維摩經略疏 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

7.2

Chapter on Inquiring after the Illness, Part Two

From "put this aside" onwards is the fourth [part], properly explaining the inquiry after the illness. The previous conversation was the etiquette of host and guest meeting each other, not the main purpose. Since their spiritual understanding was equal and their eloquence was inexhaustible, it would impede proclaiming the Buddha's intention; therefore, he says, "Put this matter aside." The text has two parts: first, proclaiming the Buddha's intention beforehand; second, Mañjuśrī's own statement. Having originally received the Buddha's command, the Master's intention is of paramount importance, so it must be proclaimed beforehand. Next, one must inquire into the profound reason for relying on illness, examining and evoking the Great Being's elucidation to benefit beings, and therefore he states his own sentiment. If it were merely proclaiming the Buddha's intention, the śrāvakas and bodhisattvas should not each have declined; but to inquire into the meaning of the illness face-to-face with an extraordinary person, the back-and-forth exchange is difficult, and others were not up to it. The intention lies here, and therefore Mañjuśrī next states his own sentiment. Proclaiming the [Buddha's] intention has two parts: first, properly proclaiming the intention; second, summarizing the Buddha's intent. The first passage consists of three phrases making three parts. The first phrase says, "Is this illness bearable?" Vimalakīrti's dharmakāya is fundamentally without illness, without bearableness or unbearableness. Since it is for the sake of sentient beings, bearableness and unbearableness are still discussed in terms of sentient beings. However, when a buddha abides in the world, his traces are identical to the worldly; therefore there is a sympathetic inquiry. Just as in the Vinaya, the Buddha also inquires after the monks: "Are you fatigued from the road? Was almsfood easy to obtain?" It is also like the *Dàpǐn*, where the buddhas inquire after one another: "Have you few illnesses and few troubles?" and so forth. The *Zhì lùn* explains that all of these have profound reasons. Now the Buddha asks Vimalakīrti, "Is it bearable?" Because Vimalakīrti is ill for the sake of sentient beings, and sentient beings are different, illnesses are bearable or unbearable. Just as when a person, though ill, can still walk, it is bearable; or if having pain and distress, unable to rise or move, it is unbearable. Now we also explain according to the four lands: First, according to the defiled and pure of the Co-dwelling [Land]. Those who are ill in the defiled land have the six destinies: karmas such as the ten evils and the four grave offences are the illnesses of cause for the three evil destinies, and the painful fruits of the three wretched paths are the illnesses of fruit; these grave illnesses are the marks of the unbearable. The ten goods are the illnesses of cause for asuras, humans, and devas, and the eight sufferings, five decays, and so forth are the illnesses of fruit; these sufferings are somewhat light and are the marks of the bearable. Furthermore, in the defiled Co-dwelling Land the illness of fruit is one, but the illnesses of cause are of nine different kinds, namely the six destinies and the three vehicles. If there is an illness of cause of the six destinies without the capacity of the three vehicles, it is the mark of the unbearable; if there is the capacity of the three vehicles, it is bearable. Furthermore, when ordinary persons cultivate the practice of the three vehicles, their faculties are sharp or dull, and their hindrances are light or heavy: if the faculties are sharp and hindrances light, the illness is bearable; if the faculties are dull and hindrances heavy, it is unbearable. Furthermore, when practitioners of the three vehicles advance and sever fetters, those who have severed fetters are light and thus bearable; those who have not yet severed them are heavy and thus unbearable. Vimalakīrti's provisional illness is identical to all of these. Next, for the pure Co-dwelling Land, excluding the four evil destinies, it concerns only humans and devas, with the three vehicles analogous to the preceding. Second, according to the Land with Remainder, free from the suffering of fragmented [birth and death], all are generally bearable. Yet when coarse and fine are compared, when bodhisattvas of the two vehicles and the shared teaching are born in that land, being dull, it is unbearable; when bodhisattvas of the distinct and perfect [teachings] are born in that land, being sharp, it is bearable. Provisional identification is also like this. Third, according to the Land of Retribution, those bodhisattvas are all dharmakāyas without the distinctions of the three vehicles; although there are illnesses of cause and fruit belonging to the intrinsic nature of fundamental ignorance, all are bearable. Provisional identification is also like this. If stages are compared, it is not impossible, but unlike the Land with Remainder, it does not possess these marks horizontally. Fourth, since the [Land of] Eternally Quiescent Light is the ultimate stage, where all evils are forever extinguished and all goods universally assembled, there is neither illness nor distress, and no distinction between bearable and unbearable for illnesses real or provisional. The Buddha merely uses one sentence to inquire after Vimalakīrti, which is broad, profound, and encompasses everything.

7.4

Question: It was said above that there is illness in Quiescent Light; why is it now said that there is none? Answer: It is not fixed; it simply accords with the sacred teaching: where the teaching says there is, there is; where the teaching says there is none, there is none. Now, basing it on the ultimate stage, there is no real illness.

