維摩經略疏 4.111

4.111

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.