṇa has spoken their cessation." Hearing this, Śāriputra was opened up in awakening and understanding, directly realizing the first fruit \[of the path\] upon those words. Returning to their dwelling, Maudgalyāyana saw him from afar and immediately knew he had attained something, promptly inquiring about it. Śāriputra replied with all that he had heard, and upon hearing it, Maudgalyāyana also awakened to the first fruit. The two men consequently went to the Buddha to renounce the household life, and their disciples followed them to the Buddha's presence; all attained arhatship. Maudgalyāyana was foremost in supernatural powers among the Buddha's disciples; now he was commanded to inquire after the illness. Within this \[passage\], \[the Buddha\] first commands him, and afterwards he declines, saying he is not equal to it. In his declining, it begins with an overarching statement; below "For what reason" is an explanation; below "Therefore" is a conclusion. The initial overarching statement is readily understood; in the explanation, "for what reason" raises a rhetorical question to prompt what follows, beneath which it provides a proper analysis and explanation. Therein are four parts: first, adducing the circumstances under which he was formerly rebuked; second, below "At that time Vimalakīrti", showing the words of rebuke; third, below "When this Dharma was spoken, eight hundred laymen gave rise to the aspiration for bodhi", the benefit of the instructional rebuke; fourth, \[in\] "I lack such eloquence", expressing his own unworthiness and shortcomings, showing how difficult that person is to equal. In the first part, "Remembering the past" adduces the time when he was rebuked. "Entering Vaiśālī, in the lanes and alleys" indicates the place where he was rebuked. "Expounding for the householders" sets forth the matter over which he was rebuked. What kind of Dharma was he expounding? The text does not specify; it must have been that he was expounding morality, giving, the teachings on rebirth in heaven, and so on for those white-robed householders, which is why he was subsequently rebuked. From here follows the second \[part\], clarifying the words of instructional rebuke. Why was this necessary? It was to benefit Maudgalyāyana and the householders that he gave this instructional rebuke. In the text, "Vimalakīrti came and said" is an overarching introduction. Below "O…" is the specific \[rebuke\]. Within the specific part, "You should not speak as the benevolent one does" is the word of rebuke. His teaching did not accord with the Dharma, hence "you should not"; moreover, it did not accord with their capacities, which is also "you should not". Beneath "For one who expounds the Dharma", he instructs him on how to expound it correctly. Herein are two points: first, instructing him with respect to the essential nature of the Dharma to be expounded; second, below "For one who expounds the Dharma, there is nothing to expound and nothing to demonstrate", instructing him with respect to the deportment of one who is capable of expounding. In the former, he extensively reveals the characteristics of the Dharma Jewel to cause people to realize and enter it. Herein it begins with a general statement; below "The Dharma has no…" is the detailed breakdown. Below "If the characteristics of the Dharma are like this, how could it be expounded?", he drives home the rebuke by means of the underlying principle. Regarding the initial general statement, "For one who expounds the Dharma" broadly introduces the act of expounding. "Ought to expound it according to the Dharma" is a general instruction and exhortation: one should expound in accordance with the essential nature of the Dharma Jewel. Below "The Dharma has no arising", he gives specific instructions following the Dharma. Therein he extensively reveals the essential characteristics of the Dharma Jewel, causing him to proclaim \[the teaching\] in reliance upon them. The essential characteristics of the Dharma Jewel are as spoken in the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* regarding mindfulness of the Dharma: wondrously quiescent and free of characteristics, fully possessing all meanings, the sphere traversed by all buddhas and bodhisattvas, constant, eternal, and unchanging. This is precisely the true Dharma of buddha-nature, the tathāgatagarbha, in the sūtra. The garbha is the true nature of all dharmas, and within this true nature there are no characteristics of dharmas; hence in this passage he reveals it by refuting characteristics, proclaiming that there is no arising and no dharmas. Though he speaks of emptiness, it is analyzed in terms of the real; therefore, in the text below, he speaks of no sentient being, no lifespan, and so forth, entirely in reference to the essential nature of dharmas. However, the