維摩義記 3.7

3.7

In the section below on subduing [the mind], Mañjuśrī first asks, "How does a sick bodhisattva subdue their mind?" The answer follows from "Vimalakīrti" downward. The text has two distinct parts: first, explaining the marks of practice; second, [explaining] non-abiding. Within this, from "nor abiding in non-subjugation" downward, the marks of accomplishment are explained. Cultivating and remedying while sick is called the marks of practice. When the illness is healed and virtue established, this is called the marks of accomplishment. Within the preceding practice, first there are individual teachings, and then an overall concluding exhortation. In the preceding individual teachings, the essential points are solely wisdom and compassion: cultivating wisdom is for one's own benefit; cultivating compassion is for benefiting others. Wisdom is accomplished in reliance on emptiness; compassion arises following existence; these two are mutually required. Why is this so? If one cultivates wisdom alone, one stagnates and sinks in emptiness; if one cultivates compassion alone, one becomes attached to existence. Being attached to existence is the dharma of ordinary persons; stagnating and sinking in emptiness is the dharma of śrāvakas. The bodhisattva is distinct from them and therefore must cultivate both. Because both are cultivated, compassion accompanies wisdom and one is not defiled by existence; wisdom accompanies compassion and one is not attached to emptiness. Not being defiled by existence is not the practice of ordinary persons; not being attached to emptiness is not the practice of the worthy and sage; therefore the text below says: "Neither ordinary nor sage is the bodhisattva practice." Furthermore, not clinging to existence is not an impure practice; not being partial to delight in emptiness is not a pure practice; therefore the text below says: "Neither defilement nor purity is the bodhisattva practice." The skillful practice of the bodhisattva is wondrous precisely in this. In the text there are three pairs of cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. From the beginning up to "Mañjuśrī, a sick bodhisattva should view all dharmas in this way" is the first pair. From "Furthermore, viewing the body as impermanent and suffering" downward is the second pair. From "Furthermore, viewing the body as not separate from illness" downward is the third pair. How do these three pairs differ? The differences are of four kinds: First, differentiation according to concrete matters: the matter is only the body's illness; the first pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to illness; the second pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to the body; the third pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to both body and illness together. Second, differentiation according to dharmas: dharmas have gradations. The first pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to the profound principle of emptiness; the second pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to suffering, impermanence, and so forth; the third pair cultivates wisdom and compassion with respect to the matters of body and illness. Third, differentiation according to persons. The first pair cultivates wisdom and compassion within the unshared dharmas of the bodhisattva, because only bodhisattvas understand the profound principle of emptiness and the rest do not understand it; the second pair cultivates wisdom and compassion within the shared practices of the śrāvaka, because śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas can also contemplate suffering, impermanence, and so forth; the third pair cultivates wisdom and compassion within the shared practices of ordinary persons, because even ordinary persons can know the matter of bodily illness. Fourth, differentiation of sequential order. There are two kinds of sequence: First, the sequence of proceeding from the profound to the shallow. Emptiness is what the bodhisattva's correct practice relies upon, so one first cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on it; emptiness is entered by means of explanation, so secondly one cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on suffering and impermanence; suffering, impermanence, and so forth are identified based on matters, so thirdly one cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on the matter of bodily illness. Second, the sequence of initiating transformation from quiescence. Emptiness is what the bodhisattva relies upon to cure illness, so one first cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on it, which is one's own virtue; relying on this one initiates transformation, transforming the two vehicles, so secondly one cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on suffering and impermanence; the transformative practice gradually broadens, wishing to benefit ordinary persons, so thirdly one cultivates wisdom and compassion relying on the matter of bodily illness. The sequence is like this. Within the first pair, the text has four distinct parts: first, directly explaining the cultivation of wisdom and the cultivation of compassion; second, from "Mañjuśrī, this is how one with illness subdues the mind" downward, concluding with praise to reveal supremacy; third, from "The sick bodhisattva further thinks: 'Just as this illness of mine is not truly existent'" downward, purifying compassion with wisdom; fourth, from "A sick bodhisattva should view all dharmas in this way" downward, an overall concluding exhortation. Within the first section, first