維摩義記 3.59

3.59

問曰：直爾修淨便足，何用行染？解有四義：一、約行分別。行有自利利他之異，自行修淨、化他現染，現染對破聲聞偏淨、修淨對破凡夫偏染。故上文言「非垢非淨是菩薩行」。第二、約就化人分別。人有凡聖，化凡現染、化聖修淨。又復人有大小之別，教大起染、化小唯淨。三、隨法分別。法有世間、涅槃之異，願隨世間必須現染、欲求涅槃必須修淨。四、顯實分別。如來藏中有二種門：一是寂滅真如之門、二是緣起作用之門。欲證是二必須了因，欲入寂門必須修淨而作了因，欲隨用門必須行染以為了因。有此多義，故今此中現行染法通達佛道。然此染行，人言唯應，他見我作義實不作，此乃一相非謂一切。若唯應者，今此所修豈可是其應通佛道？地經所說發起勝行，豈可是其應殊勝行而非實乎？實有所修，那得唯應？於中分別有修有成，修必力厲學起，非我不為。成有三義：一、約情分別。他見我為，我實不作，作染之情聖已斷故。二、約因分別。所現染用皆是大悲願力因起，非直他見。三、約法分別。所現染用皆是緣起三昧法門之所示現，如如意珠雨眾寶物。故《涅槃》云「大般涅槃能建大義，金剛三昧種種示現。」如《華嚴》中善財所求法界之門，各有作用。如是等也。既從悲願法門力起，何得定說我實不為但是他見？

Question: Simply cultivating purity would be sufficient; why would they practice defilement? There are four points to this explanation: First, it is distinguished in terms of practice. Practice has the distinction of benefiting oneself and benefiting others: in one's own practice one cultivates purity, while to transform others one manifests defilement; manifesting defilement counters and refutes the śrāvaka's one-sided purity, and cultivating purity counters and refutes the ordinary person's one-sided defilement. Therefore the text above says, "Neither defilement nor purity is the bodhisattva's practice." Second, it is distinguished in terms of the persons being transformed. Persons are divided into ordinary people and noble ones: to transform ordinary people one manifests defilement, and to transform noble ones one cultivates purity. Furthermore, persons are divided into Great and Small: to teach the Great one gives rise to defilement, and to transform the Small one solely uses purity. Third, it is distinguished according to dharmas. Dharmas have the distinction of the mundane and nirvāṇa: wishing to adapt to the mundane one must manifest defilement, and desiring to seek nirvāṇa one must cultivate purity. Fourth, it is distinguished by revealing the real. In the tathāgatagarbha there are two gates: first is the gate of quiescent suchness; second is the gate of dependently arisen function. Wishing to realize these two, one must have revealing causes: wishing to enter the gate of quiescence, one must cultivate purity to serve as the revealing cause; wishing to follow the gate of function, one must practice defilement to serve as the revealing cause. Because there are these many meanings, here one manifests the practice of defiled dharmas to penetrate the Buddha path. However, regarding this practice of defilement, people say it is solely an adaptive response, and that while others see me do it, in actual meaning I do not do it; this is just one aspect and does not mean everything. If it were solely an adaptive response, how could what is cultivated here be an adaptive penetration of the Buddha path? How could the arousal of superior practices spoken of in the Daśabhūmika Sūtra be an adaptive extraordinary practice and not real? There is real cultivation; how could it be solely an adaptive response? Distinguishing within this, there is cultivation and there is accomplishment. Cultivation must be undertaken with vigorous effort; it is not that I do not do it. Accomplishment has three meanings: First, it is distinguished in terms of emotion. Others see me do it, but I actually do not do it, because the emotion of performing defilement has already been severed by the sage. Second, it is distinguished in terms of cause. The defiled functions manifested are all caused and aroused by the power of great compassion and vows, not merely seen by others. Third, it is distinguished in terms of dharmas. The defiled functions manifested are all manifestations of the dharma gates of dependently arisen samādhis, like a cintāmaṇi raining down various precious items. Therefore the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says, "Great parinirvāṇa can establish great purposes; the vajrasamādhi manifests in various ways." As in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, the gates of the dharmadhātu sought by Sudhana each have their functions. It is like this and so on. Since they arise from the power of compassionate vows and dharma gates, how could one definitively say that I actually do not do it and it is merely seen by others?