維摩義記 3.37

3.37

三緣如是，然今且約第三一門明修無量。理實四行齊有三緣，但今文中言有隱顯。慈無量中備具三緣：初觀眾生人法皆空而起慈行，即是法緣及無緣義。下以六度益眾生等，兼具生緣。悲喜捨中唯眾生緣，餘略不論，良以是中慈為行體，故備三緣；餘三行用，故唯生緣。就前慈中初明修相，「行寂滅」下，明其相成。修在緣觀，成在真心。修中初觀人法皆空，即是法緣及無緣觀。「文殊言」下，依觀修慈。前中文殊先問起發，「云何菩薩觀於眾生」；「維摩」下答。文別有二：一、觀生空，即是法緣；二、「如無色界色」已下，明觀法空，即是無緣。生空觀中有十五句，皆借喻顯。前之一喻別舉別合，後十四喻併舉總合。此有何別？初之十句就相明虛，明五陰相虛無神主；後之五句就情說無，妄情所取畢竟不有。如第五大、第六陰等。又前十句觀相虛假破去人性，後之五句觀理空寂破去人相。前十句中，「譬如幻師見所幻人」，立喻顯法。幻師知幻了了不真，故取為喻。「菩薩觀生為若此」者，合之顯法。下「如智者見水月」等，轉喻顯法。「智者見於水中月」等，知實非有。菩薩生觀實知非有，故取為喻。說何為水？名何以為空中之月？將何以為水中之月？總取水月況生無實，不勞別對。若欲細合，汎解有二：一約眾生分齊以論、二約法說。約生論者，曲有兩義：一起我見、二起我相。若起我見，陰法如水。我見之心，如水中月。於此門中，本識之心及本識中無始薰習我見種子，如空中月。由依此本，於彼妄想五陰法中我妄想生，如水中月。故《地持》云「久遠積習我我所」，著於五受陰，起我妄想，此復為本，如空中月。於彼事相五陰法中我人見起，如水中月。故《地持》云「依我妄想起身見我慢」，若起我想妄心如水，五陰集用我人之相如水中月。於此門中，佛性緣起集用之我，及本識中無始薰習我塵種子，如空中月。由依此本，我妄想中妄相五陰集用人現，如水中月。此復為本，如空中月，於彼事識我見心中，五陰集用我人相現，如水中月。妄心妄境宜相起故。約法論者亦有二種：一起妄心，二起妄心本識之，心及本識中無始熏習妄想種子，如空中月。由依此本，於彼妄相虛偽法中心想見等妄想心生，如水中月。此復為本，如空中月，於彼事相陰界入中事識心生，如水中月。若起妄法，妄心為水，妄法如似水中之月。於此門中，佛性緣起陰界入法，及本識中無始熏習法塵種子，如空中月。由依此本，妄想心中陰界入等虛偽相現，如水中月。此復為本，如空中月。事識心中陰界入等事相法起，如水中月。汎論如是。今約眾生分齊言耳。水月既然，鏡中像等類亦同爾。後五句中，妄情所取我性本無，是故說言如第五大、第六陰等。又復假名人相亦無，是以說言如第五大、第六陰等。於色法中，唯有地水火風四大，更無第五。成身法中，唯有五陰，更無第六。「如第七情」，情猶識也，於事識中唯有六識，更無第七。何故如是？六根之外無第七根，六塵之外無第七識。通妄及真說七說八，理亦無傷。今唯就事，故無第七。生識法中，唯有六根及與六塵十二入法，無第十三。根塵識等隨別開分，唯十八界無第十九。良以此等畢竟無法，似身無我，故取為喻。法空觀中，先喻、後合。喻別十五，言皆可知。上來觀生，明其法緣及無緣義。下明修慈。於中文殊先問起發，若作是觀，不見人法，云何行慈？「維摩」下答。菩薩觀無，自念為生說如斯法，是真行慈。是義云何？為生說前空無我法，能令眾生捨有證空，即是第一義樂與人，故得名慈。

The three conditions are like this; however, now we explain the cultivation of the immeasurables solely in terms of the third approach. In actual principle, all four practices equally possess the three conditions, but in the present text the statements have implicit and explicit aspects. The immeasurable benevolence fully possesses the three conditions: initially contemplating that both person and dharmas of sentient beings are empty and giving rise to the practice of benevolence is the meaning of being conditioned by dharmas and unconditioned. Below, benefiting sentient beings with the six perfections and so forth also possesses being conditioned by sentient beings. Among compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, there is only being conditioned by sentient beings, and the rest are omitted from discussion. Truly, it is because benevolence is the essence of the practice here that it fully possesses the three conditions, whereas the other three are the functioning of the practice, hence they are only conditioned by sentient beings. Regarding the aforementioned benevolence: first, the characteristics of cultivation are explained; from "practicing quiescence" onward, their mutual accomplishment is explained. Cultivation lies in conditioned contemplation; accomplishment lies in the true mind. Within cultivation, first contemplating that both person and dharmas are empty is contemplation conditioned by dharmas and unconditioned. From "Mañjuśrī said" onward, one cultivates benevolence based on contemplation. In the former part, Mañjuśrī first asks to initiate it: "How should a bodhisattva contemplate sentient beings?"; from "Vimalakīrti" onward is the answer. The text specifically has two parts: first, contemplating the emptiness of sentient beings, which is conditioned by dharmas; second, from "like form in the formless realm" onward, explaining the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas, which is unconditioned. Within the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings, there are fifteen clauses, all using metaphors to make it evident. The first metaphor is stated separately and applied separately; the latter fourteen metaphors are brought forward together and applied collectively. What is the difference between these? The first ten clauses explain unreality with respect to characteristics, showing that the characteristics of the five skandhas are unreal and lack a spiritual lord; the latter five clauses