維摩義記 4.9

4.9

二十三中，「無礙曰」，標人別說。下明所說。「身身滅二」，反舉二相。生死之報名之為身，身滅涅槃名為身滅，有無兩分名之為二。下翻此二以明不二，二相雙遣為不二矣。先辨、後結。辨中「身即是身滅」者，略明不二。身之無處與彼身滅無處一理，故言即是。「所以」下釋之，先問、後解。「見身實相不起見身及滅身」者，觀一破別。第一義空是身實相，於此實中由來無身，何有所滅？故見身實，不起見身及與滅身。「身與滅身無二無別」，破別歸一。身滅竝無，故云無二，此遣別相。二相既無，取情亦息，名無分別，此遣別情。上來辨竟。言「於其中不驚不懼為入不二」，牒以結之。小乘眾生聞說無身及滅亦無，多生怖畏，故頓宣說不驚不懼，於滅無處不生驚怪、於身無處不生恐懼。且可於身無處不驚，於彼身滅無處不懼。通則義齊。「是為」下結。

In the twenty-third [statement], "Apratihata said" indicates the person who speaks separately. Below, what he said is clarified. "'The body and the cessation of the body are two'" points back to the signs of duality. The retribution of saṃsāra is called the "body"; the cessation of the body that is nirvāṇa is called the "cessation of the body"; and their two divisions into existence and non-existence are called "two." Below, he overturns these two to clarify nonduality, where the double elimination of the two signs constitutes nonduality. First he differentiates, and then he concludes. In differentiating, "the body is just the cessation of the body" briefly clarifies nonduality. The non-abiding of the body and the non-abiding of that cessation of the body are of one principle; therefore he says "is just." "Therefore..." and what follows explains it, first asking and then explaining. "One who sees the true mark of the body does not give rise to seeing the body or the cessation of the body": this contemplates the one to refute the distinct. Emptiness of the supreme meaning is the true mark of the body; within this true mark, originally there is no body, so what could there be to cease? Therefore, seeing the truth of the body, one does not give rise to seeing the body or the cessation of the body. "The body and the cessation of the body are without duality and without distinction": this refutes the distinct to return to the one. Body and cessation are both nonexistent; therefore he says "without duality"; this eliminates the distinct marks. Once the two marks do not exist, the grasping disposition also ceases, which is called "without differentiation"; this eliminates the distinct dispositions. The differentiation above is finished. As for the statement "within this, being without alarm and without fear is entering nonduality," it takes this up to conclude. When sentient beings of the Hīnayāna hear that there is no body and also no cessation, they mostly produce terror; hence it is immediately proclaimed that being without alarm and without fear means not giving rise to shock or bewilderment at the locus where cessation is nonexistent, and not giving rise to fright or fear at the locus where the body is nonexistent. Or again, one is not alarmed at the locus where the body is nonexistent, and not afraid at the locus where that cessation of the body is nonexistent. Comprehensively, their meanings are equivalent. "This is..." and what follows concludes.