7.5

"Is it abating under treatment?" Next is proclaimed the second sentence. As for "abating under treatment," when there is illness in the world, medical treatment is necessary. Since it is for the sake of sentient beings, if sentient beings are treated, Vimalakīrti is treated. However, the illnesses of sentient beings are of three different kinds: view and thought [afflictions], ignorance of particulars, and fundamental ignorance. These three illnesses are the root of all illnesses of cause and effect within and outside the realm [of saṃsāra]. When treated with the threefold contemplation, the three illnesses are all extinguished. This is fully explained in the threefold contemplation of the *Xuányì*, and will naturally be seen when explaining the text below. It is also explained according to the four lands: First, in the Co-dwelling [Land]: (1) entering emptiness from provisionality properly treats the illnesses of view and thought of the Co-dwelling [Land]; (2) entering provisionality from emptiness properly treats the sands of the Ganges [afflictions] of the [Land with] Remainder, and laterally treats the ignorance of particulars of the Co-dwelling [Land]; (3) the correct contemplation of the Middle Way properly treats the fundamental ignorance of the [Land with] Remainder and the Retribution [Land]. A bodhisattva of sharp faculties laterally treats view, thought, and ignorance of particulars of the Co-dwelling [Land], and also laterally treats the ignorance of particulars of the [Land with] Remainder. Quiescent Light has no illness to treat. Now we explain treating the Co-dwelling Land. The *Zhì lùn* makes four types of discernment: (1) Dull faculties and heavy hindrances: this refers to dull-witted ordinary persons whose defilement of affliction is heavy and cannot be treated. (2) Dull faculties and light hindrances: like Cūḍapanthaka, who in one summer only recited a single verse, yet was able to realize the real and become a great arhat. (3) Sharp faculties and heavy hindrances: like Aṅgulimāla, who killed 999 people daily, but because his faculties were sharp, hindrances could not obstruct him, and upon seeing the Buddha he immediately awoke. (4) Sharp faculties and light hindrances: like Śāriputra, who, upon hearing Aśvajit recite a single verse on the three truths, immediately attained the first fruit. Vimalakīrti's illness is identical to these illnesses being difficult or easy to abate. As in the four alternatives, Panthaka, Aṅguli[māla], Śāriputra, and so forth are all "abating under treatment"; when considering the Land with Remainder, there is none that never abates. If the three vehicles are compared with one another, three distinctions of abating can also be made, and the provisional illness is also like this. If entering the equal dharma realm of retribution, this is of sharp faculties, having only the single hindrance of fundamental ignorance: discussed in terms of transmission through stages, there is no distinction of light and heavy; horizontally, there is only one abatement of hindrance. If considering initial resolve and past karma, one might make a discernment of two alternatives, as there are no dull faculties; the provisional illness is also like this. The Land of Eternally Quiescent Light is the ultimate stage, utterly tranquil, without these distinctions; therefore the Buddha asks, "Is it abating under treatment?"

7.6

"Does it not tend to increase?" Next is proclaimed the third sentence. The meaning of this question is that just as people's illnesses in the world possess four kinds: (1) Some, from the beginning of taking medicine, only increase without abating, ultimately with no reason for recovery; this is called "increase-increase." (2) Others, though critically ill, are cured as soon as treated; this is called "increase-abate." (3) Others take medicine, and though it temporarily abates at first, it later increases again; this is called "abate-increase." (4) From the beginning it gradually abates until full recovery; this is "abate-abate." Vimalakīrti provisionally manifests birth in the Co-dwelling [Land], expounding the twelve-part scriptures to treat the illnesses of sentient beings, which also correspond to conditions of four faculties: (1) "Increase-increase" refers to lowest ordinary persons who, if Dharma is expounded to them, further give rise to slandering and icchantika transgressions, such as Sunakkhatta, Devadatta, and so on. (2) "Increase-abate" is like Śrīgupta, Aṅguli[māla], and so on. (3) "Abate-increase" is like the monk of the fourth dhyāna explained in the *Zhì lùn*, who believed it to be the fourth fruit, but at the approach of death saw his place of rebirth, slandered that there is no nirvāṇa, and immediately fell into hell; also the persons who fall back in the teaching explained in the *Abhidharma* and *Satyasiddhi* are all of this mark. (4) "Abate-abate" refers to Śāriputra and other people who attained the Path. Vimalakīrti in the Co-dwelling [Land], in his provisional illness, is also like this. Second, according to the Land with Remainder, there are only three kinds, with no "increase-increase"; having already attained non-retrogression in stage, they are not reborn in the three realms. Yet the three vehicles born there have the sharp and the dull, and according to retrogression in practice and retrogression in mindfulness, there can also be three; the provisional illness is also like this. In the Retribution Land, all are non-retrograde in mindfulness; thought after thought is tranquil and naturally flows into [the ocean of omniscience], so all are "abate-abate." Or one may establish three alternatives according to the meaning of entering and exiting contemplation; the provisional illness is also like this. Quiescent Light is the ultimate stage, clear and tranquil without illness. Vimalakīrti provisionally identifies with the illnesses of the previous three lands, and in treating their real illnesses, they abate and do not increase. Vimalakīrti is also like this, and therefore he inquires, "Does it not tend to increase?"

