維摩義記 2.16

2.16

Question: Is this practice performed by the Buddha, or is it seen by others? Explanation: In terms of intention, the Buddha has no mind to act; others see me doing it. In terms of capacity, it is performed by the Buddha. There are two kinds of Buddha-action: First, manifestation through the power of samādhi dharma-gates. As the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* says, great parinirvāṇa can establish great purposes, taking a consort, fathering a son, and various other manifestations. It is also like all the dharma-gates sought by Sudhana in the *Avataṃsaka*, which can all manifest such things. Second, manifestation through the power of cultivation. By the power of the Buddha's past vows of great compassion and also by the power of initiating supreme practices, even without mental conceptualization, they can manifest spontaneously. These two are mutually required. How are they mutually required? Although the Dharma can give rise [to them], its arising necessarily depends on cultivation. Just as a fire-crystal can produce fire, but produces it only upon seeing the sun; and just as a water-crystal can produce water, but produces it only upon seeing the moon. This is also like that; hence the *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* says: "Because different dharmas exist, different dharmas are born; because different dharmas do not exist, different dharmas are destroyed." Although cultivation can give rise [to them], its arising necessarily relies on the Dharma. Just as sound can emit an echo only by relying on a valley, and a form can produce a reflection only by relying on a mirror. This is also like that: what is manifested by the power of cultivation is the recompense-response (sambhogakāya/nirmāṇakāya), and what is manifested by the power of Dharma is the Dharma-response (dharmakāya). If this is so for one gate, all other gates follow suit. "Nor dwelling together with them" means that the Buddha does not abide in conditioned practice. Looking back upon realizing reality, they have never existed from the beginning; with no dharma remaining present, it is called "not dwelling together with them." It is not that there are real dharmas which he abandons and does not dwell with. Among the sharp [delusions], "not destroying the body" again means not clinging to unconditioned practice. Manifesting the active view of the body without abandoning it is called "not destroying the body." "Yet following the single characteristic" again means not clinging to conditioned practice. The principle of reality is like a single characteristic; following it through practice and realization is called "following." This explains liberation in terms of the delusions of view; below it is in terms of the delusions of cultivation. "Not extinguishing ignorance and craving" again means not abiding in unconditioned practice. The ground of abiding ignorance is called "ignorance"; the grounds of abiding craving of desire, craving of form, and craving of existence are spoken of as "craving." Because they are actively manifested in accordance with transformation, they are said to be "not extinguished." "Generating clarity and liberation" again means not clinging to conditioned practice. Clarity is the clarity of wisdom, which counteracts the former ignorance. Liberation means mental liberation on the path, which counteracts the former craving. Due to severance, one generates the clarity of wisdom—clarity being liberation through wisdom; due to detachment from the fetter of craving, one generates mental liberation. This explains the virtue of liberation in terms of afflictions. Next is the severance of karma. "Displaying the characteristics of the five inexpiables" again means not abiding in unconditioned practice. Killing one's father, killing one's mother, killing an arhat, causing schism in the Saṅgha, and shedding the blood of a Buddha's body are the five inexpiables. Because these turn against kindness and violate the field of merit, they are called inexpiable. Killing one's father or mother is inexpiable because it turns against kindness; the latter three are inexpiable because they violate the field of merit, as explained in detail in a separate chapter. This should be discussed fully. Manifesting their arising in accordance with transformation is called "the characteristics of the five inexpiables," just as Devadatta and others gave rise to all kinds of karma; because these five inexpiables are grave, they are singled out, for if even grave ones are performed, light ones need not be mentioned. "Yet attaining liberation" again means not abiding in conditioned practice. Severing karmic fetters forever is called "attaining liberation." This phrase explains the virtue of liberation in terms of karma. "Neither bound nor liberated" explains the virtue of liberation in relation to the retribution of suffering, identical to what was said before. Not being entangled by the retribution of suffering in saṃsāra is called "not bound." Manifesting its reception in accordance with transformation is called "not liberated." The above explains the virtue of liberation in terms of severance. Below it is in terms of wisdom, which has cause and fruit. "Neither seeing the four truths nor not seeing the truths" is discussed in terms of cause. Manifesting views and doubts without contemplating the principle of the truths is called "not seeing the truths." Truly realizing it inwardly is called "not not seeing." These, on the bhūmis, are generally called "seeing the truths." "Not attaining the fruit" is spoken of in terms of fruit. This phrasing is slightly abridged; according to what preceded, it should say "neither attaining the fruit nor not attaining the fruit," but here it temporarily raises one side, referring to Buddhahood as the fruit. Because one does not abandon all practices of a bodhisattva, it is "not attaining the fruit." Because one truly realizes bodhi, it is "not not attaining." It is now briefly left unexplained. The above seven phrases cross-examine in terms of practice; from here onward it is in terms of persons. "Neither an ordinary person nor apart from an ordinary person": possessing noble virtues inwardly, he is not an ordinary person; manifesting ordinary actions to transform sentient beings, he is not apart from ordinary dharmas. "Neither a noble one nor not a noble one": manifesting as an ordinary fool to transform sentient beings, he is named "not a noble one"; possessing noble virtues inwardly, he is "not not a noble one." The above are specific cross-examinations. "Although accomplishing all [dharmas], yet free from all dharmas" summarizes and concludes them. As specific challenges cannot be exhausted, a general conclusion is required. These are all the virtues of Buddhas and bodhisattvas, cross-examining him to make him equal them. "May then take the food" concludes by stating that he should accept it. For one endowed with the aforementioned virtues, begging is necessarily for the sake of others, and therefore he may take the food.