維摩經略疏垂裕記 10.97

10.97

二十二、寂根，二：初、釋名。「三無漏根」者，如前記。荊溪云：此是大乘三無漏根，從於寂滅實相而生。「六根得清淨」者，分真清淨也。二、釋門，二：初、廣釋三寶義，二：初、明二相。文中先問起三寶，是三不應云二。「既言」下，作兩意答釋：初約異故名二。是則四法乃至無量，對一如理悉得名二，豈但三法？「又解」下，次束三寶以為人法，故知三寶秖是二也。言「佛與眾生俱是人」者，眾下多「生」字，後人妄加也。眾是僧耳，以僧伽翻眾故，故佛僧二寶俱是人也。佛是果人，僧是因人。「故言」下，引《大論》證佛稱人，以人與眾生俱假名故。人不曉此，遂於上文「眾」字下輒加「生」字。二、「今觀」下，示不二，二：初、正約三寶示不二。二、「何故」下，更歷三身示不二，二：初、約身廣明，二：初、徵起總明。二、「人就」下，約身別示，二：初、三身敵對。二、三身各明，三：初、法身三寶。「是法佛之師」者，「法」字誤也，應云諸佛之師。此即《大經》云「諸佛所師，所謂法也。以法常故，諸佛亦常。諸佛即報智也。」此法身正是法佛，豈得又為法佛之師耶？「可軌之法」者，以報智軌則法性而成故，即是以法常故諸佛亦常也。法以軌則為義。「境智相稱」者，荊溪云：不稱則不和。既約境智以明三寶，而云境法佛智相稱者，境亦稱智，故名相稱。二、報佛三寶。荊溪云：與理相應者，智應於理如前，約理即是理應於智。三、應身三寶。二、「雖復」下，結示不二。「然此三身各明三寶」者，凡有二異：若法報二身，秖是境智照發等互成三義。法身以所發之智為佛，報身以所照之境為法，法身以境同於智為僧，報身以智同於境為僧。秖由報法相應相冥，故得互望各為三寶。唯應身三寶一向就應說，細尋前文其義可見。「凡十二寶」者，以源本三并流出九，源流共數則有十二。「未曾有異」者，以三身一體、人法不二故。「入一實相」者，三九雖殊，一心無別。二、「三寶」下，略例一切法。荊溪云：諸法亦爾者，諸法無非一體三寶之實相也。

22. Quiescent Faculty. There are two parts. First, explaining the name. "The three untainted faculties" are as noted earlier. Jingxi says: These are the Great Vehicle's three untainted faculties, born from quiescent true reality. "The six faculties attain purity": partial purity of the true. Second, explaining the gate. There are two parts: first, extensively explaining the meaning of the Three Jewels. There are two parts: first, clarifying the two characteristics. In the text, first asking about the Three Jewels: being three, they should not be called two. From "Having said" onward gives two senses in reply and explanation: first, regarding difference, they are called two. Then four dharmas down to immeasurable, when paired with the one principle of suchness, can all be called two; how could it be only three dharmas? Next, from "Another explanation" onward, bundling the Three Jewels into person and dharma; thus we know the Three Jewels are merely two. The statement "Buddha and sentient beings are both persons": below "sentient" (zhong) the character "beings" (sheng) is superfluous, mistakenly added by later people. Zhong is merely the saṅgha, because saṅgha translates as "assembly" (zhong); therefore the two jewels of Buddha and saṅgha are both persons. The Buddha is the person of fruition, and the saṅgha is the person of cause. From "Therefore it says" onward cites the Da zhidu lun to verify that the Buddha is called a person, because persons and sentient beings are both nominal designations. People did not understand this, and so arbitrarily added the character "beings" under the character "assembly" in the text above. Second, from "Now contemplating" onward shows non-duality. There are two parts: first, directly showing non-duality regarding the Three Jewels; second, from "Why" onward, further going through the three bodies to show non-duality. There are two parts: first, extensively clarifying regarding the bodies. There are two parts: first, raising the question for a general clarification; second, from "Persons concerning" onward, specifically showing regarding the bodies. There are two parts: first, the three bodies in direct opposition; second, each of the three bodies explained separately. There are three parts: first, the Three Jewels of the dharmakāya. "Is the teacher of the dharma Buddha": the character "dharma" (fa) is an error; it should read "the teacher of all Buddhas" (zhu fo). This is as the Great [Nirvāṇa] Sūtra says: "What all Buddhas take as teacher is the so-called Dharma. Because the Dharma is eternal, all Buddhas are also eternal. All Buddhas are the wisdom of reward." This dharmakāya is precisely the Dharma Buddha; how could it again be the teacher of the Dharma Buddha? "A dharma that can be a model": because the wisdom of reward models itself upon the dharma-nature and is accomplished, this is "because the Dharma is eternal, all Buddhas are also eternal." Dharma takes being a model as its meaning. "Object and wisdom matching each other": Jingxi says: If they do not match, they are not in harmony. Since the Three Jewels are clarified regarding object and wisdom, saying the object Dharma and Buddha-wisdom match each other means the object also matches wisdom, hence called matching each other. Second, the Three Jewels of the saṃbhogakāya. Jingxi says: Corresponding with principle: wisdom corresponds with principle as before; regarding principle, it is principle corresponding with wisdom. Third, the Three Jewels of the nirmāṇakāya. Second, from "Although again" onward concludes by showing non-duality. "However, each of these three bodies clarifies the Three Jewels": there are two differences: in the case of the dharma and reward bodies, it is merely that object and wisdom illuminating and producing each other reciprocally form three meanings. The dharmakāya takes the generated wisdom as Buddha, the saṃbhogakāya takes the illuminated object as Dharma, the dharmakāya takes the object being identical to wisdom as Saṅgha, and the saṃbhogakāya takes wisdom being identical to the object as Saṅgha. Solely because the reward and dharma bodies correspond and merge with each other, when viewed reciprocally each forms Three Jewels. Only the Three Jewels of the nirmāṇakāya are spoken of purely in terms of response; searching the previous text closely, its meaning can be seen. "In all, twelve jewels": taking the three of the source-origin and combining them with the nine flowing out, the source and the flow together count as twelve. "Never any difference": because the three bodies are of one substance, and person and dharma are non-dual. "Entering into the single true reality": although three and nine are distinct, in the single mind there is no differentiation. Second, from "The Three Jewels" onward briefly draws an analogy to all dharmas. Jingxi says: "All dharmas are also like this": all dharmas are nothing other than the true reality of the one-substance Three Jewels.