7.7

"The World-Honoured One solicitude-filled inquiries are boundless." Second, this explains Mañjuśrī's overall proclamation of the Buddha's intention in making the inquiry. As for "inquiries are boundless," since the real illnesses of the three lands in the dharma realms of the ten directions are already boundless, Vimalakīrti's compassionate regard makes the provisional illnesses boundless; therefore, he causes the Tathāgata to make boundless inquiries. Merely stating three sentences is to indicate the beginning of the inquiry. Perhaps there were many sentences, which the translator simplified, or the compiler of the sūtra did not bring out. For instance, the five hundred and eight thousand all had praises and statements, but these were abridged and not transmitted. Or it may be that merely proclaiming boundlessness in general is sufficient to express the Buddha's intent, and so he did not state more.

7.8

From "Householder" onwards is the second [part], where Mañjuśrī states his own sentiment. The difficulty of inquiring after the illness under the [Buddha's] command: the intent lies here. The text has two parts: first, inquiring about the provisional illness within the fruit; second, inquiring about the real illness within the cause. Because of inquiring about the provisional, Vimalakīrti replies, which gives rise to the "Inconceivable Chapter." Because of inquiring about the real, Vimalakīrti replies, which gives rise to the four chapters including "Contemplating Sentient Beings," as can be seen when arriving at the text. Concerning inquiring about the provisional illness within the fruit, the text has three parts: First, from "Householder, from what cause did this illness arise?" onwards is inquiring into the arising of the illness of fruit. The Great Being's dharmakāya at the stage of fruition is pure and forever free from troubles and encumbrances, yet now he manifests illness—from what cause did it arise? Second, from "Why is this room empty, without attendants?" onwards is inquiring where the Great Being's dharmakāya, dependent retribution, and retinue are now located, such that one sees only an empty room. Third, from "What are the marks of this illness?" onwards is inquiring: regarding the response body's identical illness, what are its marks? Is it identical to the dharmakāya, or identical to an ordinary person? Therefore he inquires into the marks. The first passage has two parts: first, Mañjuśrī's inquiry; second, Vimalakīrti's reply. The initial inquiry has three parts: first, inquiring into the causal arising of the illness's birth; second, inquiring into how long the illness has arisen; third, inquiring into the method of eliminating the illness. First, inquiring into the causal arising of the illness: if it is the dharmakāya at the stage of fruition, what illness or distress could there be? Now suddenly it is said to have an illness—due to what did it arise? Next, inquiring "How long has it arisen?": the dharmakāya has no illness; since there is a provisional illness, for how long has it been present? Next, inquiring "How should it be eliminated?": if it is for the sake of sentient beings, now sentient beings in the lands of the ten directions are endless, so provisionally it cannot be eliminated; how can this illness be eliminated? Mañjuśrī's three inquiries: the general meaning lies here.

7.9

From "Vimalakīrti [said]" onward is the second [section], in which Vimalakīrti replies. It has two parts: first, he replies to the second and third questions; next, he replies to the first question. As for why question and answer are out of order, each has its purpose. Mañjuśrī's intent in asking was to make sentient beings know how the traces arise from the origin. Vimalakīrti's intent in replying was to make sentient beings trace the traces back to enter the origin, and also to reveal the principle that arising and cessation mutually establish each other. His initial reply has three parts: first, directly repeating and replying to both questions; second, the explanation; third, elucidation through a simile. The first part has two: first, replying to the second question on the arising of the illness; next, replying to the third question on the cessation of the illness. Now he first replies to the second question on how long the illness has arisen. As for "From delusion there is craving, and thus my illness arose": the duration of the illness is entirely due to sentient beings' twelve links of dependent origination; Vimalakīrti's provisional illness matches their duration. How we know he answers in terms of dependent origination is that the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "There are two primary extremes of birth and death: ignorance and craving are these two; in between them there is birth, aging, illness, and death." Ignorance is past delusion; craving is present delusion. Because they are situated in two different lifetimes, two names are established. Ignorance moistens karmic formations, causing the five present fruits such as consciousness; present craving and grasping moisten existence, resulting in future birth and death. Thus there is the revolving of the twelve links of dependent origination; experiencing birth and undergoing death through the twenty-five states of existence across the three realms, there are causal illnesses and fruitional illnesses. Because sentient beings have delusion and craving, Vimalakīrti gives rise to the great compassion of the dharmakāya, and thus the provisional illness arises. The arising of sentient beings' delusion and craving has not been recent, and the provisional illness is likewise. Replying to the duration of the illness—the main intent lies here. Furthermore, as for Vimalakīrti's being ill for sentient beings' sake, how could it be only that when the illness of conditioned delusion and craving in [the Land of] Common Abode arises, the provisional illness arises? The unconditioned in [the Land of] Remainder is likewise. Why? When the delusion and craving of the Common Abode are exhausted, the delusion and craving of the Remainder arise, because through confusing the Middle Way and being tainted by nirvāṇa, this delusion and craving arise. In between these two, there are the causal and fruitional illnesses of the twelve links of dependent origination; it is merely that this is transformative dependent origination, which differs from fragmented [birth and death]. Fragmented [birth and death] involves rising and sinking, transmigrating among the six destinies; transformative [birth and death] is not like this, but is merely birth and death in terms of causal craving: when craving ceases, one is immediately born in a higher stage and never falls back to be born in a lower stage. Why? When the bonds of the three realms are exhausted, one is not born into fragmented [birth and death], nor does one fall back from the subtle to receive the coarse. It is analogous to an anāgāmin cultivating and attaining the first dhyāna while having a body of the desire realm: upon death in the first dhyāna, he is immediately born in the second dhyāna, never being born into the desire realm or falling back to the first dhyāna. If even the noble ones within the realm are like this, how much more so those outside the realm—how could they be born again into fragmented [birth and death] or receive coarse transformation? If transformative sentient beings have this delusion and craving, Vimalakīrti's great compassion immediately gives rise to the illness of delusion and craving. This is the reply regarding how long the illness has arisen. If in the Land of Retribution, unexhausted ignorance is delusion and attachment to the environmental and personal [retribution] is craving, in between these two there is the arising of causal and fruitional illnesses through the twelve links of dependent origination of self-nature birth and death. Therefore the Śrīmālā [Sūtra] says: "The entrenchment of ignorance is of the greatest power; only the wisdom of a buddha's bodhi can sever it." If the illness of delusion and craving of the Remainder ceases, the illness of delusion and craving of Retribution immediately arises, and Vimalakīrti's dharmakāya great compassion immediately matches its arising. This too is the reply regarding how long the illness has arisen. In the ultimate stage of Quiescent Light, there is no real illness of delusion and craving; hence there is no duration for the arising of a provisional illness.

