維摩經略疏 5.147

5.147

問：三相四相不說有老，今何得言佛說亦老？答：四相有異，老即是異。所以引老不引住者，為彌勒執佛所說三相四相中有住相，約此住相現在得記。淨名還引佛語，三相中但有老無住，以證現在無住，不得約現在受未來記，仁者不受即違佛語。但現在雖有異時，三相迅速。雖云有住，佛說亦老。若住即老，即變異相。無定住相，何得約此受未來記？有師謂淨名用空破受記。此義乖宗。尋此經文，還用三藏生滅教破，何當用空。

Question: The three characteristics or four characteristics do not mention "aging"; why is it now said that the Buddha spoke of "also aging"? Answer: Among the four characteristics there is difference; aging is just difference. The reason he cited aging rather than abiding was that Maitreya grasped at the characteristic of abiding among the three or four characteristics spoken of by the Buddha, and on the basis of this characteristic of abiding received a prophecy in the present. Vimalakīrti in turn cited the Buddha's words, that among the three characteristics there is only aging and no abiding, in order to prove that the present has no abiding, and that one cannot receive a future prophecy on the basis of the present; if the benevolent one does not accept this, he goes against the Buddha's words. However, although in the present there are sequential times, the three characteristics are rapid. Even if one speaks of abiding, the Buddha said "also ages." If abiding is aging, it is the characteristic of change and difference. Since there is no fixed characteristic of abiding, how could one receive a future prophecy on the basis of this? Some masters claim that Vimalakīrti used emptiness to refute the receiving of prophecy. This view contradicts the fundamental tenets. Examining the sūtra text, it actually uses the Tripiṭaka teaching of arising and ceasing to refute it; how could it be using emptiness?