維摩經略疏 7.34

7.34

「又問至如幻故」，二、問疾用。所以問疾用者，應身權疾即是病用，進退二種與何法合？為與金剛身合、為與智慧心合？若與身合，法身應有其疾。若與心合，力無畏等心應有苦。此約進合義問也。所以約金剛為色、智慧為心者，出《大經》佛答師子吼也。若與眾生身合，眾生身實有疾，應身應實有疾。若與眾生心合，眾生心有實苦，應心應有實苦。此約退合義問也。若不與金剛身、智慧心合，云何名法身起應從大悲生？若不與眾生身心合者，云何而言應同其疾？淨名答言「非身合，身相離故」。如凡夫病，現見不與身心而合，推假名身不見實疾但有名字，名字不論合與不合。身相離故求實不得，故病不與身合。亦非心合，心如幻故念念不住。豈況應身權疾，而與金剛身合，身相離故；而與智慧心合，心如幻故但有名字。譬如明鏡，一切色像現於鏡內，此像不與鏡合。何以故？鏡形圓滿像應隨圓。若不圓滿，當知其像不與鏡合亦不與形合。何以故？外是實形、此像不實，不實之形豈與實合？雖不與鏡合，因鏡像現。雖不與形合，形對像生。此病亦爾，不與金剛身、智慧心合。何以故？金剛身相離、智慧心如幻，性無疾故。亦不與凡夫身心合。何以故？凡夫身離，病相不住；心如幻化，病亦何在？凡夫實病、此病權現，雖不與法身及凡夫合，因大悲起而有實病也。故從無住本立一切法，現有三土之疾，故以鏡為喻也。

From "He also asked […] to because it is like an illusion" is the second [part]: inquiring about the function of the illness. Why is the function of the illness asked about? The provisional illness of the response body is precisely the function of the illness. Regarding advancing and retreating, with which dharma does it unite? Does it unite with the vajra body, or does it unite with the wisdom mind? If it unites with the body, the dharmakāya ought to have this illness. If it unites with the mind, the mind of powers and fearlessness ought to have suffering. This is the inquiry regarding the meaning of advancing union. Why the vajra is taken as form and wisdom as mind comes from the Buddha's answer to Lion's Roar in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra. If it unites with the bodies of sentient beings, sentient beings' bodies truly have illness, so the response body ought to truly have illness. If it unites with the minds of sentient beings, sentient beings' minds have real suffering, so the response mind ought to have real suffering. This is the inquiry regarding the meaning of retreating union. If it does not unite with the vajra body and the wisdom mind, how can it be called the dharmakāya giving rise to the response born of great compassion? If it does not unite with the body and mind of sentient beings, how can it be said that the response shares their illness? Vimalakīrti answers, "It does not unite with the body, because the characteristics of the body are dissociated." As with the illness of an ordinary person, it is plainly seen not to unite with body or mind: analyzing the nominally designated body, one finds no real illness, only a name; regarding a name, one does not speak of union or non-union. Because the characteristics of the body are dissociated, when one seeks reality it cannot be found; hence the illness does not unite with the body. Nor does it unite with the mind, because the mind is like an illusion, not abiding from thought to thought. How much less could the provisional illness of the response body unite with the vajra body, since the characteristics of the body are dissociated; or unite with the wisdom mind, since the mind is like an illusion, existing only as a name? For example, in a bright mirror, all forms and images appear within the mirror, but these images do not unite with the mirror. Why is this so? If the mirror's shape is round, the image should accordingly be round. If it is not round, one should know that the image does not unite with the mirror, nor does it unite with the shape. Why is this so? The external is a real shape, while this image is unreal; how could an unreal shape unite with a real one? Although it does not unite with the mirror, it appears due to the mirror. Although it does not unite with the shape, it is produced facing the shape. This illness is also like this: it does not unite with the vajra body or the wisdom mind. Why is this so? The vajra body has dissociated characteristics, and the wisdom mind is like an illusion; their nature has no illness. Nor does it unite with the body and mind of ordinary people. Why is this so? The ordinary person's body is dissociated, and the marks of illness do not abide; the mind is like an illusory transformation—where could the illness be? The ordinary person has real illness, whereas this illness is provisionally manifested. Although it does not unite with the dharmakāya or with ordinary people, it arises from great compassion yet [manifests as] real illness. Therefore, based on the non-abiding root, all dharmas are established, manifesting the illnesses of the three lands; hence the mirror is used as a metaphor.