7.10

Question: If one explains the duration of Vimalakīrti's illness in terms of sentient beings, delusion and craving are beginningless and neither long ago nor recent; how can this be used to answer Mañjuśrī's question? Answer: Sentient beings' delusion and craving are beginningless and neither long ago nor recent, and Vimalakīrti's unconditioned great compassion is likewise. Speaking of long ago or recent is in terms of concrete phenomena. Why? Fruition-stage great compassion fathoms the source and has no illness; conforming to sentient beings' illness, identical-essence great compassion arises because of this, and this is called how long ago it arose. The text says: "From the root of non-abiding all phenomena are established." Beginningless ignorance gives rise to nescience numerous as the sands of the Ganges, the four inversions outside the realm and the four inversions within the realm; Vimalakīrti's fathoming the source of dependent origination is likewise. If according to principle, the arising of the illness of Retribution is long ago, and the arising of the illnesses of the Remainder and the Common Abode are gradually more recent; according to concrete phenomena, the Common Abode is long ago, and the Remainder and Retribution are gradually more recent. Just as only when one severs the delusion and craving of the Common Abode does the delusion and craving of the Remainder arise.

7.11

From "If all sentient beings... to my illness will cease" onward, next is the reply to the third question on the cessation of the illness. If one uses the four teachings and threefold contemplation to sever the delusion and craving of sentient beings of the three lands, then when their real illnesses cease, Vimalakīrti's provisional illness will also cease; hence it says "then my illness will cease." Why? If the causal and fruitional illnesses arise in the Land of Common Abode, Vimalakīrti accommodates himself to them, expounding the four teachings for their sake to make them cultivate the threefold contemplation. If those sentient beings' illnesses cease, Vimalakīrti's provisional illness ceases along with them. If sentient beings of the Land of Remainder have causal and fruitional illnesses, Vimalakīrti displays a provisional illness, expounding the distinct and complete [teachings] for their sake to make them cultivate the provisional and middle. If those sentient beings' illnesses cease, Vimalakīrti's provisional illness ceases along with them. If sentient beings of the Land of Retribution have causal and fruitional illnesses, then for Vimalakīrti's provisional illness, he only expounds the complete [teaching] for their sake to make them cultivate the contemplation of the Middle. If those sentient beings part by part extinguish the forty-one grades, Vimalakīrti does likewise. In the ultimate stage of Quiescent Light, wisdom and severance are consummately perfected, so there is no cessation. The brief reply to the third question is finished. If the various masters do not permit explaining the provisional and real in terms of the two lands outside the realm, then those two lands should be without ignorance. If those [lands] have what is real, how could Vimalakīrti not have what is provisional?

7.12

Question: Sentient beings of the three lands have endless delusion and craving; when will Vimalakīrti's provisional illness ever come to an end? Answer: Speaking generally of the provisional illness, as long as sentient beings are not exhausted, the illness is also not exhausted. For now, it is based on those to be converted who have karmic affinity in the three lands in a single period: when the illness of those with affinities for conversion ceases, the provisional illness also ceases.

7.13

From "Therefore... to has no illness again" onward is the second [part], explaining the two preceding answers. It has two meanings: The previous statement said that for the sake of sentient beings he enters birth and death, and where there is birth and death there is the arising of the three kinds of illness. This explains the answer regarding how long ago the provisional illness arose. The next statement says, "If sentient beings can be freed from illness, then the bodhisattva has no illness again"; this explains the reason behind the subsequent answer regarding how the provisional illness comes to cease.

7.14

From "For instance" onward is the third [part], elucidation through a simile. The text has two: first, unfolding the simile; second, applying the simile. Unfolding has two: first, unfolding the simile of having an illness; second, unfolding the simile of recovering from the illness. First, using parents as a simile: a bodhisattva gives rise to great compassion from the two wisdoms and abides in the stage of the single child, which is to be the parent of sentient beings. All sentient beings equally possess the principle of the nature; hence it says "only has one child." If sentient beings of the three lands have the real illness of delusion and craving, the great compassion of the two wisdoms of the dharmakāya will respond and arise in the three lands; hence there is the provisional illness. Second, unfolding the recovery from the illness can be understood.

