維摩義記 3.13

3.13

自下第四總以結勸。「文殊師利有疾菩薩應當如是觀察諸法」，前所說中就初以勸，應說病法非真非有。前唯約病修智修悲，自下第二明唯約身修智修悲。「又復觀身無常苦空無我名慧」，是修智也。觀此身法而生厭離，故名為慧。雖身有疾常在生死，饒益一切而不厭倦，是名方便，是修悲也。自下第三雙約身病修智修悲。「又復觀身，身不離病病不離身，是病是身非新非故，是名為慧」，是修智也。隨事分齊。身是苦身即體是病，故身與病不相捨離。下重顯之。「是病」牒病，「是身」牒身。亦可是病，身是病也。言是身者，病是身也。此二同體，起無前後，名非新故。噵此何為？若別體法，起容先後，先故後新。今言身病非新非故，明非別體。非別體故，厭斷病者身亦須厭。「設身有疾而不永滅是名方便」，是修悲也。假有非定，是以言設。上來三對，隨別廣教。下總結勸。「文殊有疾菩薩應當如是調伏其心」，前明修相，下明成相。病愈德立，名為成矣。由前智悲勳成菩薩不住行德。於中有四：第一、寄對以顯不住；二、「雖過魔」下，約就修義以明不住。三、「雖行空」下，歷諸行門而顯不住。四、「雖觀諸法不生滅」下，就佛果德以說不住。初中四句：第一、約對愚智二人以顯不住。愚謂凡夫，智謂聲聞。中初先正明不住。「不住中」者，不住向前調伏心中。專住調心，不能現染攝化眾生，是故不住，此異聲聞。「亦復不住不調伏」者，明異凡夫。專住不調，便起染過招集生死，是以不住。「所以」下釋，先徵、後辨，反以顯之。「若住不調是愚人法」，釋後不住不調所以。「若住調心是聲聞法」，釋前不住其中所以。「是故」已下，結勸不住。「離此二」下，結成菩薩不住道行。第二約對生死涅槃二種果法以彰不住。初先正辨。「在於生死不為污行」，不樂有為。「住於涅槃不永滅度」，不著無為。「是菩薩行」，總以結之。第三約對凡聖二人而顯不住。初先正辨。「非凡夫行」，不著於有。「非賢聖行」，不住於空。「是行」總結。第四約對生死涅槃二種因法以論不住。初先正辨。「非垢行」者，常修無漏。「非淨行」者，現起有漏。「是行」總結。此初段竟。

From here below is the fourth [section], a general concluding exhortation. 'Mañjuśrī, a bodhisattva who has an illness should contemplate all dharmas in this way' offers an exhortation in terms of the beginning among what was spoken before, stating that the dharmas of illness are neither real nor existent. Previously, one cultivated wisdom and compassion solely in terms of illness; from here below, the second part explains cultivating wisdom and compassion solely in terms of the body. 'Furthermore, contemplating that the body is impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self is called wisdom' is cultivating wisdom. Contemplating this dharma of the body and giving rise to aversion and detachment is therefore called wisdom. Although the body has an illness, constantly remaining in saṃsāra to benefit all without weariness is called upāya; this is cultivating compassion. From here below, the third part cultivates wisdom and compassion in terms of both body and illness together. 'Furthermore, contemplating the body: the body is not separate from illness, and illness is not separate from the body; this illness and this body are neither new nor old; this is called wisdom' is cultivating wisdom. In accordance with the demarcation of things, the body is a body of suffering, so its essence is illness itself; therefore, the body and the illness do not abandon one another. Below, it reveals this again. 'This illness' reiterates illness; 'this body' reiterates body. It can also be: 'is illness' means the body is illness; saying 'is body' means illness is the body. These two are of the same essence, and their arising has no before and after; this is called 'neither new nor old'. Why is this stated? If they were dharmas of distinct essences, their arising might allow a before and after: the former being old, the latter new. Now, saying that body and illness are neither new nor old makes clear that they are not distinct essences. Because they are not distinct essences, when detesting and cutting off illness, the body must also be detested. 'Even if the body has an illness, not entering eternal extinction is called upāya' is cultivating compassion. Since it is provisional and not fixed, it therefore says 'even if'. The preceding three pairs give broad instruction according to their distinctions. Below, it concludes with a general exhortation: 'Mañjuśrī, a bodhisattva who has an illness should tame his mind in this way.' The former explained the marks of practice; the latter explains the marks of accomplishment. When the illness is cured and virtue is established, this is called accomplishment. From the preceding wisdom and compassion, the bodhisattva's virtuous quality of non-abiding practice is fully forged. In this there are four parts: first, revealing non-abiding by relying on contrasts; second, from 'Although surpassing Māra' downward, explaining non-abiding in terms of the meaning of cultivation; third, from 'Although practicing emptiness' downward, revealing non-abiding by going through various gates of practice; fourth, from 'Although contemplating that all dharmas do not arise and do not cease' downward, speaking of non-abiding in terms of the virtues of the Buddha's fruit. Within the first part there are four phrases: First, revealing non-abiding by contrasting two people, the foolish and the wise. The foolish means worldlings; the wise means śrāvakas. Therein, it first directly clarifies non-abiding. 'Not abiding therein' means not abiding in the aforementioned tamed mind. Exclusively abiding in taming the mind, one cannot manifest defilements to gather in and transform sentient beings, and therefore one does not abide; this differs from the śrāvakas. 'And also not abiding in being untamed' makes clear the difference from worldlings. Exclusively abiding in being untamed, one then gives rise to defiled faults and accumulates saṃsāra, which is why one does not abide. 'Why is this?' downward explains it, first asking and then distinguishing, reversing it to reveal it. 'If one abides in being untamed, it is the dharma of a foolish person' explains the reason for the latter 'not abiding in being untamed'. 'If one abides in taming the mind, it is the dharma of a śrāvaka' explains the reason for the former 'not abiding therein'. 'Therefore' downward concludes with an exhortation not to abide. 'Leaving these two behind' downward concludes the bodhisattva's practice of the path of non-abiding. Second, manifesting non-abiding by contrasting the two kinds of resultant dharmas: saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. First, it directly distinguishes them: 'Being in saṃsāra, not performing defiled conduct' means not taking pleasure in the conditioned. 'Abiding in nirvāṇa, not undergoing eternal extinction' means not clinging to the unconditioned. 'This is the bodhisattva's practice' concludes it in general. Third, revealing non-abiding by contrasting two people, worldlings and noble ones. First, it directly distinguishes them: 'Not the practice of worldlings' means not clinging to existence. 'Not the practice of worthy and noble ones' means not abiding in emptiness. 'This is the practice' concludes generally. Fourth, discussing non-abiding by contrasting the two kinds of causal dharmas: saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. First, it directly distinguishes them: 'Not defiled practice' means constantly cultivating the uncontaminated. 'Not pure practice' means manifesting contaminated states. 'This is the practice' concludes generally. This ends the first section.