維摩經義疏 1.7

1.7

次會二歸一第三。問曰：初建三門，後明二徹，觀其文釋似如究麗，考其大旨則不二未成。何者？若明不二之理無言、應物之教有言，則無言之理不可有言、有言之教不可無言，則理教天乖，何名不二？答曰：斯乃曉不二無言，而未悟言即不二。故教滿大千而不言、形充八極而不像。故無言而言，雖言不言；無像而像，雖像不像。乃為一致，何謂天乖？難曰：若言即不二，則文殊之言常默；若不二即言，則淨名之默常言。三階之論渾然，二轍之宗便喪。答：三階之說，寄迹淺深；二轍之言，提引末悟。如其窮達，即不二常言、言常不二，未始不二、未始不言，故莫二之道始成、得一之宗便建。

Next, bringing the two back to one is the third [section]. Question: First you established three gates, and later explained two paths; looking at the commentary, it seems exhaustive and fine, but examining its main purport, non-duality is not yet established. Why? If you clarify that the principle of non-duality is wordless, while the teaching that responds to beings has words, then the wordless principle cannot have words, and the teaching that has words cannot be wordless. Then principle and teaching are as far apart as heaven [and earth]—how can it be called non-dual? Answer: This is because you understand that non-duality is wordless, but have not awakened to the fact that words are precisely non-duality. Therefore, the teaching fills the great trichiliocosm yet is wordless; physical forms fill the eight limits yet are formless. Thus, speaking without words, though speaking there is no speech; taking form without forms, though taking form there is no form. This is precisely unity; how could they be as far apart as heaven [and earth]? Objection: If words are precisely non-duality, then Mañjuśrī's speech is ever silent; if non-duality is precisely words, then Jingming's silence is ever speaking. The discourse on three stages would become indistinct, and the principle of the two paths would be lost. Answer: The explanation of the three stages manifests traces of depth and shallowness; the discourse on the two paths guides those of later awakening. If one fathoms their realization, then non-duality is ever speaking, and speech is ever non-dual; it has never not been non-dual, and has never not spoken. Thus the path without duality is first accomplished, and the principle of attaining the One is established.