維摩經略疏垂裕記 5.106

5.106

二、「一約」下，正明三解。「心及諸法」者，心即能造，諸法即所造。既法由心造，明全法是心。但觀能造即具諸法，此理不改，名之為性。諸法之性，故名法性。又性可軌則，故名法性，性謂三諦也。「不為惑染」者，即惑是理，故不為染。「如優波離心相」等者，荊溪云：下文正約犯罪之心本來無垢，如優波離得小乘脫，豈不見於罪心？心性不別，故約理性一切無垢。「勝天王」者，引自相空以證理法無眾生垢。引自相離，以證理中離眾生垢。皆約法性，並云自相。次實慧中亦先牒法性者，由性無故慧方今無。雖復性無而猶有者，良由無慧不可自無。但云若法不云心者，心法相攝，舉一自通。下去諸句一切悉然。「法性至煩惱垢」者，此中具二：一者全不了知真中無我；二者縱了真諦，不知中道。由此故令我猶有垢，以有垢故並名妄計。「若了」下，明稱實之慧乃契理無。下去諸句一切悉然。

Second, from "First, in terms of" downward, directly explains the three interpretations. "The mind and all phenomena": the mind is that which creates, and all phenomena are what is created. Since phenomena are created by the mind, it is clear that the totality of phenomena is mind. Simply contemplating that which creates immediately possesses all phenomena; this principle does not change, and is called nature. Being the nature of all phenomena, it is called Dharmatā. Furthermore, because nature can be a model and standard, it is called Dharmatā; nature refers to the three truths. Regarding "not defiled by afflictions": defilement is itself principle, and therefore not defiled. Regarding "Like Upāli's mental characteristics" and so forth: Jingxi says: "The text below directly concerns the mind that commits a transgression being fundamentally devoid of defilement; as Upāli attained the liberation of the Hīnayāna, did he not see the mind of transgression? Mind and nature are not distinct, so in terms of the nature of principle, all is without defilement." "Prasenajit": cites the emptiness of own-characteristic to verify that the phenomena of principle are devoid of the defilement of sentient beings. He cites detachment from own-characteristic to verify detachment from the defilement of sentient beings within principle. Both are in terms of Dharmatā, and both speak of own-characteristic. Next, in real wisdom, he also first reviews Dharmatā, because only when the nature is absent does wisdom now become absent. Although nature is absent, it still exists, which is truly because without wisdom it cannot become absent of itself. It only says "if phenomena" and does not say "mind," because mind and phenomena subsume each other, and mentioning one naturally applies to the other. All the lines below are like this. Regarding "Dharmatā to the defilement of afflictions": this contains two points: first, having no understanding whatsoever that there is no self in the true and the middle; second, even if one understands the true truth, one does not know the middle way. Because of this, it causes the self to still have defilement; because there is defilement, both are called deluded conceptualizations. From "If one understands" downward, explains that wisdom that accords with reality then tallies with the non-existence of principle. All the lines below are like this.