7.15

From "The bodhisattva... to also recovers" onward, next is applying the simile. The text also has two: first, applying the simile of having the provisional illness; next, applying the simile of the provisional illness recovering, as in the text.

7.16

From "It also says... to compassion arising" onward is the second [part], going back to reply to the first question. Above, the arising and cessation of the provisional illness have already been distinguished; now next is replying to the cause and reason for the arising of the provisional illness, which is due to great compassion. That is, by the power of the wholesome roots of unconditioned kindness and compassion of inconceivable liberation, he is able to manifest a body with illness to benefit the three lands. This is to have no conscious intent toward beings. The Great Sūtra says: "Right from the five fingers he emitted five lions; the Tathāgata in truth formed no thought, yet the elephant saw the lions—you should know that this is all the power of the wholesome roots of kindness." Now Vimalakīrti's great compassion perfumes his mind, manifesting illness in the three lands, which is also like this. Kindness conditioned by sentient beings or conditioned by phenomena cannot be like this. Now Vimalakīrti has unconditioned great compassion, and therefore is able to manifest a body with illness in the three lands to expound the four teachings and threefold contemplation, like poison placed in milk, which can kill someone even when [processed] into ghee. The bodhisattva's great compassion is also like this: whichever body he manifests, he works together to benefit, and his effort is not in vain. Therefore the Great Sūtra says: "Kindness is the Tathāgata; kindness is liberation." This kindness and compassion are endowed with all buddhadharmas, like a lodestone attracting iron; compassion is also like kindness.

7.17

Question: Is the stone different from the attraction, or the attraction different from the stone? Answer: If the stone were different from the attraction, the stone would have no attraction; if the attraction were different from the stone, the attraction would exist outside the stone. Now it is not like this: neither identical nor different, it is the stone's attraction. Unconditioned kindness and compassion are the dharmakāya; the dharmakāya is unconditioned great compassion, serenely pure and attracting without thought. Just as a mirror originally has no images, yet following all conditions facing the mirror, images appear. Sentient beings' original nature is pure and without delusion or craving; the bodhisattva's dharmakāya originally has no illness. Because the illness of delusion and craving of sentient beings of the three lands arises, the bodhisattva's great compassion has the provisional illness of the three lands; therefore it says, "From delusion there is craving, and thus my illness arose."

7.18

From "Mañjuśrī..." onward is the second [part], asking about the room being empty and without attendants. The text has two: first, the question; second, the answer. First, as for the question: Mañjuśrī, entering and seeing that the room was empty, immediately knew it had a symbolic meaning; as the assembly at that time had not yet awakened, he wished to reveal the meaning of the buddha-land, and therefore asked next. This is asking about the land of environmental retribution as the dwelling for the personal retribution, in order to make the assembly of that time know that the ultimate pure land where the Great Being's dharmakāya dwells has no environmental retribution or retinue. If responding to beings, then there are environmental retribution and a retinue; therefore he asks next, "Why is this room empty and without attendants?" This question directly initiates the buddha-land and supports the preceding "Buddha-land Chapter."

7.19

From "Vimalakīrti..." onward is the second [part], Vimalakīrti's reply. The text has two: first, replying about the room being empty; next, replying about having no attendants. Regarding the reply about the room being empty, there are seven rounds of back-and-forth. First, as for saying "All buddha-lands are likewise empty": the Great Being's skillful means are many and various, and his symbolic expressions are not single. Formerly, the arrangement and furnishings of this room and the retinue of attendants standing by were to symbolize that because he wished to teach the various expedient teachings and the collection of conditions was not yet removed, he was not yet able to reveal the pure land. Now, wishing to reveal that the true pure land has no afflictive burdens of fragmented or transformative environmental and personal retributions, and to guide them into the ultimate original-nature empty principle of the eternally quiescent original land, he sweeps away all possessions to symbolize abandoning the expedient teachings that explain existence. Now, wishing to expound the ultimate pure land's true emptiness and Quiescent Light, he replies, "All buddha-lands are likewise empty." How could emptiness merely symbolize that the nature is pure and eternally quiescent, empty and having nothing? All lands whatsoever are also empty. If the various lands were not empty, Quiescent Light would not be pervasive; since it is pervasive throughout everything, the three lands are all empty.

7.20

Question: Is there a separate Land of Quiescent Light? Answer: Not so. Fragmented and transformative are themselves the Eternally Quiescent Light. Just as what Śikhin saw was that the defiled is itself the pure, and one does not seek separately; therefore it says, "For instance, the devas eat from a common precious vessel, but the color of the rice differs." Saying "the devas" symbolizes the three lands: all have environmental and personal retribution—the personal retribution is the body; the environmental is the dwelling place, the pure and wondrous five desires possessed, and so forth. Saying "all are empty" symbolizes that Eternally Quiescent Light has no such distinctions of environmental boundaries, nor does it have differences among kinds of personal retribution, but all together enter the principle of ultimate true emptiness, just as this room is empty without things and without attendants. Formerly, when facing various expedient guests, all the furnishings had to be provided; now the guests have all become vessels for ultimate emptiness. Even if they have not yet entered, they surely will enter; having obtained the fragrant rice before long, like hearing the poison drum, when they come to hear the Lotus Sūtra they will all enter. Therefore, the empty room directly symbolizes this.

