維摩經略疏垂裕記 3.130

3.130

Seventh, maintaining precepts. Regarding "reproach," the Guangya says: "To reproach (ji) is to sting. It is to question." The Shuowen says: "It is to slander." Jingxi says: "Regarding the four propositions, according to the sūtra, it precisely utilizes the second of the four as the cause for the pure land. Reproaching others appropriately is generally used in the third. Initial-mind bodhisattvas have not yet completely guarded themselves, so this is not discussed. In the fourth proposition, not reproaching is one half, which in principle can also penetrate, but because they do not guard themselves, it is also inappropriate. Only in the first proposition is there nothing to be adopted at all. Next, the Great Sūtra is cited to verify the third proposition; thus in the first proposition, since one does not guard oneself, what benefit is there in reproaching? If one's own person is not upright, even if one orders, it will not be followed; therefore in the second proposition, without ordering it is practiced. If one sees capacities, one definitely uses the second and third propositions. The second is personal practice, and the third is benefiting others; these are precisely the pure land practices. Regarding 'Suppose there are three sons,' and so forth, the elder has four sons in all; the metaphor for the Buddha is also like this. Beiyuan says: '1. Slandering the Dharma, 2. the four grave offenses, 3. the five heinous crimes, 4. the ten unwholesome deeds. The former three are called dying by the rod, because they cannot be redeemed. The ten unwholesome deeds can still be repented, as there is the meaning of generating goodness; thus they must be dealt with harshly.' In Zhang'an's commentary, it is further explained in terms of the teachings: the first three being reproached is called dying by the rod; clinging to the perfect [teaching] should also be reproached and subdued, so like the one son they must be dealt with harshly. The present text cites this to verify the precepts, temporarily agreeing with Yuan's explanation. Since it says only seeing the four capacities without error, one must still rely on Zhang'an's explanation. Kumārajīva's commentary states: 'The preceding spoke of the perfection of precepts; now speaking of precepts again, the meaning does not lie in the precepts, but rather wishes to clarify not reproaching their deficiencies by means of precepts. Because one does not reproach their deficiencies, none know of their deficiencies; when none know of their deficiencies, there is no name of violating prohibitions. Practicing with this, one consequently obtains this as a fruition, and then all evils are entirely extinguished; therefore it is followed by the ten wholesome deeds.' Altogether, there are three explanations in the foregoing, each having its rationale; let scholars choose between them."