Dharma is empty and interfused, and there is nowhere its principle does not extend; now, he expounds it provisionally in terms of the gates of the five skandhas and the eighteen dhātus; the rest may be inferred accordingly. First, he clarifies that the Dharma is free from characteristics and the Dharma has no "mine" in terms of the five skandhas. Below "Free from 'mine'", he clarifies that the Dharma is free from characteristics in terms of the eighteen dhātus. It is mostly regarding these that sentient beings generate conceptual reckonings, so he discusses them accordingly. In the preceding \[discussion of\] the five skandhas, there are ten distinct phrases, which discern only two principles: the first four phrases clarify the selflessness of persons, and the latter six phrases clarify the selflessness of dharmas. The meaning of the two kinds of selflessness is extensive as in the separate chapter, and should be fully discussed here. Among \[the phrases on\] the selflessness of persons, how do the four phrases differ? The first phrase clarifies that within the essence of the true Dharma there is no sentient being; the second, no self; the third, no lifespan; the fourth, no person. These are precisely the four meanings found in that \*Śrīmālādevī Sūtra\*: the tathāgatagarbha is not a self, not a sentient being, not a life, and not a person. How do these four—self, sentient being, and so forth—differ such that they must be eliminated separately? Broadly interpreted, they are a single entity, like eyes and vision, yet within it, distinct divisions are not without differences. What are their different characteristics? Declaring the substance of the skandhas to be a spiritual master is called "self". Reckoning a determinate reality within their aggregate is spoken of as "sentient being". Reckoning within their continuity that a spiritual nature sustains it uninterruptedly is called "lifespan". Positing within their activities a controller is spoken of as "person". Countering these, it is said that there is no self, person, sentient being, or lifespan. Thus that \*Sūtra on the Transformation of the Female Body\* says: "Contemplating internally there is no self, externally there are no sentient beings, and the internal-external combination has no lifespan; they are ultimately pure." As for why there is no person: contemplating internally there is no self means the substance of the skandhas is not a spirit. That externally there are no sentient beings: the collected activities of the five skandhas, viewed against the substance of those skandhas, are called "external"; within them there is no reality, which is called "no sentient beings". That the internal-external combination has no lifespan: the skandhas arise together provisionally, and their continuity is called "life"; there is no separate life-substance, and it is ultimately pure. Being called "no person": the active controller is called "person"; because there is no self-substance, human agency is also non-existent, and it is ultimately pure. In the text, it first says "The Dharma has no sentient being", directly clarifying its non-existence in principle, meaning that within the real essence of the Dharma Jewel there are no sentient beings. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.7.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7.2) 所無有三：一、無橫計神我眾生； 二、於假名眾生之中無其定性； 三、無假名眾生之相。 此等皆是情相之有，故悉無之，餘用類爾。 「離生垢」者，破情顯理。 取我之心名眾生垢； 真法之中無此我心，名離生垢。 以無垢心，故無眾生。 第二句中，「法無我者」，正明理無。 亦真法中無三種我，準前可知。 「離我垢」者，破情顯理，義同前解。 此兩句中破情顯理，後二句中破相顯理，宜須記知。 第三句中，「法無壽命」，正明理無，亦真法中無三種壽，準前可知。 「離生死」者，破相顯理。 若真法中有其生死，故可就之說有壽命； 既無生死，就何說壽？ 第四句中，「法無人」者，正明理無，亦真法中無三種人，準前可知。 「前後際斷」，破相顯理。 有為之法前後相起，前為前際、後為後際。 若真法中有此二際，則可就之以說於人； 真中無此，就何說人？ 於情為有、於理本無，翻情顯理故說為斷，非有所除。 就後六句明法空中，初二離相、次二離名，次有一句結前離相，末後一句結上離名。 初兩句中，前之一句正明離相。 後之一句破去心緣成前離相。 就初句中，「法常寂然」，正明理無。 真法不動故曰寂然。 「滅諸相」者，破相顯寂。 五陰是相，於真本無，名滅諸相。 有相不寂，無故寂矣。 就後句中，「法離於相」，正明理無。 於真法中無五陰相，名法離相。 「無所緣」者，破相顯理。 若真法中有相可緣，不名離相； 於真法中無相可緣，故法離相。 以無所緣，能緣亦無。 次兩句中，前之一句破名破說，後之一句破去心覺成前離說。 就初句中，「法無名字」，正明理無，謂真法中無彼妄想所立名字。 「言語斷」者，破去言說顯成無名。 名是言本，以無名故言語不生，名言語斷。 舉語言斷，成名無矣。 就後句中，「法無言說離覺觀故」，破情顯理。 覺觀言因，以真法中無覺觀故言語不生，故無言說。 麁思名覺，細思稱觀，此皆情道； 真法出情，故無覺觀。 次下一句，結前離相。 「法無形相」，正辨理無，謂真法中無陰形相。 以此結前離相之義，故說無相。 「如虛空故」，類以顯之。 真法離相，似世大虛，故言如空。 自下一句，結前離名。 「法無戲論」，正明理無。 理外名言斯成戲論，真中離此名無戲論。 以此結前離名之義，故說無戲。 「畢竟空故」，釋以顯無。 永絕言論，名畢竟空。 上來就陰明法離相。 自下第二，就十八界明法離相。 六根、六塵及以六識是十八界。 文中句別有其十九：初之一句明人無我，後十八句明法無我。 就初句中，「法無我所」，正明理無。 明真法中無我及所，義如上解。 「離我所故」，釋以顯無。 法空中句雖十八，相從為三：初有六句，明六根空； 「法無動」下五句之文，明六識空； 「法離好」下七句之文，明六塵空。 初六句中，前三破相，後三即實。 就前三中，初句約識以明根空，第二約塵以彰根空，第三約自而顯根空。 就初句中，「法無分別」，正明理無。 於真法中無有六根生識了塵，名無分別。 「離諸識故」，釋以顯無。 於事分齊，六根生識； 真中無此，名離諸識。 以離諸識，故無分別。 第二句中，「法無有比」，正明理無。 根塵相對，名之為比； 真中無此，名法無比。 「相待者無」，釋以顯無。 以無根塵相形待故，說為無比。 第三句中，「法不屬因」，正明理無。 於事分齊，根從因起，與因作果，名為屬因； 真中無此，名不屬因。 「不在緣故」，釋以顯無。 親生名因，疎助稱緣。 有緣可在則可對之說其屬因； 無緣可在，知復對何說為屬因？ 亦可緣者因之別稱，言不在緣，當知猶是不在因矣，不能重言彰不在緣。 生不離緣，因之為在； 真不假緣，故曰不在。 