維摩義記 2.7.3

2.7.3

In the latter three lines, it relies on the three treasuries (garbha) of thusness, dharma-nature, and the reality-limit to reveal that they are identical with true reality. How do these three differ? In the true Dharma, emptiness is called 'thusness', existence is called 'dharma-nature', and neither existence nor non-existence is called the 'reality-limit'. How is the true empty? It is free from characteristics and free from essential nature. How is it not empty? It is endowed with all Buddha-dharmas. How is it further called neither existence nor non-existence? Existence and non-existence share the same substance. The meanings of this thusness, dharma-nature, and reality-limit are extensively [treated] in a separate chapter, which should be discussed fully. The true Dharma revealed shares the same substance with these three gates while differing in aspect; therefore, the Dharma is identical with thusness, dharma-nature, the reality-limit, and so on. In the first line, 'the Dharma is identical with dharma-nature' directly explains it in terms of its characteristics. All Buddha-dharmas within the tathāgatagarbha are called dharma-nature; the true Dharma explained is of one substance with that, being one and not different, hence it is said to be identical. Why is it said to be identical with dharma-nature? Dharma-nature is pure, constant, and changeless, and what is explained here is also like that; hence it is said to be identical. 'Because it enters all dharmas' is an explanation to reveal identity. 'Entering' is like according with: according with the nature of all dharmas, it is therefore called identical. With respect to this Dharma of one substance, how is it called according with? How is it called entering? Although its substantial nature is one, the aspects of meaning are ever distinct. With distinct meanings and one substance, one can therefore speak of 'entering'. The following are all like this. In the second line, 'the Dharma conforms to thusness' directly explains its non-differentiation from the meaning of thusness in terms of its characteristics. Although the dharmadhātu has distinctions, the principle of emptiness is not different, hence it is called thusness. The Dharma explained accords with that principle of thusness, hence it is said to 'conform'. Since this is one with thusness, how can one speak of conforming? The meaning is as explained above: with distinct gates and one meaning, one can speak of conforming. 'Identical with' previously and 'conforming to' here are merely variations in phrasing. 'Because there is nothing it conforms to' explains and establishes the meaning of conforming. Because it does not conform to existent dharmas, it conforms to thusness. In the third line, 'the Dharma abides in the reality-limit' directly explains it in terms of its characteristics. 'Limit' means boundary, which is another name for a place. The place where true reality is exhausted is called the 'reality-limit'. The true Dharma explained is identical with the reality-limit, which is called 'abiding'. 'Conforming' previously and 'abiding' here are merely variations in phrasing. 'Unmoving at all extremes' explains and establishes the meaning of abiding. Because it is not shaken by the two extremes of existence and non-existence, it abides in the reality-limit. Next, the five lines clarify that consciousness is empty: the first two refute characteristics, and the latter three identify with true reality. In the first two lines, the former first clarifies the emptiness of consciousness in relation to dust-objects, and the latter line directly clarifies emptiness in terms of the substance of consciousness. In the first line, 'the Dharma has no agitation' directly clarifies that the principle is absent [of it]. The mind of the six consciousnesses goes back and forth grasping at dust-objects, which is called 'agitation'; the true Dharma is permanently abiding and unlike that, so it is called 'without agitation'. 'Not relying on the six dust-objects' explains to reveal this absence. Because it does not, like the six consciousnesses, arise from the six dust-objects, it is without agitation. In the latter line, 'the Dharma has no coming or going' directly clarifies that the principle is absent [of it]. The mind of the six consciousnesses transmigrates through the three times, which is called 'coming and going', where 'going' is the past and 'coming' is the future; the true Dharma is not like that, hence it has no coming or going. 'Because it is permanently non-abiding' explains to establish this. The present is called 'abiding'; if the true Dharma had once abided in the present, one could speak of going and coming in relation to it. If the Dharma has no present abiding, in reference to what could one speak of going and coming? These two dispel characteristics; the three below identify with true reality, namely the three gates of liberation. The meaning of the three gates of liberation will be explained later. 