7.21

From "He also asked... to empty with emptiness" onward is the next question and answer. As for "He asked: By what is it empty?": fragmented and transformative both have environmental and personal retribution; how can they be made to return together to a single emptiness? Furthermore, the śrāvaka sūtras explain the emptiness samādhi, and the Mahāyāna eighteen emptinesses include the emptiness of emptiness; it is not yet known by what emptiness it is empty.

7.22

"He answered, 'By emptiness it is empty.'" If this is explained in terms of the unity of object and wisdom in illuminating the emptiness of phenomena, it is as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra explains that it is empty because of the emptiness of emptiness. It is also empty because bodhisattvas cultivate emptiness, just as the nature of salt is salty and makes other things salty; hence it is said, "by emptiness it is empty." Here it is meant that if one is confused about the teaching's intention and merely chases words, saying "empty of emptiness," then emptiness becomes limitless and does not escape frivolous discourse. What the Tripiṭaka and Shared teachings explain is merely the emptiness of emptiness within the three realms. Now, the correct contemplation of the Middle Way is able to empty samsara and also empty nirvāṇa; hence it is said, "empty of emptiness." If one empties samsara, that is the emptiness of the cohabitation [land]; if one empties nirvāṇa, that is the emptiness of the transformation [land]. Therefore it is said, "by emptiness it is empty." Why is this? If even the substantial forms within the realms are yet empty, how much more so must the subtle and wondrous retribution fruits outside the realms not be empty! Deducing from this, the empty room signifies that the buddha-lands are empty, properly signifying that the various lands are the [Land of] Eternally Silent Light.

7.23

"He further asked... 'therefore it is empty.'" This is the third round of question and answer. The reason he further asks, "What use is emptiness for being empty?" is: if phenomena are originally empty by themselves, why wait for cultivation to make them empty? If they are empty because of cultivating emptiness, then their original nature is not empty. Furthermore, if one contemplates the portioned [realm] entering emptiness from the provisional, emptiness is the true truth; why must it be emptied further? If it must be emptied further, one should know that it exists. Hence he asks what use emptiness is for being empty.

7.24

"He answered, 'It is empty through non-discriminative emptiness.'" If in terms of original nature, the principle of emptiness is one; but two-vehicle [practitioners] and bodhisattvas who adhere to expedient teachings make distinctions and grasp at emptiness, not yet realizing true emptiness. If one abandons the cognitive obscuration of distinguishing the two truths, one realizes the principle of true emptiness of the Middle Way; hence it is said, "It is empty through non-discriminative emptiness." Furthermore, if one distinguishes conventional existence and true emptiness, destroying the conventional to enter the true, then samsara and nirvāṇa are dual, which is called discrimination; one merely attains mere emptiness and does not attain unattainable emptiness. If one realizes that its essence is neither conventional nor true, then there is no distinction between samsara and nirvāṇa; how could there be any cognitive obscuration to abandon? To lack samsara is mere emptiness; to lack nirvāṇa is unattainable emptiness. This is called being empty through emptiness. If one realizes non-discriminative emptiness, there is no distinction between inside and outside the realms; this is the true, ultimate pure land of Eternally Silent Light.

7.25

"He further asked... 'is also empty.'" This is the fourth round of question and answer. The intention of Mañjuśrī's question is a hidden objection: If discrimination is not empty and non-discrimination is empty, how can one speak of emptiness? If one says it is empty, is that not discrimination? If the discrimination and grasping at emptiness by the two vehicles and expedient bodhisattvas are both not emptiness, how can one now abandon discriminative emptiness and take up non-discriminative emptiness? If there is taking up and abandoning, non-discrimination turns back into discrimination; once it becomes discrimination, it is not empty. If it is empty, one should not discriminate. Hence he asks, "Can emptiness be discriminated?" Vimalakīrti answers, "Discrimination is also empty." This principle of emptiness is inherently empty by its own nature; falsely giving rise to discrimination, this very discrimination has never existed. Although there are various conceptualizations and discriminations, discrimination is itself empty. Why is this? If nature is inherently empty, cultivating emptiness sees emptiness. If the contemplated object of discrimination is itself empty and without discrimination, the contemplating [wisdom] is also like this. If the contemplating wisdom of discrimination were not itself empty and without discrimination, the contemplated object might be so; but because the contemplated object of discrimination is empty and therefore non-discriminative, the contemplating [wisdom] is now also like this. In the various expedient teachings, phenomena and principle are not interfused, and discrimination can obstruct the principle of non-discrimination. The Perfect Teaching is not like this: all discrimination is itself non-discrimination, and non-discrimination is itself discrimination; discrimination is itself empty. Therefore the text above says, "Able to skillfully discriminate the marks of phenomena, yet unmoved in the primary truth." Although one discriminates, one is never separated from emptiness; hence it is said, "Discrimination is also empty." Furthermore, the three lands all exist because of discriminative false thoughts. If all are themselves the one suchness of the Middle Way's Dharma-nature without duality, this discrimination is itself empty, which is the Silent Light of non-discrimination.

