維摩經義疏 3.10

3.10

「佛告羅睺羅：汝行詣維摩詰問疾」。此第九次命羅睺羅。就文為二：初命、次辭不堪。羅睺者，此言覆障，謂六年在胎，為胎所覆障，因以為名。所以有羅睺者，諸相師四月八日來白淨飯王言：「太子若今夜不出家，明日七寶自至，為轉輪王。」父王夜增其伎樂，菩薩欲心內發，耶輸陀羅其夜有身。淨居天悲而言：「菩薩貪著五欲，眾生誰度之？」內觀出家，後成道夜始生羅睺。所以六年在胎者，《智度論》云「羅雲過去為王，六日飢餓仙人，故招此報。」又餘經云「由塞鼠穴，受斯果也。」羅睺，亦名宮生。悉達出家而生羅睺，諸釋謂非佛子，欲燒殺之。耶輸抱子立誓，俱投於火，而化成蓮華。諸釋云：「真宮生也。」因以為名。「羅睺羅白佛言：世尊！我不堪任詣彼問疾」。第二辭不堪。就文為三，謂標、釋、結。此初標也。「所以者何？憶念昔時毘耶離諸長者來詣我所，稽首作禮，問我言：唯羅睺羅！汝佛子，捨轉輪王位出家為道。其出家者有何等利？我即如法為說出家功德之利」。此第二釋不堪。就文為三：一被呵之由、二能呵之旨、三明時眾得益。初文為二：一長者子問、二羅雲答。捨轉輪王位者，佛不出家當為金輪聖王，王四天下。羅雲不出家，當為鐵輪王，王一天下。一天下地及虛空，各十由旬鬼神屬之，為其給使。羅雲所以出家者，佛成道竟，還至本國，羅雲年始六歲。如來明日至，變千比丘悉如佛形，羅雲直往佛所，摩其頂，明日歸精舍，勅身子、目連度之。初出家後，喜多暴口，形詔於人。佛一時約勅，於斯永斷，相罵不瞋，佛嘆其忍辱持戒密行第一。諸長者子所以問者，見羅睺所捨至重，未聞其所得，是故問也。我即為如法說出家利者，依《出家功德經》，有人殺三千世界眾生，有人救之得脫。有人挑三千世界眾生眼，有人治之得差。其出家福，多彼救治，功德相應。為說此利也。「時維摩詰來謂我言：羅睺羅！不應說出家功德之利」。此第二能呵之旨。就文為二：初呵羅云所說、次淨名辨出家之利。羅什云「羅雲受屈，其旨有四：一不見人根，應非其藥。二出家功德無量，而說之有限。三即是實相，而以相說之。四出家本為實相涅槃，羅云不說其本。」吉藏謂家有二種：一者形家，謂父母妻子；二者心家，即是煩惱。諸長者子無出形家之義，有出心家之義，而羅云雖嘆出形家，於事無益；若說出心家，則便有利。而不應說而說、應說而不說，則是漏機，所以受屈。「所以者何？無利無功德是為出家。有為法者可說有利有功德。夫出家者為無為法，無為法中無利無功德」。此第二得名說出家法。諸長者子正以有得為懷，謂有人能出、有家可出，家為過罪、出有功德，此皆有所得心，即是有為法，悉名為家。維摩破著心，故讚無為法。無為是果、出家為因，果既無為，因豈有著？若能蕭然無寄，始是出家。「羅睺羅！出家者無彼無此亦無中間」。在俗為此、出家為彼、出家方便名為中間，今並忘之，即出家也。「離六十二見處於涅槃」。既忘彼此兩間，復離諸見，便處涅槃果。「智者所受、聖所行處」。地前菩薩依教生解名為智者，信順此法是名為受。登地會於正理稱之為聖，聖心遊之故云行也。「降伏眾魔、度五道」。經云「一人出家，魔宮皆動」，始動魔宮、終心降伏，既降伏四魔，必超度五道。凡夫能出四趣，不能出天道。出家求滅，則五道斯度。「淨五眼、得五力、立五根，不惱於彼」。二乘出家雖度五道，不能淨五眼；大乘離俗，能淨五眼。五眼有二：一約五人有五，人有肉眼、天有天眼、二乘慧眼、菩薩法眼、佛佛眼。一人具五者，見彰內為肉眼、見障外為天眼、照實相為慧眼、照二乘法滅名為法眼、照於佛性兼無法不知名為佛眼。今論後五，故名為淨。信、進、念、定、慧為五，此五在鈍根人心為根，在利根人心為力。若據一人，則始終為異。在家有妻子財產，若遇因緣必惱於彼。出家則道超事外，惱因自息，故云惱於彼。「離眾雜惡、摧伏外道」。在俗行善，由雜不善；出家求道，道既純淨，行分不雜也。出家不為摧物而諸惡自消，猶如日出不期滅闇而闇自滅也。「超越假名」。經說有四：一生死是假名、涅槃非假名。生死是浮虛幻偽，所以是假；涅槃真實，故非是假。二者涅槃是假、生死非假。涅槃無名，強為立名，所以是假；生死本是名相之法，非強立名，是故非假。三者俱是假。以生死涅槃是因緣相待，故是假也。如《華嚴》云「生死涅槃，二俱是虛妄」。四二俱非假。癈名就法，法體皆如，如內絕言，故非假稱。今就初門，明生死是假名、得涅槃故超出也。「出淤泥、無繫著」。出假名，離生死果；出淤泥，離生死因。在家沒愛泥、外道出家沒見泥，今明真出家俱離愛見，非但離生死之愛見，亦無繫著於道法。「無我所、無所受、無擾亂」。所以無繫著者，由無我所故也。受之言取，取有四種：欲取、我取、戒取、見取。今無此四取也。若內有四取，必有擾亂；以心無所取，故無擾亂。「內懷喜、護彼意，隨禪定、離眾過」。出家之人有三種喜：一者有現世功德，自然豫欣。二者後得涅槃，心常歡悅。三者不憂不喜，心無依著，則真淨妙喜也。又能將順眾生，不乖逆其意，故言護彼意。隨禪定者，戒能折伏煩惱令其勢微，禪定能遮使惑不起，智慧能滅畢竟無餘。今持戒清淨則結薄心靜，與禪相順，故言隨也。「若能如是，是真出家」。若能不違上說，是真出家。總結之也。「於是維摩詰語諸長者子：汝等於正法中宜共出家。所以者何？佛世難值」。此第三明時眾出益。凡有四句：初淨名勸出家、二長者不敢違佛制、三淨名重勸發心、四長者受旨。此初文也。淨名知其不得出家，而欲令其發心，故有此勸耳。「諸長者子言：居士！我聞佛言：父母不聽，不得出家」。此第二答也。律云「有人詣僧坊，諸比丘輒度之。其父母大愁苦，訴淨飯王。淨飯王云：『太子無令我知，輒私出家。吾愁苦。自令已去，父母不聽，不得出家。』以是事白佛，佛制戒云：若父母不聽，不得。趣度之者，得吉羅罪。」「維摩詰言：然。汝等便發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，是即出家，是即具足」。此第三文也。所以勸發心者，彰其形雖繫於二親，而心超於三界，則是出於心家。既出心家，則身口無眾惡，便是具足戒也。「爾時三十二長者子皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心」。此第四文也。諸長者子既以有礙不形出家，而聞在家有出心家之理，故欣然從之。「故我不任詣彼問疾」。此第三總結。