speak of non-existence with respect to feelings, where that which is grasped by deluded feelings is ultimately non-existent, like the fifth great element, the sixth skandha, and so forth. Furthermore, the first ten clauses contemplate that characteristics are false and provisional, dismantling the nature of a person; the latter five clauses contemplate that principle is empty and quiescent, dismantling the characteristics of a person. Among the first ten clauses: "Just as a magician sees an illusory person created by magic" establishes a metaphor to reveal the Dharma. The magician knows illusion clearly as not real, and therefore it is taken as a metaphor. "The bodhisattva's contemplation of sentient beings is just like this" applies it to reveal the Dharma. Below, "as a wise person sees the moon in the water," and so forth, turn to other metaphors to reveal the Dharma. "A wise person sees the moon in the water," and so forth, knows that it is truly non-existent. The bodhisattva's contemplation of sentient beings truly knows they are non-existent, and therefore it is taken as a metaphor. What is spoken of as water? What is named as the moon in the sky? What is taken as the moon in the water? Taking the moon in the water collectively as a metaphor for the unreality of sentient beings does not require separate correspondences. If one wishes to make a detailed correspondence, broadly speaking there are two: first, discussed according to the scope of sentient beings; second, spoken of according to dharmas. Discussing it according to sentient beings, there are specifically two senses: first, giving rise to the view of self; second, giving rise to the characteristics of self. If giving rise to the view of self, the dharmas of the skandhas are like water. The mind with the view of self is like the moon in the water. Within this approach, the mind of the fundamental consciousness and the seeds of the view of self perfumed in the fundamental consciousness from beginningless time are like the moon in the sky. Relying on this basis, in those falsely conceptualized dharmas of the five skandhas, the deluded conceptualization of self arises, like the moon in the water. Therefore, the Bodhisattvabhūmi says: "Accumulated habituation of 'I' and 'mine' over a long time," clinging to the five appropriation-skandhas, gives rise to the deluded conceptualization of self; this again becomes the basis, like the moon in the sky. In those phenomenal dharmas of the five skandhas, the view of self and person arises, like the moon in the water. Therefore, the Bodhisattvabhūmi says: "Relying on the deluded conceptualization of self, the view of self and conceit of self arise." If giving rise to the notion of self, the deluded mind is like water, and the characteristics of self and person of the gathered functions of the five skandhas are like the moon in the water. Within this approach, the self of the gathered functions of the dependent origination of Buddha-nature, and the seeds of the dust of self perfumed in the fundamental consciousness from beginningless time, are like the moon in the sky. Relying on this basis, in the deluded conceptualization of self, the person of the gathered functions of the falsely characterized five skandhas appears, like the moon in the water. This again serves as the basis, like the moon in the sky; in the mind of the view of self of that phenomenal consciousness, the characteristics of self and person of the gathered functions of the five skandhas appear, like the moon in the water. Because deluded mind and deluded objects mutually give rise to each other. Discussing it according to dharmas also has two types: first, giving rise to the deluded mind; second, giving rise to the deluded mind's fundamental consciousness: the mind and the seeds of false conceptualization perfumed in the fundamental