'The Dharma accords with emptiness' means according with the gate of emptiness. 'Conforms to signlessness' means conforming to the gate of signlessness. 'Responds to aimlessness' means responding to the gate of aimlessness. Speaking of 'accords with' first, 'conforms to' next, and 'responds to' later is also varied phrasing. Furthermore, because the true Dharma differs in aspect but is identical in substance with these three gates, one can speak of according with, conforming to, and responding to. In the latter seven lines clarifying that dust-objects are empty, the first four lines directly address the substance of dust-objects to explain their emptiness; the next line explains emptiness in relation to the sense-faculties; the next line again addresses the substance of dust-objects to clarify their emptiness; and the final line discusses emptiness in relation to consciousness. In the first four, 'the Dharma is free from good and bad' clarifies freedom from the characteristics of dust-objects. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects have the fine and the foul, where the fine is called 'good' and the foul is called 'bad'; the true Dharma has neither, hence it is said to be free from them. 'The Dharma has no increase or decrease' clarifies freedom from the functions of dust-objects. Complying and benefiting is called 'increase', while obstructing and diminishing is called 'decrease'; the true Dharma is free from these, hence it is called 'without increase or decrease'. 'The Dharma has no arising or ceasing; the Dharma has no place to return' clarifies freedom from the substance of dust-objects. The substance of the six dust-objects has arising and termination, which is called arising and ceasing, and belonging to a person is called returning; the true Dharma has neither, hence it has no arising or ceasing, nor any place to return. This concludes one section. 'The Dharma surpasses the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind' clarifies the emptiness of dust-objects in contrast to the six sense-faculties. In the domain of phenomena, the six dust-objects are the realms of action of the six sense-faculties, which is not called surpassing; within the true, there are no dust-objects, and the sense-faculties and the like cannot reach it, hence it is called 'surpassing'. This concludes two sections. 'The Dharma has no high or low' returns to the substance of dust-objects to explain their emptiness. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects have superior and inferior [qualities]: dust-objects of the higher stages are superior and called 'high', while those of the lower stages are inferior and called 'low'; the true Dharma is free from this, hence it has no high or low. 'Permanently abiding and unmoving' explains the lack of high and low. This concludes three sections. 'The Dharma is free from contemplative practice' explains emptiness in relation to consciousness. In the domain of phenomena, dust-objects are the conditions for consciousness, not being free from contemplative practice; in the true Dharma, there are no dust-objects to be conditioned, therefore it is called free from all contemplative practice. The above was the specific instruction. 'When the characteristics of dharmas are like this, how can they be spoken of?' rebukes with the principle. Citing what was explained above is called 'the Dharma is like this'. Since names and characteristics are entirely severed, and the activities of the mind are also absent, how could they be proclaimed? The above was instruction regarding what is spoken. Next is instruction regarding the speaker. Herein, it first instructs on abandoning four kinds of minds, and from 'then speak' onward concludes with an exhortation to proclaim. What are the four minds? First, instructing on eliminating the mind of views; second, from 'one should understand' onward, instructing on leaving behind the mind of folly; third, from 'with great compassion' onward, instructing on relinquishing the small mind; fourth, from 'mindful of repaying kindness' onward, instructing on keeping distant from the ordinary mind. In the first line, instructing them to distance themselves from the retribution of self and person is called eliminating the mind of views. Therein, it first instructs with an exposition of the Dharma. 'One who speaks the Dharma has neither speaking nor showing' clarifies that there is no speaker. Applying words to dharmas is called 'speaking'; applying words to persons is termed 'showing'. In ultimate principle, neither truly exists, which is called 'neither speaking nor showing'. 'One who listens to the Dharma has neither hearing nor obtaining' clarifies that there is no listener. Applying listening to words is termed 'hearing'; applying listening to dharmas is said to be 'obtaining'.