7.26

"He further asked... 'sought within.'" This is the fifth round of question and answer. "He asked: 'Where should emptiness be sought?'" clarifies that since this principle of non-discriminative emptiness is subtle and profound, far transcending [the ordinary], where should a practitioner seek it when wishing to do so? Vimalakīrti then answers, "It should be sought within the sixty-two views." For example, if someone confuses south for north, they cannot abandon the north; in the end, they must return to the very north where they were confused to seek the south. When awakened, it is still at the confused north that they see the south. Now, when sentient beings are not awakened, bodhi is itself affliction; hence there are the afflictions of the sixty-two views. If awakened, affliction is itself bodhi: the very place of affliction conceived by the sixty-two views is itself the pure land of bodhi, true emptiness, and eternal silence. Now it is explained that although the sixty-two views are many, their root does not go beyond two views; from two emerge four, and applied across the aggregates of the three times, they become sixty-two. Thus the Lotus Sūtra says, "Whether existing or non-existing, etc., relying on these views, they fully possess the sixty-two." In ordinary beings and the four teachings, there are five kinds of the four views of existence and non-existence: First, the four views of ordinary beings produce the sixty-two, as explained earlier. Second, in the four gates of the Tripiṭaka [teaching], if one is not awakened and grasps, these are the four views; as the Dàzhìdù lùn explains, if one enters the Abhidharma, one falls into existence, and the Emptiness gate, the Piṭaka (Guṇalakṣaṇa) gate, etc., each fall into views. Third, in the four gates of the Shared teaching, if one has not attained the truth, clinging to these four propositions constitutes the four views; as the Dàzhìdù lùn says, "Prajñā is like a great mass of fire, not to be grasped on four sides"; the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā's Chapter on the Examination of Phenomena also has this explanation. Fourth, in the four gates of the Distinct teaching, as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra uses the metaphor of milk for the four propositions of Buddha-nature, if one has not seen Buddha-nature, clinging to these four propositions constitutes the four views. Fifth, in the four gates of the Perfect teaching, if one has not seen the nature, clinging to these four propositions also becomes the four views. Hence the Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā Sūtra says, "True words are false words that give rise to the view of words"; hence the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says, "Prior to this, all are called wrong views." Applying these four teachings across the aggregates of the three times and the two kinds of selflessness, each also produces sixty-two views. Someone said: The Mahāsaṃnipāta has this discrimination; I have not yet investigated the text. The reason for presenting these five kinds of sixty-two views is to substantiate Vimalakīrti's answer; hence it is said that it should be sought within the sixty-two views. If sought from the sixty-two views of ordinary beings and the four views of the Tripiṭaka and Shared teachings, one attains mere emptiness and sees the cohabitation [land] and the remainder [land]. If sought from the four views of the Distinct and Perfect teachings, etc., one attains the vision of the retribution land. If sought in the four views of the Perfect teaching, etc., reaching the pure dhyāna free from all views, one sees the Silent Light. Just as when confusing south for north, seeking from the place of confusion allows one to see the origin; now, wishing to seek the principle, seeking only within views allows one to attain non-discriminative emptiness and enter the Eternally Silent Light. Hence he answers, "It should be sought within the sixty-two views."

7.27

"He further asked... 'sought within.'" This is the sixth round of question and answer. "He asked: 'Where should the sixty-two views be sought?'" clarifies that these inverted views are fundamentally unreal; relying on what place do they arise, that one may seek these views? Vimalakīrti then answers, "They should be sought within the liberation of the buddhas." Why is this? The liberation of the buddhas is itself the inherently pure mind of the Middle Way, unstained by afflictions, fundamentally neither bound nor liberated; unstained yet stained, it is difficult to comprehend. It is precisely because sentient beings are confused about the liberation of the true nature that they give rise to the sixty-two views, having bondage and liberation. These views do not arise from anywhere else; they arise precisely from being confused about the liberation of the true nature. Now, wishing to seek these confused views, one must seek them within the buddhas' liberation of the true nature; then one knows the source from which the sixty-two views arise, just as wishing to seek ice, one cannot leave water.

7.28

"He further asked... 'sought within.'" This is the seventh round of question and answer. If seeking the sixty-two views is done by seeking them from the buddhas' liberation of the true nature, where then does the liberation of the three virtues on the buddhas' fruition stage come from? Vimalakīrti then answers, "Sought within the mental activities of sentient beings." The text above says, "In accordance with the purity of their minds, the buddha-land is purified." Now, contemplating the mental activities of sentient beings to enter the wisdom of inherent purity and exhausting the source of sentient beings' minds reveals the fruition of the buddhas' liberation. The Avataṃsaka says, "Breaking open a single atom releases sūtra scrolls of a trichiliocosm." Thus the Pratyutpanna Samādhi Sūtra says, "The buddhas attain liberation from the mind; the mind is pure and called stainless; the five destinies are immaculate and do not receive form; one who understands this accomplishes the Great Path." Therefore Vimalakīrti encourages seeking within the mental activities of sentient beings, just as encouraging one to seek water without leaving ice.

