維摩經略疏垂裕記 2.21

2.21

四、「答若」下，通。厝，置也。「何曾併是」者，如分經三分各立義門，豈皆佛說耶？然此蓋不知《釋論》所明四依菩薩隨義立名名為法施也。若許種種釋義，何獨不許法門解耶？二、顯頓漸諸教咸須觀解，二：初、問難。二、答釋，二：初、明方等有觀解。二、明小乘有觀解。「為牧牛人說十一法」等者，暹云：《大論》曰「放牛難陀問佛：『有幾法成熟能令牛群蕃息？有幾法不成熟令牛群不增不得安穩？』佛答：『牧牛有十一事。頌云：解色與相應（二）、摩刷覆瘡痍（二）、放煙并茂草（二）、安隱及度處（二）、時宜留𤛓餘（二），將護於大牛（一）。比丘亦如是，知四大造色（一）、善別愚智相（一）、摩刷六情根（一）、善覆十善相（一）、傳所誦為煙（一）、四意止茂草（一）、十二部安處（一）、八聖及度處（一）、莫受輕賤請名曰知時宜（一）、知足為留餘（一）、敬護是將護（一）。』」此十一事，即小乘附事觀心也。然則豈唯內典，外教亦然。〈儒行篇〉云「儒有忠信以為甲冑，禮義以為干櫓。」又楊子《法言》曰「修身以為弓，矯思以為矢，立義以為的。尊而後發，發必中矣。」抑亦觀心之例也。由是知今師觀解，其得意於內外乎。

Fourth, from "Answer: If..." downward, resolving it. *Cuo* means to place. As for "how could it all have been...," just as dividing a sūtra into three sections and establishing gates of meaning for each, how could that all be the Buddha's preaching? However, this is simply not knowing what is explained in the *Treatise* [*Dazhidulun*]: that bodhisattvas of the four reliances establish names according to meaning, which is called the gift of Dharma. If diverse explanations of meaning are accepted, why should an explanation in terms of dharmas alone not be accepted? Second, revealing that both the sudden and gradual teachings all require contemplative explanations, in two: first, raising a question and challenge. Second, answering and explaining, in two: first, clarifying that the Vaipulya has contemplative explanations. Second, clarifying that the Hīnayāna has contemplative explanations. As for "explaining the eleven dharmas for the ox-herder" and so forth, [Dao]xian says: "The *Great Treatise* says: 'Nanda the cowherd asked the Buddha: "How many dharmas bring maturation and cause the herd of cattle to multiply? How many dharmas fail to bring maturation, causing the herd of cattle not to increase and not to obtain safety?" The Buddha answered: "Herding cattle has eleven matters. The verse says: Understanding color and corresponding marks (two), grooming and covering sores (two), making smoke and lush grass (two), safe places and crossing places (two), knowing the right time and leaving leftover milk (two), and guarding the great oxen (one). A bhikṣu is also like this: knowing the four great elements and derived form (one), well distinguishing the marks of the foolish and the wise (one), grooming the six sense faculties (one), well covering the marks of the ten good deeds (one), transmitting what is recited as smoke (one), the four bases of mindfulness as lush grass (one), the twelve divisions of scriptures as safe places (one), the eight noble paths as crossing places (one), not accepting invitations that are despised as knowing the right time (one), knowing contentment as leaving leftovers (one), and reverent protection as guarding (one)."'" These eleven matters are precisely the Hīnayāna's contemplating the mind in connection with phenomena. This being so, how could it be only in the internal scriptures? The external teachings are also like this. The "Chapter on the Conduct of the Ru" says: "The Ru have loyalty and trustworthiness as armor and helmet, and propriety and righteousness as shield and buckler." Also, Master Yang's *Fayan* says: "Cultivating the person serves as the bow, correcting thoughts serves as the arrow, and establishing righteousness serves as the target. Revering it and then shooting, the release will surely hit the mark." This is also of the same pattern as contemplating the mind. From this we know that our master's contemplative explanations grasped the inner meaning of both internal and external texts.