[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [維摩經略疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778) › 4.111 # 維摩經略疏 4.111 維摩經略疏 4.111 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.111](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4.111) 「為與至取食」，三、呵非不生。眾魔者樂生死，若與魔同，即同生死，何謂不生？為與等者，有二義：一約自行、二約化他。自行者，魔與善吉俱樂生死，雖有為無為不同，俱不見性，如作物相似，故言一手。二、化他者，如《大品》說「菩薩行般若時，魔來教云：『汝何不學須陀洹乃至支佛？』」今謂二乘亦教眾生修行己法，引接義同，故言一手。「侶」謂伴侶，志友為義。「勞」者，俱有塵勞，潤業事同。又解：勞者堅也。俱染生死，執因難轉，故言勞侶。汝與等者，魔具八萬四千塵勞，汝亦具有，故言等也。又具界外八萬四千。「於一切至怨心」者，如犯王法，有力不救，怨之大也。二乘自免，不濟眾生，恣其輪迴，怨之大矣。又如群賊閹人，二乘亦爾，壞人善根斷佛種子，故言而有怨心。又害眾生法身慧命及善法眷屬，所謂害智度母、善權父、法喜妻、善心男、慈悲女，豈非善法之大怨也。「謗諸佛」者，謗有二義：一增：二損。佛無生死病惱等患，而言有者，即增謗也。佛身常住功德智慧湛然具足，而言無者，即損謗也。如下文呵阿難云「勿謗如來。如來身者，金剛之體，諸惡永盡，眾善普會，何疾何惱？」「毀於法」者，若定說有作之法，即毀無作法也。又法即法性，不可說示，若言有者即是毀損。《金剛般若》云「若言有所說者，則為謗佛，不解我說。」故真諦三藏明四謗，即是小乘四門四句說法，為說謗大乘法也。若於眾生有怨、謗佛毀法，名大惡業。別惑能潤受變易生，生死浩然，何名不生？「不入眾數」者，若有此障，即不入圓教賢聖之數。此教鐵輪六根互用，二乘所無，寧得在數？「終不得滅度」者，計有小乘滅度，終不能得常樂涅槃。即是變易生死未滅，何名滅度？故《法華》云「但離虛妄名為解脫，其實未得一切解脫。佛說是人未得滅度，斯人未得無上道。」故汝今執證，終不能得大涅槃滅，即非不生，那得自謂是不生也？則無羅漢三義，與彼魔外有何等異？何得不愜同於悲田而取食也。世人不深得經意，多疑此解，至《法華》方顯。故四大聲聞自歎云：「我等今者真阿羅漢，於諸世間應受供養。」此方悟昔淨名彈斥。 > Regarding "as joining with \[the māras\]… take food": Third, rebuking him for not being "unborn". The hosts of māras delight in saṃsāra; if one joins with māras, one joins with saṃsāra, so how can one be called unborn? Regarding "as joining with…", there are two meanings: first, in terms of one's own practice; second, in terms of transforming others. Regarding one's own practice: Māras and Subhūti both delight in saṃsāra; although conditioned and unconditioned differ, neither perceives \[buddha-\]nature, resembling made things, hence it is said "\[joining with\] one hand". Second, regarding transforming others: As the Dàpǐn says, "When a bodhisattva practices prajñā, māra comes and teaches him, saying: 'Why do you not learn the stage of srotāpanna up to pratyekabuddha?'" Here it means that the two vehicles also teach sentient beings to practice their own dharma, which is identical in the sense of leading and guiding \[them astray\], hence it is said "\[joining with\] one hand". "Companion" means associate, having the sense of an intimate friend. "Affliction" means both have dust-like afflictions, being identical in the matter of moistening karma. Another explanation is: "affliction" (láo) means stubborn/firm; both are defiled by saṃsāra and their clinging causes are hard to turn, hence they are called "companions in affliction". Regarding "you are equal to…": Māras possess the eighty-four thousand dust-like afflictions, and you also possess them, hence it is said "equal". You also possess the eighty-four thousand \[afflictions\] beyond the realms. Regarding "holding an antagonistic mind toward all…": Just as when someone violates the king's law and one has the power but does not rescue him, this is the greatest enmity. The two vehicles liberate only themselves and do not ferry sentient beings across, abandoning them to transmigration; this is the greatest enmity. Furthermore, like a gang of bandits castrating a person, the two vehicles are also like this, destroying people's wholesome roots and cutting off the lineage of the buddhas; hence it is said "holding an antagonistic mind". Moreover, they harm the dharmakāya, wisdom-life, and wholesome dharma retinue of sentient beings—namely harming the mother of prajñāpāramitā, the father of skillful means, the wife of dharma joy, the son of the wholesome mind, and the daughter of compassion; how is this not a great enemy to wholesome dharmas? Regarding "slandering the buddhas": Slander has two meanings: first, exaggeration; second, denigration. The Buddha has no afflictions such as saṃsāra, illness, or distress, yet to say that he has them is slander by exaggeration. The Buddha's body is eternally abiding, serenely replete with merit and wisdom, yet to say that he lacks them is slander by denigration. As below he rebukes Ānanda, saying: "Do not slander the Tathāgata. The Tathāgata's body is the vajra essence, in which all evils are forever extinguished and all goods are universally gathered; what illness or what distress could there be?" Regarding "defaming the Dharma": If one definitively speaks of conditioned dharmas, one defames unconditioned dharmas. Moreover, Dharma is dharmatā, which cannot be expressed or demonstrated; to say it exists is defamation. The Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā says: "If anyone says that \[the Tathāgata\] has taught a dharma, he slanders the Buddha, not understanding what I teach." Therefore Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha explained the four slanders as precisely the Hīnayāna's four doors and four propositions in preaching the Dharma, which constitute slandering the Mahāyāna Dharma. If one holds enmity toward sentient beings, slanders the Buddha, and defames the Dharma, this is called great evil karma. Distinct delusions can moisten \[karma\] to receive birth through transformation, and saṃsāra is vast and boundless; how can this be called unborn? Regarding "not entering the count of the assembly": If one has these hindrances, one does not enter the count of the sages and worthies of the perfect teaching. In this teaching, with the iron-wheel \[stage\], the six sense-faculties function interchangeably, which the two vehicles lack; how could they be included in the count? Regarding "ultimately failing to attain extinction": Supposing one has the extinction of the Hīnayāna, one will ultimately fail to attain the nirvāṇa of permanence and bliss. That is, birth and death through transformation are not yet extinguished; how could it be called extinction? Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: "Merely being free from delusion is called liberation, but in truth one has not yet attained complete liberation. The Buddha says this person has not yet attained extinction, for this person has not yet attained the unexcelled path." Therefore, you now cling to your realization and will ultimately fail to attain the extinction of great nirvāṇa, meaning you are not unborn; how can you claim to be unborn? Thus you lack the three meanings of an arhat; what difference is there between you and those māras or outsiders? How could you, without humbling yourself to be equal to the field of compassion, take the food? People of the world do not deeply comprehend the sūtra's meaning and mostly doubt this interpretation; it is only revealed when coming to the Lotus Sūtra. Hence the four great śrāvakas themselves sighed: "We are now true arhats, worthy of receiving offerings from all worlds." Only here did they awaken to Vimalakīrti's past rebukes. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.110](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4.110) - [Next: 4.112](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4.112) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778~en-mt.4.111) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4.111](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.4.111) · Pramāṇa