the cultivation of wisdom is explained. From "Through non-reception" downward, the cultivation of compassion is explained. Within the preceding cultivation of wisdom, first one contemplates and sees emptiness, breaking and departing from the illness of existence. From "Having attained this equality, there is no other illness" downward, one contemplates emptiness as also empty, refuting and expelling the illness of emptiness. The former breaks the illness of existence and extinguishes the hindrance of afflictions; the latter breaks the illness of emptiness and eliminates the hindrance to knowledge; expelling both hindrances together is called subduing the mind. Furthermore, the former section extinguishes the hindrance of afflictions and expels the cause of segmented [samsāra]; the latter removes the hindrance to knowledge and departs from the cause of transformation [samsāra]; both causes being eliminated, neither effect arises, and therefore it is curing illness. Within the former section on breaking existence, one contemplates the two kinds of selflessness to break the two attachments to self. Here, one should first understand the meaning of selflessness and then explain the text; the meaning is as in the separate chapter. In the text, first the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings is explained; from "A sick bodhisattva, in order to extinguish the conception of dharmas" downward, the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas is explained. The former contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings breaks and departs from the conception of a self; the latter contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas extinguishes and eliminates the conception of dharmas; both conceptions subsiding together is called subduing the mind. Furthermore, the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings severs and extinguishes the four dwelling-places, removing the cause of segmented [samsāra]; the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas eliminates and relinquishes ignorance, departing from the cause of transformation [samsāra]; both causes being eliminated, neither effect arises, which is called curing illness. Within the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings, first the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings is undertaken with respect to the four great elements. From "Furthermore, the arising of this illness is entirely due to attachment" downward, the contemplation of the emptiness of sentient beings is undertaken with respect to the five skandhas. Within the former, first the root of the trouble is traced. In "Now this illness of mine arises entirely from the deluded conceptions, inversions, and afflictions of previous lifetimes," sentient beings' attachment to a self is called deluded inversion; grasping at what is not real is called deluded conception; conceiving a self where there is no self is called inversion; fetters such as greed and anger are called afflictions; it is due to these that the present illness arises. From "There is no true" downward, contemplative practice severs it. "There is no real dharma; who is it that receives illness?" is a brief contemplation of selflessness. The explanation follows "Why is this?", first raising the question and then explaining. In "Because of the combination of the four great elements it is provisionally called a body," one contemplates the body as provisionally existent. In "The four great elements are non-arising and the body is also without self," one contemplates the body as truly non-existent. The four great elements have no master; seeking separately there is no soul; the body is also without a self—employing the particulars to reveal the universal, establishing the universal absence of self. Below, the contemplation of selflessness is explained with respect to the five skandhas. Within this there are two parts: first, contemplating the five skandhas to break and depart from the universal self; second, from "Furthermore, these dharmas do not know one another" downward, contemplating the five skandhas to break and depart from the particular self. Within the former, first the conception of a self is broken and departed from; from "One should give rise to the conception of dharmas" downward, cultivating the conception of dharmas is explained. Within the former departure from self, "Furthermore, the arising of this illness is entirely due to attachment to self" traces the root of the trouble. "Therefore, toward the self one should not give rise to attachment" is revulsion toward the past. Having known the root of the illness, one immediately removes the conception of a self and the conception of a sentient being. Knowing the fault and severing it, not grasping at a human nature, is called removing the conception of a self. Not grasping at the provisionally named conception of a person composed of combinations is therefore called departing from the conception of a sentient being. Contemplating the particulars breaks the universal, and therefore both are eliminated. Next is the cultivation of the conception of dharmas. "One should give rise to the conception of dharmas" is an overall encouragement to practice. From "One should think" downward, individual instruction on practice is given. In "One should think: 'It is merely by means of multiple dharmas that this body is formed,'" one contemplates the particulars forming the universal. Removing the previous mark of a self, there is no person, only dharmas; therefore it says "merely," meaning merely the multiple dharmas of