不在緣故，不屬因耳。 > That which is absent comprises three aspects: first, there is no arbitrarily imagined soul-self as a sentient being; second, within conventionally designated sentient beings there is no determinate nature; third, there are no characteristics of conventionally designated sentient beings. These are all the existence of emotional mental marks, and therefore are entirely absent; the rest are to be analogized accordingly. "Apart from the defilement of being": this refutes feelings to reveal the principle. The mind that grasps at a self is called the defilement of sentient beings; within the true Dharma there is no such mind of self, which is called being apart from the defilement of being. Because there is no defiled mind, there are no sentient beings. In the second phrase, "the Dharma is without a self": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. Likewise, within the true Dharma there are no three kinds of self, which can be understood according to the above. "Apart from the defilement of self": this refutes feelings to reveal the principle, its meaning being the same as the previous explanation. In these two phrases, feelings are refuted to reveal the principle; in the subsequent two phrases, characteristics are refuted to reveal the principle, which should be remembered and understood. In the third phrase, "the Dharma is without a life span": this directly clarifies the absence in principle; likewise, within the true Dharma there are no three kinds of life span, which can be understood according to the above. "Apart from birth and death": this refutes characteristics to reveal the principle. If within the true Dharma there were birth and death, one could accordingly speak of having a life span; since there is no birth and death, based on what could one speak of a life span? In the fourth phrase, "the Dharma is without a person": this directly clarifies the absence in principle; likewise, within the true Dharma there are no three kinds of person, which can be understood according to the above. "The previous and subsequent limits are severed": this refutes characteristics to reveal the principle. Conditioned dharmas arise sequentially before and after; the prior is the anterior limit, and the subsequent is the posterior limit. If within the true Dharma these two limits existed, one could accordingly speak of a person; since in the true these do not exist, based on what could one speak of a person? Existing for emotional feelings, but originally nonexistent in principle, inverting feelings to reveal the principle is therefore spoken of as being severed; it is not that there is something eliminated. Regarding the subsequent six phrases that clarify the emptiness of dharmas: the first two are apart from characteristics, the next two are apart from names, the next single phrase concludes the preceding being apart from characteristics, and the final phrase concludes the above being apart from names. In the first two phrases, the preceding single phrase directly clarifies being apart from characteristics. The subsequent single phrase refutes mental objects to establish the preceding being apart from characteristics. In the first phrase, "the Dharma is constantly quiescent": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. Because the true Dharma is unmoving, it is said to be quiescent. "Extinguishing all characteristics": this refutes characteristics to reveal quiescence. The five skandhas are characteristics, which are originally nonexistent in the true; this is called extinguishing all characteristics. That which possesses characteristics is not quiescent; because they are absent, it is quiescent. In the subsequent phrase, "the Dharma is apart from characteristics": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. That within the true Dharma there are no characteristics of the five skandhas is called the Dharma being apart from characteristics. "Without cognitive objects": this refutes characteristics to reveal the principle. If within the true Dharma there were characteristics that could be taken as objects, it could not be called being apart from characteristics; within the true Dharma there are no characteristics that could be taken as objects, and therefore the Dharma is apart from characteristics. Because there are no cognitive objects, that which cognizes is also absent. In the next two phrases, the preceding phrase refutes names and refutes discourse; the subsequent phrase refutes mental initial and sustained thought to establish the preceding being apart from discourse. In the first phrase, "the Dharma has no names": this directly clarifies the absence in principle, meaning that within the true Dharma there are no names established by that false discrimination. "Words and speech are severed": this refutes words and speech to