consciousness from beginningless time are like the moon in the sky. Relying on this basis, in those false and deceptive dharmas of deluded characteristics, deluded conceptualizing minds such as mental notions and views arise, like the moon in the water. This again serves as the basis, like the moon in the sky; in those phenomenal skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas, the mind of phenomenal consciousness arises, like the moon in the water. If giving rise to deluded dharmas: the deluded mind is water, and deluded dharmas are like the moon in the water. Within this approach, the dharmas of skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas dependently originated from Buddha-nature, and the seeds of the dust of dharmas perfumed in the fundamental consciousness from beginningless time, are like the moon in the sky. Relying on this basis, in the mind of false conceptualization, false and deceptive characteristics such as skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas appear, like the moon in the water. This again serves as the basis, like the moon in the sky. In the mind of phenomenal consciousness, phenomenal dharmas such as skandhas, dhātus, and āyatanas arise, like the moon in the water. The general discussion is like this. Here it is merely spoken of in terms of the scope of sentient beings. Since the moon in the water is like this, images in a mirror and the like are of the same kind. In the latter five clauses, the nature of a self grasped by deluded feelings is fundamentally non-existent; therefore, it says: like the fifth great element, the sixth skandha, and so forth. Furthermore, the nominal characteristics of a person are also non-existent; hence, it says: like the fifth great element, the sixth skandha, and so forth. Among material dharmas, there are only the four great elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—and no fifth. Among dharmas that constitute the body, there are only the five skandhas, and no sixth. "Like a seventh faculty": "faculty" (qing) is consciousness; within phenomenal consciousness there are only six consciousnesses, and no seventh. Why is this? Beyond the six sense faculties there is no seventh faculty; beyond the six sense objects there is no seventh consciousness. Comprehensively speaking of the deluded and the true, to speak of seven or eight is also harmless in principle. Here, it is solely with respect to phenomena, hence there is no seventh. Among dharmas that generate consciousness, there are only the twelve āyatana dharmas of the six faculties and the six sense objects, without a thirteenth. As the faculties, objects, and consciousnesses are specifically differentiated, there are only eighteen dhātus, without a nineteenth. Truly, because these are ultimately non-existent dharmas, resembling a body without a self, they are taken as metaphors. In the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas, the metaphors are given first, followed by the application. There are fifteen distinct metaphors, whose words can all be understood. The above on contemplating sentient beings explains the meaning of being conditioned by dharmas and unconditioned. Below, the cultivation of benevolence is explained. Therein, Mañjuśrī first asks to initiate it: if one makes such a contemplation and does not see person or dharmas, how does one practice benevolence? From "Vimalakīrti" onward is the answer. The bodhisattva contemplates non-existence and reflects to himself that expounding such a Dharma for sentient beings is the true practice of benevolence. What is the meaning of this? Expounding the aforementioned Dharma of emptiness and selflessness for sentient beings can cause sentient beings to abandon existence and verify emptiness; this is giving the joy of ultimate truth to others, and therefore it can be called benevolence.