維摩經略疏垂裕記 10.164

10.164

二、別答，二：初、釋觀三世，二：初、正釋經文。「如見有未來之法」等者，此語過去法未至現在時，故云未來之法可得。「是有邊無邊」者，牒凡夫妄執有過去也。此即外人妄計，謂過去有邊無邊、現在常無常、未來如去不如去，乃至各加兩亦雙非，約三世五陰共成六十，不離斷常即六十二見也。《大論》《大經》并疏及《輔行》等處處明之。今意者，若過去實有，可同外計。今既本空，其計安是？下明後際不去、現在不住，例之可知。二、「他解」下，對古示義，二：初、約位辨常，二：初、敘古。二、明今。若解今意，方曉大經二鳥雙遊之旨。文為二：初、明金剛前自行故常。「適今」者，始今也。凡夫並常，何況分聖。二、金剛後約化他故無常。然約自行亦有無常，以元品無明未斷故。今此且就化他明之。妙覺極果尚示八十無常，豈況分常而不示乎？

Second, the individual answer, has two parts: First, explaining the contemplation of the three times, has two parts: First, directly explaining the sūtra text. "Like seeing that there are dharmas of the future" and so forth: this speaks of when past dharmas have not yet arrived at the present; therefore it says that dharmas of the future can be obtained. "Is it bounded or unbounded?": repeating the ordinary person's false grasping to the past as existent. This is the non-Buddhists' false calculation, saying that the past is bounded or unbounded, the present is permanent or impermanent, the future goes as such or does not go as such, and even adding both and neither to each, which together with the five aggregates across the three times make sixty, not departing from annihilation and permanence, namely the sixty-two views. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, along with the commentaries and the Fuxing, clarify this in many places. The present meaning is: if the past were real and existent, it could agree with the non-Buddhist calculations. Now, since it is fundamentally empty, how could their calculations be correct? Below, clarifying that the later limit does not depart and the present does not abide can be known by analogy. Second, from "Others' explanation" downward, showing the meaning in contrast to the ancients, has two parts: First, distinguishing permanence in terms of stages, has two parts: First, recounting the ancients. Second, clarifying the present. If one understands the present meaning, only then does one comprehend the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra's purport of two birds flying together. The text has two parts: First, clarifying that before the diamond [samādhi], it is permanent because of one's own practice. "Shijin" means just beginning now. Ordinary persons are all permanent, how much more so the partial sages? Second, after the diamond [samādhi], it is impermanent in terms of transforming others. However, in terms of one's own practice, there is also impermanence, because original fundamental ignorance has not yet been severed. Here this is explained just in terms of transforming others. If the ultimate fruit of wonderful enlightenment still manifests the impermanence of eighty years, how much more so would partial permanence not manifest it?