維摩經略疏 4.75

4.75

「住平等法，應次行乞食」者，初破未得平等滅理，涉事去取，致乖次乞之法。菩薩若得本有滅諦平等之理，即心行平等由如虛空，於善不善等以慈，即於貧富心無去取，能次第求。《大品》明須菩提白佛：「次第心中應行般若不？」佛答：「常不離薩婆若心。」為行生修即是住平等法，而能次第行生修也。即是理中次第求於法喜禪悅，由本垂迹故涉事行乞，由迹顯本故行平等。若迦葉破八邪入八脫，但得小乘法喜禪悅，此即捨邪取正，何得名為次第求於法喜禪悅？菩薩雖知法性真滅平等，能不捨八邪入八解脫，即是次第求於大乘法喜禪悅。何者？以薩婆若心從凡夫禪悅入世間諸定，又入二乘出世間定，又入菩薩上上諸禪，皆摩訶衍以不可得故，於一一禪皆有一心三智，故得真法喜。皆有三諦三昧故，得真禪悅，故云住平等法應次行乞食。是為菩薩次第行、次第學、次第道。《法華》云「善能次第集諸善法」，故菩薩行頭陀時，大悲平等心如虛空，不觀貧富心無去取，依分衛法次第行乞。迦葉內心不得無緣大慈，不住本有滅諦真平等法，故不能於邪正諸禪次第得大乘法喜禪悅，唯住偏真滅諦棄捨生死，故涉事行乞。心有去取捨富從貧，淨名呵之，意在此也。「為不食故應行乞食」，二、約知苦破者，只以苦諦是陰入身，故須乞食以資性命。若迦葉無為破此苦諦以求涅槃不食之法，故須乞食資身行道。若發無漏因入無餘，同如虛空，即是不食。若在學地，雖發無漏，結既未盡，不食之因未成，可許為不食故應行乞食。迦葉結漏已盡、食因已亡，若為不食，但七日不食即入無餘，即無飯食之患。猶日日乞食，意欲何之？若為利生令得不食而行乞者，不應捨富及入無餘。若菩薩觀苦為不食故而行乞者，欲破界內外生死之食，求大涅槃無食三昧，故須乞食資身修不食之因，此則無過。若為化眾生令得不食之果，貧富俱往化世乞食，終不灰滅入不食之涅槃。此皆觀心，不須更作。

"Dwelling in the equal Dharma, one should beg for food in succession": first, refuting his failure to attain the principle of the equal cessation truth, involving himself in phenomenal affairs with acceptance and rejection, thereby contravening the method of begging in succession. If a bodhisattva attains the inherently existing principle of the equality of the cessation truth, then their mental practice is equal like empty space; regarding the good and not good, they treat them equally with compassion, thus having no acceptance or rejection in mind toward the poor and wealthy, and can beg in succession. The Dàpǐn explains that Subhūti asked the Buddha: "Within a sequential mind, should one practice prajñā or not?" The Buddha answered: "One is never separated from the mind of sarvajña (all-knowledge)." Cultivation arising for the sake of practice is precisely dwelling in the equal Dharma, thereby being able to carry out successive cultivation. That is, within the principle, successively seeking the joy of the Dharma and the delight of dhyāna; manifesting traces from the fundamental, they engage in phenomenal affairs to beg for food, and revealing the fundamental through traces, they practice equality. If Kāśyapa severs the eight wrongs and enters the eight liberations, he merely attains the Hinayana joy of the Dharma and delight of dhyāna; this is abandoning the wrong to grasp the right, so how could it be called successively seeking the joy of the Dharma and the delight of dhyāna? Although a bodhisattva knows that the true cessation of dharma-nature is equal, they are able to enter the eight liberations without abandoning the eight wrongs; this is precisely successively seeking the Mahāyāna joy of the Dharma and delight of dhyāna. Why is this so? Because with the mind of sarvajña, from the worldly dhyāna delight of ordinary beings, they enter into the various mundane concentrations, enter again into the supramundane concentrations of the two vehicles, and enter again into the superior dhyānas of bodhisattvas; all are the Mahāyāna because they are ungraspable, and in every single dhyāna there is the one mind with the three wisdoms, thus attaining true joy of the Dharma. Because all possess the samādhi of the three truths, they attain true delight of dhyāna, hence it is said: "Dwelling in the equal Dharma, one should beg for food in succession." This is the bodhisattva's sequential practice, sequential learning, and sequential path. The Lotus Sūtra says: "Skillfully able to accumulate all good dharmas in succession." Therefore, when a bodhisattva practices the dhūtas, their great compassion is equal and their mind is like empty space; not viewing poverty or wealth, their mind has no acceptance or rejection, and they beg for food in succession according to the rules of alms-gathering (piṇḍapāta). Kāśyapa inwardly had not attained unconditioned great compassion, nor did he dwell in the true equal Dharma of the inherently existing cessation truth; therefore he could not successively attain the Mahāyāna joy of the Dharma and delight of dhyāna in wrong and right dhyānas, but only dwelled in the one-sided true cessation truth, casting aside birth and death, and thus engaged in phenomenal alms-begging. His mind held acceptance and rejection, abandoning the wealthy to approach the poor; Vimalakīrti's rebuke of him has its intention right here. "Begging for food should be practiced for the sake of not eating": second, refuting in terms of knowing suffering. It is simply because the truth of suffering is the body of aggregates and sense-fields that one must beg for food to sustain life. If Kāśyapa, without contrivance, broke through this truth of suffering to seek the state of nirvāṇa wherein there is no eating, he then needed to beg for food to sustain his body and practice the Way. If, having generated uncontaminated causes, he entered into [nirvāṇa] without residue, being identical to empty space, that would be "not eating." If he were still in the stage of learning (śaikṣa), although he had generated uncontaminated [causes], his fetters would not yet be exhausted, and the cause of not eating would not yet be accomplished; it could be granted that he should beg for food for the sake of not eating. But Kāśyapa's fetters and outflows were already exhausted, and the cause of eating was already eliminated; if it were for the sake of not eating, by merely not eating for seven days he would enter into [nirvāṇa] without residue, thereby having no trouble with food and drink. Yet he still begged for food day after day; where was his intention heading? If he begged for food for the sake of benefiting sentient beings to enable them to attain non-eating, he should not have abandoned the wealthy nor entered into [nirvāṇa] without residue. If a bodhisattva contemplates suffering and begs for food for the sake of not eating, desiring to break through the food of birth and death within and outside the realms, seeking the samādhi of non-eating in great nirvāṇa, they must beg for food to sustain the body and cultivate the cause of not eating; in this case there is no fault. If it were to convert sentient beings so that they attain the fruit of non-eating, they would approach both the poor and the wealthy to convert the world and beg for food, never reducing themselves to ashes and entering the nirvāṇa of non-eating. These are all contemplations of mind, and need not be elaborated further.