維摩義記 3.10

3.10

The above explains the cultivation of wisdom; next is the cultivation of compassion. In this there are two parts: first, not extinguishing various feelings for the sake of transforming sentient beings; second, from 'even if the body has [suffering]' onward, generating compassion based on feelings. In the first part, it initially says 'because of non-reception', referring back to the preceding and introducing what follows, clarifying one's own absence of reception. Previously, by cultivating wisdom, one saw the equality of dharmas; that there are no dharmas to be received is called 'non-reception'. Yet 'receiving various feelings' clarifies that receiving is for the sake of other beings; experiencing all kinds of suffering to transform sentient beings is called 'receiving various feelings'. 'Not yet possessing the Buddha-dharmas, neither does one extinguish feelings' clarifies that feelings do not cease, because one does not yet possess the Buddha-dharmas of merit for transforming others. Therefore, 'not extinguishing feelings to attain realization' means not realizing the nirvāṇa of the cessation of feelings. The above explains not extinguishing feelings for the sake of transformation; below explains generating compassion. 'Mindful of beings in evil destinies, generating great compassion' directly refers to giving rise to the mind of compassion. From 'Having subdued myself' onward, it concerns transforming and benefiting [beings] based on compassion. In [this section on] benefit, it first says, 'Having subdued myself, I should also subdue all sentient beings', which clarifies the intent to initiate transformation. 'Only removing their illnesses, but not removing dharmas' clarifies understanding the method of transformation. One understands that in transforming sentient beings, one need only teach them to sever mental illness, without needing to remove dharmas. Why is this so? Dharmas have the true and the deluded; the Buddha-nature is true. The existence and non-existence grasped by deluded sentiments are said to be deluded. If one considers true dharmas, their essence is fundamentally without fault, so there is no need to remedy or sever them. Deluded dharmas exist only in sentiment; when sentiment is removed, they are absent. One need not labor to separately sever them, hence dharmas are not removed; and because dharmas are not removed, beings are easily transformed and saved. From 'In order to sever the root of illness' onward directly explains the benefit of transformation. 'Teaching and guiding them in order to sever the root of illness' generally clarifies the benefit of transformation. Below it is individually revealed, and within this there are two parts: first, identifying the root of illness; second, from 'how to sever' onward, instructing them to sever it. In the first part, it initially says 'What is the root of illness?', questioning the preceding and introducing what follows. 'It is said to be having cognitive grasping' directly explains in response to the question. This is still the mind that attaches to dharmas and the self. The origin of all faults is called the root of illness. Clinging is the hand; grasping is the foot. The mind's grasping of objects is like a hand clinging to things or feet climbing a tree; the dharma is named after the metaphor, hence called cognitive grasping. Below it is revealed again. 'Arising from having cognitive grasping is the root of illness' demonstrates its fundamental meaning. Relying on this deluded mind, it can produce all defilements, initiate karma, and incur suffering; hence it is called the root of illness. 'What is cognitively grasped? It is said to be the three realms' reveals the meaning of cognitive grasping. Cognitively grasping all dharmas of the three realms is why it is called cognitive grasping. Below, in the instruction on severing, 'How to sever cognitive grasping' raises the question to provoke [the answer]. 'Through non-apprehension' briefly explains in response to the question. Contemplating the true and abandoning the deluded is called non-apprehension; if there is non-apprehension, then there is no cognitive grasping. It is revealed again: departing from the aforementioned cognitive grasping is called non-apprehension, so if there is non-apprehension, there is no cognitive grasping. Although it says that with non-apprehension there is no cognitive grasping, one still does not know what grasping is spoken of as non-apprehension. Below it is revealed again: 'What is called non-apprehension?', questioning the preceding and revealing what follows. 'It refers to the two views' identifies what is absent. The two views are precisely the essence of cognitive grasping. Although called the two views, they are still difficult to recognize and require further explanation. 'What are the two views?', questioning the preceding and introducing what follows. 'Internal views and external views' directly explains in response to the question. 'Internal' means positing the six sense faculties as existent and not empty, which is called internal views. 'External' means positing the six sense objects as existent and not empty, which is called external views. These internal and external views are what was previously referred to as non-apprehension. The above is the first part, clarifying the cultivation of wisdom and compassion.