維摩義記 3.55

3.55

Third, Śāriputra, taking advantage of her words, raised an objection: "The present Buddhas realize and attain bodhi, and those of the past who have already attained it and those of the future who will attain it are as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. What does this all refer to?" The text from "The heavenly maiden [replied]" downward explains this. Within this, it first explains the meaning of the three times and the non-three times. From "Have you attained the arhat path?" downward, it explains the Buddhas' attainment and non-attainment. In the former part, the initial statement that "conventional words speak of the three times" distinguishes characteristics from reality. "It does not mean that bodhi has past, future, or present" clarifies that reality differs from characteristics. What is the meaning of this? In general explanation, there are four points: First, it is distinguished in terms of the correlation between the real [body] and the response [body]. The response and manifestation belong to time and therefore have three times, whereas the real is eternally abiding like empty space, without past, future, or present. Second, it is distinguished in terms of the correlation between the inherently pure and upāya within the real. According to the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], the fruits of inherent purity are all called nirvāṇa, while the fruits of upāya are spoken of as bodhi. Thus, bodhi arises through cultivation reliant on conditions, and although it is subsumed under the three times, the essential nature of nirvāṇa has fundamentally emerged since antiquity; it does not arise from conditions and is not past, future, or present. If one relies on the Commentary on the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the like, within the gate of bodhi there are inherently the distinctions of the inherently pure and upāya. Upāya, arising through cultivation, is said to have three times; the substance of inherent purity is eternal, not subsumed under the three times, and without past, future, or present. Third, it is distinguished directly within the inherently pure in reference to cultivation and realization. Inherently pure bodhi relies on conditions and cultivation to be revealed; since cultivation differs in before and after, and purification is not instantaneous, there are the three times. Looking back in reference to realization, it has always been eternally pure. Because it is eternally pure, there is no concealment and no revelation, neither cause nor fruit; for this reason, there is no past, future, or present. This one meaning is similar to the statement in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]: "Relinquishing conventional-truth compassion, one attains ultimate-truth compassion; ultimate-truth compassion does not arise from causes and conditions." Fourth, it is distinguished directly within the inherently pure in reference to conditions and reality. Considering reality from the perspective of conditions, there is reality outside conditions; the reality outside conditions can only be converged with when conditions are brought to rest, and since there is an earlier and a later to this convergence, there are the three times. Discussing reality from the perspective of reality, there are no conditions outside reality; since conditions do not exist, who could come to conceal me? Thus, there is fundamentally no concealment. Since fundamentally there is no concealment, how could there be a present revelation? The real nature is eternally quiescent and does not change along with conditions; for this reason, there is no past, future, or present. The general explanation is like this. What is distinguished at present corresponds in meaning to the third; furthermore, relying on the fourth is also free of fault. The above explained the meaning of the three times in response to the objection; below, it further clarifies attainment and non-attainment in response to the objection. Within this, the heavenly maiden first asks: "Śāriputra, have you attained arhatship?" Śāriputra then answers: "Attained through non-attainment." There are three meanings to this explanation: First, when arhatship is attained, extinguishing and departing from emotional grasping is called having nothing attained; attaining this non-attainment is called "yet attained." Second, extinguishing and departing from emotional grasping is called non-attainment; realizing the principle of non-self is called "yet attained." Third, seeing that dharmas have no inherent nature and nothing that can be craved or grasped is called non-attainment; since one attains this non-attainment, there is again non-attainment. From "The heavenly maiden [replied]" downward, relying on what he answered, she clarifies the meaning of Buddhas and bodhisattvas attaining bodhi through non-attainment. The explanation also has three points: First, putting an end to emotional grasping is called non-attainment; attaining this non-attainment is called "yet attained." Second, putting an end to emotional grasping is called non-attainment, which is why the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] speaks of ten kinds of non-attainment; true realization being in accord is called attainment, which is why the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] proclaims that bodhisattvas attain the ultimate truth, attain the path of bodhi, and attain nirvāṇa; therefore it is not non-attainment. Third, the true nature is eternally quiescent, without cultivation and without realization, which is called having nothing attained. This dharma of non-attainment was originally concealed by delusion, and being revealed through conditions and cultivation is called "yet attained." Thus, non-attainment is attained through cultivation reliant on conditions, yet when attainment is reached, one attains non-attainment. The above was the second [section], which relied on manifestation to reveal virtues.