reveal and establish the absence of names. Names are the basis of speech; because there are no names, words and speech do not arise, which is called words and speech being severed. Bringing up the severance of words and speech establishes the absence of names. In the subsequent phrase, "the Dharma is without discourse, because it is apart from initial and sustained thought": this refutes feelings to reveal the principle. Initial and sustained thought are the causes of speech; because within the true Dharma there is no initial and sustained thought, words and speech do not arise, and therefore there is no discourse. Coarse thinking is called initial thought, and subtle thinking is called sustained thought; these are all paths of emotional feelings. The true Dharma transcends feelings, and therefore has no initial or sustained thought. The next phrase concludes the preceding being apart from characteristics. "The Dharma has no form or characteristics": this directly explains the absence in principle, meaning that within the true Dharma there are no forms or characteristics of the skandhas. Using this to conclude the preceding meaning of being apart from characteristics, it is therefore said to be signless. "Because it is like empty space": this illustrates it by comparison to reveal it. The true Dharma is apart from characteristics, resembling the great space of the world, and so it is said to be like empty space. The next phrase concludes the preceding being apart from names. "The Dharma is without prapañca": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. Names and words outside of principle constitute prapañca; within the true, being apart from these is called being without prapañca. Using this to conclude the preceding meaning of being apart from names, it is therefore said to be without prapañca. "Because it is ultimate emptiness": this explains it to reveal nonexistence. Permanently cutting off words and discourse is called ultimate emptiness. The above has clarified the Dharma being apart from characteristics in terms of the skandhas. From here on, the second section clarifies the Dharma being apart from characteristics in terms of the eighteen dhātus. The six sense faculties, six sense dusts, and six consciousnesses are the eighteen dhātus. In the text, the distinct phrases number nineteen: the first single phrase clarifies the selflessness of persons, and the subsequent eighteen phrases clarify the selflessness of dharmas. In the first phrase, "the Dharma is without what belongs to a self": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. It clarifies that within the true Dharma there is neither self nor what belongs to it, its meaning being as explained above. "Because it is apart from what belongs to a self": this explains it to reveal nonexistence. Although the phrases in the emptiness of dharmas number eighteen, they group together into three: first there are six phrases clarifying the emptiness of the six sense faculties; from "the Dharma has no movement" downward, the five phrases clarify the emptiness of the six consciousnesses; from "the Dharma is apart from the favorable" downward, the seven phrases clarify the emptiness of the six sense dusts. In the first six phrases, the first three refute characteristics, and the last three conform to reality. In the first three, the first phrase clarifies the emptiness of faculties in relation to consciousness, the second clarifies the emptiness of faculties in relation to sense dusts, and the third reveals the emptiness of faculties in relation to themselves. In the first phrase, "the Dharma has no discrimination": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. That within the true Dharma there are no six sense faculties generating consciousness to apprehend sense dusts is called having no discrimination. "Because it is apart from the consciousnesses": this explains it to reveal nonexistence. In the division of phenomenal affairs, the six faculties generate consciousness; within the true these do not exist, which is called being apart from the consciousnesses. Because it is apart from the consciousnesses, it is without discrimination. In the second phrase, "the Dharma is without comparison": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. The mutual pairing of faculties and dusts is termed comparison; within the true this does not exist, which is called the Dharma being without comparison. "That which is mutually dependent does not exist": this explains it to reveal nonexistence. Because there is no mutual dependence between faculties and dusts, it is spoken of as being without comparison. In the third phrase, "the Dharma does not belong to causes": this directly clarifies the absence in principle. In the division of phenomenal affairs, faculties arise from causes and act as