維摩經略疏垂裕記 9.55

9.55

二、約此去四品明來意，二：初、略示。荊溪云：兼成室外四品者，理須兼於〈佛國〉半品，通總論之，故且云四。「故方便」下，三、正當三觀。〈方便品〉約所用法正多屬空，〈弟子〉、〈菩薩〉約能訶法，而弟子多屬假，以菩薩多屬中，佛國具三。三觀既爾，四教準知。二、「分此」下，廣釋，二：初、近成〈問疾〉調伏慰喻，二：初、標牒。二、解釋，三：初、此品成上從假入空。荊溪云：而云成者，即釋成也。上所明空既空一切，即是皆空故也。「應具假中而但云空」者，此有二意：一者通途虛照三諦，雖三而空。二者由在方等教中，雖三而通，故使通相復異次第，未是獨顯，但是通知。若爾，空尚未委，況今於空加四無量及廣上等？故云小異。是故今以三品釋上〈觀眾生〉中有假有中，故云約空起四無量。義當假觀，含於空中，故云約空。若準此文，窮眾生源，義當中在空中意也。「淨名答」等者，源者即是無住之源本也。尚至無住，豈但空耶，二，佛道品成上從空入假。荊溪云：次〈佛道品〉既辨假中，任運變成不思議之假中也。文中雖不彰灼言之，道理應爾。雖然，此乃從於教旨以說顯機，乃須依附方等故分三品以屬三觀。三、〈不二〉、〈香積〉兩品成上中道。荊溪云：如我病者等者，能見斯病與空同體，故中雙非病，亦雙非非俗，故非有非真故非無，此則正當中道義也。

Second, explaining the intent of coming for the four chapters from this one on has two parts: first, a brief indication. Jingxi says: "In fulfilling additionally the four chapters outside the chamber, principle demands that half of the 'Buddha Land' chapter also be included; discussing them comprehensively and collectively, they are provisionally called four." Under "Therefore, expedient means...", third, they precisely correspond to the three contemplations. The "Expedient Means" chapter, in terms of the dharmas applied, predominantly belongs to emptiness; the "Disciples" and "Bodhisattvas" chapters, in terms of the dharmas capable of reproaching, have the disciples predominantly belonging to the provisional, while the bodhisattvas predominantly belong to the middle; the Buddha Land possesses all three. The three contemplations being thus, the four teachings are to be understood by analogy. Second, from "Dividing this..." downward, a broad explanation, which has two parts: first, proximately fulfilling the pacification and consolation of [the chapter on] "Inquiring about Illness," which has two parts: first, quoting the heading; second, explaining, which has three parts: first, this chapter fulfills the preceding "entering emptiness from the provisional." Jingxi says: "When it says 'fulfills,' it means explaining and fulfilling. Since the emptiness explained above empties everything, it is precisely because all are empty." As for "It should possess the provisional and the middle, yet speaks only of emptiness," this has two meanings: first, the general method emptily illuminates the three truths, so that although there are three, they are empty; second, because it is within the vaipulya teaching, although there are three, they are shared, thereby making the common aspect also distinct from the sequential, not yet being independently revealed, but only known in common. If so, emptiness has not yet been detailed, how much less now adding the four immeasurables to emptiness and broadly elaborating the above, etc.? Therefore it is called "slightly different." For this reason, three chapters are now used to explain the above [chapter], "Contemplating Sentient Beings," which contains both the provisional and the middle; thus it is said that "based on emptiness one arouses the four immeasurables." In meaning this corresponds to the provisional contemplation, yet it contains the middle within emptiness, hence it is said to be "based on emptiness." If judged by this text, exhausting the source of sentient beings in meaning corresponds to the intent of the middle being within emptiness. As for "Jingming replied..." and so forth, "source" is precisely the original root of non-abiding. If it reaches even non-abiding, how could it be mere emptiness? Second, the "Buddha Path" chapter fulfills the preceding "entering the provisional from emptiness." Jingxi says: "Next, since the 'Buddha Path' chapter discerns the provisional and the middle, it spontaneously turns into the inconceivable provisional and middle. Although it is not plainly stated in the text, the principle must be so. Nonetheless, this is explaining and revealing capacity according to the doctrinal purport, and by necessity must rely on the vaipulya; hence it divides into three chapters to subordinate them to the three contemplations." Third, the two chapters "Non-duality" and "Gandhakūṭa" fulfill the preceding middle way. Jingxi says: "Regarding 'Like my illness...' and so forth, being able to see this illness as sharing the same substance with emptiness, the middle therefore doubly negates illness, and also doubly negates non-conventionality; hence it is neither existent nor ultimate, and thus not non-existent. This precisely corresponds to the meaning of the middle way."