7.29

Question: Does seeking the liberation of the true nature also attain real wisdom and expedient means? Answer: The mind-nature of sentient beings is itself the true nature; delusion and craving are themselves real wisdom; the various unwholesome actions are themselves expedient means—fully as explained in the Profound Meaning concerning the three non-paths of the twelve links of dependent origination penetrating the inconceivable three liberations of the Buddha Path.

7.30

If one sees that the purity of sentient beings' minds is itself the purity of the buddha-land, then within the mental activities of sentient beings one sees the buddhas' three kinds of dharmakāya liberation, neither vertical nor horizontal, like the worldly letter 'I' [∴]. Therefore, in the ultimate dharmakāya, apart from the body there is no land, and apart from the land there is no body; body and land share the same principle, differing only in name. Just as Indra, Lord of the Gods, has many names, liberation is also like this: sometimes named Vairocana, sometimes named the Land of Eternally Silent Light. Hence Vimalakīrti's empty room signifies that the buddha-lands are empty, and only placing a single bed to lie ill signifies the liberation of the three virtues. If one sees the room is empty, one sees lying ill on the bed; if one sees lying ill on the bed, one sees the room is empty. If one sees the minds of sentient beings are empty, one sees the buddha-lands are empty, which means seeking within mental activities attains the three liberations. Therefore, because Vimalakīrti answered concerning the buddha-lands, he sequentially proceeded to answer concerning the buddhas' liberation, which in turn reinforces and accomplishes the purport of the inconceivable liberation taught by the Buddha, revealing the central aim of the buddha-lands. Assisting the Buddha in propagating the transformation—his primary intention is right here. Although the five chapters inside the room below explain much, their gathered purport ultimately originates from this.

7.31

From "Furthermore, what you ask, Virtuous One" below is the second [part]: answering [why there are] no attendants. This expresses that the purity of nature is forever free of craving and views; hence it is said that there are no attendants. Just as the attendants of worldly people wait on both sides and are driven in service, the various kinds of attendants precisely symbolize this. The text has two [parts]: first, the direct answer; second, the explanation. First, the direct answer states, "All māras and heterodox practitioners are my attendants." The intention of this answer is that the Great Being originally takes māras and heterodox practitioners as attendants; now the empty room has no attendants, expressing that the Land of Eternally Quiescent Light is free of craving and views, and thus without māras and heterodox practitioners—hence there are no attendants. Yet the meaning of having attendants is that if one responds to beings possessing craving and views in the three lands, these are māras and heterodox practitioners. When Vimalakīrti transforms and employs them, they become buddha-work that benefits sentient beings; this is the meaning of having attendants. If the beings possessing craving and views in the three lands are identical to emptiness and nonexistent, this is the meaning of having no attendants. Since there are beings possessing craving and views in all three lands, Vimalakīrti manifests residence in all these lands, and thus there are attendants. If in the defiled Co-dwelling Land, there are Māra Pāpīyas's retinue and beings belonging to craving—these are the attendants on the right side; the six teachers with their ninety-six varieties and beings belonging to views—these are the attendants on the left side. Why is this so? In the defiled Co-dwelling Land, Vimalakīrti manifests various bodies: not abandoning craving, he may act as a demon king to tame his retinue and make it a buddha-work; immovable in views, he may act as a heterodox practitioner to turn the deviant toward the correct and tame his retinue to make it a buddha-work. This is using beings formed of craving and views as attendants. Manifesting in the pure Co-dwelling Land is also like this, except there are no evil māras or heterodox practitioners. If there are views and craving in the Land of Remainder, the beings of the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of the Shared Teaching born there possess dhyāna-concentration and wisdom: dhyāna-concentration is the nature of craving, and wisdom is the nature of views. These are still the sinful defilements of the past karma of craving and views; therefore they do not see the Tathāgata's pure land. Vimalakīrti responds by being born there to share their craving and views, subduing and transforming them so as to make it a buddha-work; these are the attendants. For bodhisattvas of the Distinct and Perfect [Teachings], although they have merit and wisdom, they have not yet seen the buddha-nature and have not yet severed fundamental ignorance: this is unconditioned craving and views, and what is formed by it is still māras and heterodox practitioners. Although their Land of Transformative Birth has no heavenly māras, it has the māra of delighting in saṃsāra, for defilement with nirvāṇa is precisely craving, and because of craving there is the retribution of transformative birth, which is itself māra. Although it is free of heterodox practitioners outside the principle of the truth of emptiness, it has heterodox practitioners outside the principle of the Middle Way. The Great Being does not abandon craving, remains unmoved in views, and transforms and saves them—he precisely takes them as attendants. In the Land of Retribution, from the first abode onward, although they see the true reality and completely sever the views and thoughts of the dharma-realm, they have not yet exhausted them; even up to the Dharma Cloud [stage], there are still subtle cravings and views, and thus they are bound by the delusion of the non-self wheel, and one grade of the māra of death remains. For their sake, Vimalakīrti manifests birth in that land, subduing these bodhisattvas formed of craving and views to make them his retinue; this is what is meant by "they are all my attendants." In the ultimate Land of Quiescent Light, the dependent retribution caused by various karmas is forever exhausted; hence it is said to be "empty and having nothing." The direct retribution caused by craving and views is forever absent; hence it is said to be "without attendants." The empty room without attendants distantly symbolizes this.

First 31 of 138 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

維摩經略疏 — Classical Chinese