維摩經略疏 7.37

7.37

「維摩」下，二、淨名答。文為四：三即三教慰喻，四結成。今明三教但慰喻菩薩，不取二乘，以無慈永入涅槃故。今以藏通共成一教慰喻，界內有為見思疾未斷，菩薩有分段因果實疾，故須三藏助通大乘而慰喻也。亦得兼用別圓慰喻。若說別者，正為慰喻有無為緣集菩薩，其有無知變易因果實疾，故用別教而慰喻也。若說圓者，正為慰喻有自體緣集菩薩，其有自體因果實疾，故用圓教而慰喻也。今先明用藏助通慰喻者，勸令從假入空觀，修一切智慧眼也。文為二：一從果假入空、二從因假入空。果是五陰妄惑之身，由三假有，故名果假，即是苦諦四行中無常為初。「說身無常，不說厭離於身」者，若聲聞觀身無常，起於厭離捨遠生死。菩薩不爾，觀身無常若折若體為破常倒，不說厭離破二乘心。雖知無常念念磨滅，未度眾生、未具佛法終不捨離。「說身有苦，不說樂於涅槃」，聲聞觀苦，樂求涅槃。菩薩不爾，若折若體解苦無苦為破計樂顛倒，眾生未度、未具佛法終不入於無餘涅槃。「說身無我而說教導眾生」，聲聞觀身無我，證滅無慈，不度眾生。菩薩不爾，若折若體觀我假入無我，為破計我十六知見顛倒，不取眾生畢竟空相，故能為眾生說於如是無我之法而教導之。「說身空寂而不說畢竟寂滅」，聲聞法入真墮於寂滅。菩薩不爾，若折若體入假實二空而知中理，不以偏真為究竟也。是則雖復從假入空，欲為入中而作哢胤，不捨群品。故與聲聞觀苦有異。意在此也。

From "Vimalakīrti..." below is the second [part], Vimalakīrti's answer. The text has four [parts]: three are the consolations according to the three teachings, and the fourth concludes them. Here, clarifying that the three teachings console only bodhisattvas and do not include the two vehicles is because [the two vehicles] lack compassion and enter nirvāṇa forever. Here, using the Tripiṭaka and connecting [teachings] together to form a single teaching of consolation: within the realm [of transmigration], the conditioned illness of views and thoughts has not yet been severed, and bodhisattvas have the actual illness of the cause and effect of fragmented [samsāric birth and death]; therefore the Tripiṭaka is needed to assist the connecting [teaching] of the Mahāyāna in consoling them. One may also combine it with the separate and perfect [teachings] for consolation. If one speaks of the separate [teaching], it is precisely for consoling bodhisattvas with unconditioned causal aggregation who have the actual illness of the cause and effect of ignorance and change [birth and death]; hence the separate teaching is used to console them. If one speaks of the perfect [teaching], it is precisely for consoling bodhisattvas with intrinsic causal aggregation who have the actual illness of intrinsic cause and effect; hence the perfect teaching is used to console them. Now, first clarifying the use of the Tripiṭaka assisting the connecting [teaching] for consolation, this exhorts them to enter the contemplation of emptiness from provisionality and cultivate all wisdom eyes. The text has two [parts]: first, entering emptiness from resultant provisionality; second, entering emptiness from causal provisionality. The result is the body of the deluded confusion of the five aggregates, which exists by virtue of the three provisionalities and is therefore called resultant provisionality; this is the first of the four practices of the truth of suffering: impermanence. "Speaking of the body as impermanent, but not speaking of loathing and detaching from the body": if śrāvakas contemplate the body as impermanent, they give rise to revulsion and loathing, casting away and distancing themselves from birth and death. The bodhisattva is not like this: contemplating the body as impermanent, whether by analytical reduction or by understanding its essence, is to break the inverted view of permanence; not speaking of revulsion and loathing is to shatter the two vehicles' mentality. Although knowing it is impermanent and perishing moment by moment, as long as sentient beings are not yet delivered and the buddha-dharmas are not yet fulfilled, [the bodhisattva] ultimately does not abandon it. "Speaking of the body as having suffering, but not speaking of delighting in nirvāṇa": śrāvakas contemplate suffering and joyfully seek nirvāṇa. The bodhisattva is not like this: whether by analytical reduction or understanding its essence, understanding suffering as without suffering is to break the inverted view of conceiving pleasure; as long as sentient beings are not yet delivered and the buddha-dharmas are not yet fulfilled, [the bodhisattva] ultimately does not enter nirvāṇa without remainder. "Speaking of the body as selfless, yet speaking of teaching and guiding sentient beings": śrāvakas contemplate the body as selfless and verify cessation without compassion, not delivering sentient beings. The bodhisattva is not like this: whether by analytical reduction or understanding its essence, contemplating the provisional self to enter selflessness is to break the sixteen inverted views of conceiving a self, yet without grasping the characteristic of sentient beings as ultimately empty; thus [the bodhisattva] can explain such a Dharma of selflessness for sentient beings and guide them. "Speaking of the body as empty and tranquil, but not speaking of ultimate tranquility and extinction": the śrāvaka's Dharma enters truth and falls into tranquility and extinction. The bodhisattva is not like this: whether by analytical reduction or understanding its essence, entering the two emptinesses of the provisional and the real, one understands the principle of the Middle, not taking biased truth as ultimate. This means that although entering emptiness from provisionality again, it is intended to serve as a prelude to entering the Middle, not abandoning all living beings. Hence it differs from the śrāvakas' contemplation of suffering. The intent lies precisely here.