維摩義記 3.50

3.50

From here on, the sixth section clarifies that there is no transformation. First, Śāriputra opens by asking: 'Since your virtues are like this, you should be sovereign; a female body is vile and evil, so why now do you not transform your female body?' Next, the goddess answers, clarifying that there is no transformation. Within this there are three parts: First, the goddess clarifies that she has no transformation, so as to give rise to faith in him. Second, from 'For example' onward, she relies on a metaphor to ask him in return, so as to give rise to understanding in him. Third, from 'At that time the goddess, through supernatural powers' onward, she transforms the woman into him so that he may realize and know it. In the first part, 'For twelve years' indicates the limit of time. Ever since she came to dwell in this room, she has sought female [characteristics] without finding them; hence she says 'twelve'. 'Seeking female marks, I have entirely failed to find them; what should I transform?' directly clarifies non-transformation. The characteristics of male and female are spoken of in relation to the skandha-body; contemplating that the substance of the skandhas is empty, they cannot be found. Since they cannot be found, what is there to be transformed? In the second part, she first asks Śāriputra in return using a metaphor. 'For example, if an illusionist created an illusory woman, and someone asked why she does not transform, would that be a proper question?' The illusionist is the goddess's true body; creating an illusory woman is the goddess's response body; the person asking is Śāriputra. Next, Śāriputra answers correctly in accordance with principle. 'No' is the overall answer. 'An illusion has no fixed characteristics; what should it transform?' explains and differentiates the answer. Next, 'the goddess' takes what he answered to analogously reveal all dharmas, showing that the question was improper. 'All dharmas are also like this, without fixed characteristics' broadly adduces all dharmas to be analogous to the previous illusion. From 'Why then' onward, she shows that the question was improper. In the third part, the text has two distinct parts: First, transforming Śāriputra from male to female, making him know non-transformation. Second, from 'At that time the goddess withdrew her supernatural powers' onward, transforming Śāriputra from female back to male, making him know non-abiding. In the former part there are five phrases: First, 'The goddess through power transformed Śāriputra so that he was like the goddess, and the goddess transformed her own body to be like Śāriputra'; this is the eighth bhūmi, where one can make one's own body into sentient beings' bodies and make sentient beings' bodies into one's own body. Second, the goddess asks: 'Why do you not transform?' Third, Śāriputra answers. 'With the likeness of the goddess' means his body was female. From 'and answered, saying' onward means he answered in speech. 'I do not know what to transform' clarifies that there is nothing to transform. A woman is immediately non-woman, hence there is nothing to transform; yet being transformed into a woman clarifies that it is not that there is no transformation. Non-transformation is not existence, yet transformation is not non-existence. Fourth, the goddess uses what he answered to manifest all things: 'If Śāriputra can transform this female body, then all women should also be able to transform'; relying on Śāriputra's earlier statement that he did not know what to transform, she clarifies that all women are entirely without transformation. Stating it in reverse: if Śāriputra, where there is no woman, could transform a female body, all women are also in reality non-women, and where there is no woman, they should also be able to transform. Since Śāriputra cannot transform a female body where there is no woman, all people where there is no woman also cannot transform. Why do you have me transform a female body? From 'Just as Śāriputra is not a woman yet appears as a woman, all women are also like this' onward, she relies on Śāriputra's earlier transformation into a woman to clarify that all women entirely undergo transformation. 'Just as' is a phrase of pointing out. 'Just as Śāriputra is not a woman yet appears as a woman' takes up the earlier Śāriputra's being transformed into a woman. 'All women are also like this' and so forth analogously reveals the rest. How are they analogous? Just as Śāriputra is in essence not a woman yet appears in a female body, all women are also like this: in essence they are not women, but following their karma-illusion they are transformed into women. Because they are not women yet transformed into women, although they appear in female bodies, they are in reality not women. I am also like this: although I appear in a female body, I am not a woman; why should I need to transform? Fifth, from 'Therefore' onward, she cites the teaching to substantiate it. Because these women are all non-women made into women, and although appearing as women are not women, the Buddha said that all dharmas are neither male nor female.