the five skandhas forming the body. In "Arising is merely the arising of dharmas, cessation is merely the cessation of dharmas," one breaks the universal and returns to the particulars. Expelling the mark of a sentient being, there is no arising [of beings], merely dharmas; therefore it says "merely." This breaks the universal self; below, the particular self is broken. In "Furthermore, these dharmas do not know one another," one contemplates separately that the nature of the five skandhas is not a knower. In "When arising they do not say 'I arise,' and when ceasing they do not say 'I cease,'" one contemplates separately that the nature of the five skandhas is not an ātman. Above, the emptiness of sentient beings was contemplated; below, the emptiness of dharmas is contemplated. In "A sick bodhisattva, in order to extinguish the conception of dharmas," the purpose of cultivation is explained. Below, correct cultivation is taught. Cultivation has nine phrases: First, teaching contemplation of the fault in the marks of dharmas. In "One should think: 'This conception of dharmas is also an inversion,'" the mind that attaches to dharmas as a self is called the conception of dharmas. As for inversions, there is the distinction between the three inversions and the eight inversions: [inversions of] mind, conception, and view are the three inversions; [the inversions of] permanence, pleasure, self, and purity, and impermanence, non-pleasure, non-self, and non-purity are the eight inversions. [Inversions of] mind, mark, and view are inversions that are confused about principle; being confused about emptiness and establishing existence, permanence, pleasure, purity, and so forth are inversions confused about the conception of dharmas. Turning defilement into purity and purity into defilement are as broadly discussed in a separate chapter, which should be consulted in full here. The former self of sentient beings is subsumed under the eight inversions; this self attached to dharmas is subsumed under the three inversions; the sense of inversion being the same as before, it is therefore able to say "also." Second, teaching the generation of a mind of revulsion. In "This inversion is a great trouble; I should depart from it," the three inversions are the root of all delusions, so it is called a great trouble; being a trouble, one must depart from it. Third, teaching departure from dharmas. "How does one depart?" asks about the preceding to introduce what follows. "Departing from self and what belongs to a self" directly distinguishes [the answer] in response to the question. Within attachment to dharmas as self, the six sense organs are called self, and the six sense objects are called what belongs to it. Fourth, re-elucidating the preceding departure from self and what belongs to a self; first questioning, then distinguishing: "namely, departing from the two dharmas." Fifth, re-clarifying the meaning of the preceding departure from the two dharmas; first questioning, then distinguishing: namely, "not thinking of internal or external dharmas, practicing equality." Among the twelve āyatanas, the six sense organs are called internal, and the six sense objects are called external; because internal and external are both empty, one does not think of them; because one does not think of them, one purely practices equality. All dharmas are equal; for the moment this is what is said, and most sūtras are like this. Hence the sūtra text says that the intrinsic nature of the twelve āyatanas is equal, which is similar to this. Sixth, explaining and clarifying the preceding equality; first questioning, then distinguishing: namely, "equality of self and equality of nirvāṇa." This refers to saṃsāra as self because it is the ordinary [person's] substance; the emptiness of the dharmas of saṃsāra is called equality of self, and nirvāṇa being likewise is called equality of nirvāṇa. Seventh, re-explaining the preceding two kinds of equality, self and nirvāṇa; first questioning, then distinguishing: "These two are both empty," hence called equality. Eighth, explaining and clarifying the preceding emptiness; first questioning, then explaining: self and nirvāṇa are merely names without reality, and therefore are said to be empty. Sūtras speak of three kinds of "mere": mere name, mere function, and mere provisional designation. Here the first "mere" is raised, and the rest are omitted without discussion; because the refutation of characteristics is ultimate, function and provisional designation are also completely absent. Ninth, identifying what is emptied. Dharmas such as these two have no determinate nature, and are therefore called empty. Above, the illness of existence was broken; below, the affliction of emptiness is broken. Why must this be so? Just as when a person is ill, they take medicine to expel it; once the illness is removed, the medicine must also be discarded. If the medicine is not discarded, the medicine in turn becomes an affliction. For a practitioner it is likewise: in order to break the illness of existence, one contemplates emptiness as a cure; once the illness of existence is removed, emptiness must also be discarded. If emptiness is not expelled, it in turn becomes an affliction; for this reason it must be broken. It is truly because emptiness was originally taught to break existence, without intending to cause people to cling to emptiness, that it is broken. In the text it first says, "Having attained this equality, there is no other illness, there is only the illness of emptiness," distinguishing the preceding to introduce what follows.