effects to causes, which is called belonging to causes; within the true this does not exist, which is called not belonging to causes. "Because it does not reside in conditions": this explains it to reveal nonexistence. That which directly produces is called a cause, and that which distantly assists is called a condition. If there were conditions that could be present, then relative to them one could speak of belonging to causes; if there are no conditions that can be present, relative to what could one again speak of belonging to causes? Alternatively, conditions may be another name for causes; when saying it does not reside in conditions, one should know that it still means not residing in causes, not repeating words to demonstrate not residing in conditions. Arising is not separate from conditions, and is said to reside in them as causes; the true does not depend on conditions, and therefore is said not to reside in them. Because it does not reside in conditions, it simply does not belong to causes. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.7.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7.3) 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'. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.7.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7.4) 於理亦無，名無聞得。 次以喻顯。 「譬如幻士」，喻無說人。 「為幻士說」，喻無聽人。 「當建」下勸。 第二句中，教知根法然後起說，名離癡心。 「當了眾生根有利鈍」，勸知根也。 以前目連說不應機，故勸了根。 「善於知見無所罣礙」，勸知法也。 以前目連言不當理，故勸知法。 第三句中教修廣心，教生大意名捨小心。 「以大悲」者，教修廣心。 廣念眾生，名為大悲。 「讚于大乘」，教生大心。 以心大故，稱讚大乘。 第四句中教離魔業外道邪學，名遠凡心。 「念報佛恩」，教離魔業。 依佛法而得利益反欲加損，名背佛恩。 菩薩番彼念欲護法，名報佛恩。 「不斷三寶」，教離外道。 外道習邪乖違正法，名斷三寶。 菩薩番，彼自求正法轉教他人，能令三寶相續不絕，是故名為不斷三寶。 上來別教。 「然後說法」，總以結勸。 上來第二明教呵辭。 第三教益、第四目連自中卑闕，文顯可知。 前辭，後釋。 「是故不任」，總結不堪。 > In ultimate principle, these too are absent, which is called 'neither hearing nor obtaining'. Next, this is illustrated with a simile. 'Just like a phantom person' illustrates that there is no speaker. 'Speaking to a phantom person' illustrates that there is no listener. From 'One should establish' onward is an exhortation. In the second line, instructing one to know the faculties and dharmas before giving rise to speech is called leaving behind the mind of folly. 'One should understand that the faculties of sentient beings are sharp or dull' exhorts to know the faculties. Because previously Maudgalyāyana did not preach according with capacity, he is exhorted to understand the faculties. 'Skilled in knowledge and vision without obstruction' exhorts to know dharmas. Because previously Maudgalyāyana's words were not in accord with principle, he is exhorted to know dharmas. In the third line, instructing one to cultivate a vast mind and instructing one to give rise to great intention is called relinquishing the small mind. 'With great compassion' instructs one to cultivate a vast mind. Comprehensively being mindful of sentient beings is called great compassion. 'Praising the Mahāyāna' instructs one to give rise to a great mind. Because the mind is great, one praises the Mahāyāna. In the fourth line, instructing one to stay free from the deeds of Māra and the heterodox teachings of non-Buddhists is called keeping distant from the ordinary mind. 'Mindful of repaying the Buddha's kindness' instructs one to stay free from the deeds of Māra. Relying on the Buddha's Dharma to gain benefit and conversely wishing to cause harm is called betraying the Buddha's kindness. When a bodhisattva turns this around and is mindful of wishing to protect the Dharma, this is called repaying the Buddha's kindness. 'Not severing the Three Jewels' instructs one to stay free from non-Buddhists. When non-Buddhists practice heterodoxy and run counter to the correct Dharma, this is called severing the Three Jewels. When a bodhisattva turns this around, seeking the correct Dharma for himself and transforming others by teaching, he can make the Three Jewels continue without interruption; therefore, this is called not severing the Three Jewels. The above was the specific instruction. 'Then speak the Dharma' summarises as an exhortation. The above was the second part, explaining the words of instruction and rebuke. The third is the benefit of the instruction, and the fourth is Maudgalyāyana's expressing his own inferiority and deficiency; the text is clear and can be understood. First is the decline, and then the explanation. 'Therefore, I am not capable' summarises his inability. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776~en-mt.2.7.1) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (3) - [維摩經疏卷第三．第六](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.9) — Classical Chinese - [注維摩詰經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1775.2.297) — Classical Chinese - [淨名經集解關中疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2777.1.347) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.2.7) · Pramāṇa