維摩經略疏垂裕記 4.142

4.142

三、明空，二：初、懸示，二：初、列章。二、隨釋，二：初、總別解，二：初、正示。二、料簡，二：初、簡能喻大小。「不應焰幻為譬」者，以小乘無焰幻譬，故不應也。「沫泡」等者，以衍門十喻無沫等譬故。十喻者，一幻、二焰、三水月、四虛空、五響、六乾城、七夢、八影、九像、十化。「雜譬非宜」者，既四教並談，故小衍雜用。「但大論至如幻」者，荊溪云：具如幻化，俗同真異。一俗三真，例意可見。故於一幻所見不同，所以通教三人見別，別人次第滅幻見理，圓人即於幻見法性。「利人」，即指別圓人也。勸修觀者，留意思之，尋文迷宗謂之數寶。「從多為論」等者，謂聲聞亦為利根說如幻等，但經多說泡沫等譬。衍經亦說泡沫以為助道，但多說如幻等譬。故捨少從多，以譬分教，故云「各有宗途」。或作「徒」字者，誤。「大品」下，正示。衍經亦說少喻，但多少為異耳。「六譬」者，二、簡所喻離合。「離合」者，荊溪云：假身即是諸法合成，是故得云離合不定。亦如《婆沙》釋十二因緣，或云一法即有為也，或云二法即因果也，或云三法即三道，或云四法二因二果，或說五法二因三因，或說六法三世因果，或說七法二因五果，或說八法三因五果，皆以三世更互比說。因緣所成即假身也，故諸經論法相離合悉皆不定。「今用三事者」，若根本禪，多從息入。若通明禪，具觀三事。若無漏禪，觀不淨等及以三事，是故今文但說三事。

Third, explaining emptiness, which has two parts: first, a preliminary presentation, which has two parts: first, listing the headings. Second, explaining sequentially, which has two parts: first, general and specific explanations, which have two parts: first, directly showing them. Second, analytical distinction, which has two parts: first, distinguishing the size of the vehicles of the metaphors. Regarding "one should not use mirages and illusions as metaphors": because the Hīnayāna lacks metaphors of mirages and illusions, they should not be used. Regarding "foam, bubbles", etc.: because the ten metaphors of the Mahāyāna gate lack metaphors of foam, etc. The ten metaphors are: first, illusion; second, mirage; third, moon in the water; fourth, empty space; fifth, echo; sixth, city of the Gandharvas; seventh, dream; eighth, shadow; ninth, reflected image; tenth, transformation. Regarding "mixed metaphors are inappropriate": since the four teachings are discussed side by side, Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna are used together. Regarding "only the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra up to 'like an illusion'": Jingxi says, 'Fully like an illusion and a transformation, the conventional is identical while the real is different. One conventional and three reals—the intended analogy can be seen. Therefore, what is seen regarding a single illusion is not the same; this is why the persons of the three vehicles of the common teaching see it differently, the person of the distinct teaching gradually extinguishes the illusion to see the principle, and the person of the perfect teaching sees the Dharma-nature directly within the illusion.' 'Persons of sharp faculties' refers to persons of the distinct and perfect teachings. He encourages those cultivating contemplation to keep their minds on this and reflect; seeking words while losing the fundamental intent is called counting [another's] jewels. Regarding "speaking from the majority", etc.: this means that for śrāvakas, [the Buddha] also explained [dharmas] as like an illusion, etc., for those of sharp faculties, but the sūtras mostly preach metaphors like foam and bubbles. Mahāyāna sūtras also preach foam and bubbles to serve as aids to the path, but they mostly preach metaphors like illusions, etc. Therefore, discarding the minority and following the majority, one differentiates the teachings by metaphors; hence he says, 'Each has its doctrinal approach.' Those who write the character tú (徒, followers) are mistaken. Under "The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā...", he directly demonstrates it. Mahāyāna sūtras also preach a few [such] metaphors, but they differ only in being more or less. 'Six metaphors' refers to the second: distinguishing the combination and division of that which is metaphorized. Regarding 'combination and division': Jingxi says, 'The provisional body is composed of various dharmas, which is why one can say its combination and division are not fixed. It is also like the Vibhāṣā's explanation of the twelve links of dependent origination: some say it is one dharma, which is the conditioned; some say two dharmas, which are cause and effect; some say three dharmas, which are the three paths; some say four dharmas, which are two causes and two effects; some say five dharmas, which are two causes and three causes; some say six dharmas, which are cause and effect across the three times; some say seven dharmas, which are two causes and five effects; some say eight dharmas, which are three causes and five effects—all comparing and speaking of them mutually across the three times. That which is accomplished through causes and conditions is the provisional body; hence, across all sūtras and treatises, the combination and division of dharmic characteristics are entirely unfixed. Regarding 'Now using the three matters': in fundamental dhyāna, one mostly enters through the breath. In the dhyāna of penetration and clarity, one fully contemplates the three matters. In undefiled dhyāna, one contemplates impurity, etc., as well as the three matters; therefore, the present text only speaks of the three matters.'