"The Buddha told Rāhula: 'Go visit Vimalakīrti to inquire after his illness.'" This is the ninth commission, given to Rāhula. The text has two parts: first the commission, and next declining due to unfitness. "Rāhula" here means "shrouding obstruction"; because he remained six years in the womb and was shrouded and obstructed by the womb, he was named after this. As for why there was Rāhula: on the eighth day of the fourth month, the soothsayers came and addressed King Śuddhodana, saying: "If the prince does not go forth tonight, tomorrow the seven treasures will arrive of themselves, and he will become a wheel-turning king." That night the father king increased the singing and dancing girls, and lustful thoughts arose within the Bodhisattva; Yaśodharā conceived that night. The gods of the Śuddhāvāsa wept and said: "The Bodhisattva is attached to the five desires; who will deliver sentient beings?" Through internal contemplation he renounced worldly life, and only on the night he subsequently attained the Way was Rāhula born. As for why he was six years in the womb, the Dà zhìdù lùn says: "In a past life, Rāhula was a king who starved a sage for six days; hence he incurred this retribution." Other sūtras also say: "Because he blocked a rat's hole, he received this result." Rāhula is also called "Palace-born." When Siddhārtha went forth and Rāhula was born, the Śākyas said he was not the Buddha's son and wished to burn him to death. Yaśodharā, holding the child, made a vow and they threw themselves together into the fire, which transformed into a lotus flower. The Śākyas said: "He is truly born of the palace." Hence he was named after this. "Rāhula said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, I am not fit to go there to inquire after his illness.'" This is the second [part], declining due to unfitness. The text has three parts: the statement, the explanation, and the conclusion. This is the first, the statement. "'Why is this? I recall once when the elders' sons of Vaiśālī came to where I was, bowed their heads in homage, and asked me: "Honourable Rāhula, you are the Buddha's son; you renounced the position of a wheel-turning king to go forth to practice the Way. What benefits are there in going forth?" I then explained to them according to the Dharma the benefits of the merit of going forth.'" This is the second [part], explaining unfitness. The text has three parts: 1. the reason for being reproved; 2. the purport of the reproof; 3. showing the benefit gained by the assembly at that time. The first text has two parts: 1. the question of the elders' sons; 2. Rāhula's answer. As for renouncing the position of a wheel-turning king: had the Buddha not gone forth, he would have been a gold-wheel-turning sage king ruling over the four continents. Had Rāhula not gone forth, he would have been an iron-wheel-turning king ruling over one continent. In the earth and open sky of that one continent, spirits and deities ten yojanas [in extent] each would have belonged to him and served him. As for why Rāhula went forth: after the Buddha attained the Way and returned to his home country, Rāhula was only six years old. When the Tathāgata was to arrive the next day, he transformed a thousand monks all into the likeness of the Buddha's form; Rāhula went straight to the Buddha's place, and [the Buddha] stroked his crown. The next day he returned to the monastery and instructed Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana to ordain him. When he first went forth, he was fond of crude speech, mocking and scolding people. The Buddha once disciplined him, whereupon he severed this forever; when reviled, he felt no anger, and the Buddha praised him as foremost in forbearance, keeping the precepts, and esoteric practice. The reason the elders' sons asked was that seeing what Rāhula had renounced was extremely weighty, but not yet having heard what he had attained, they therefore asked. "I then explained according to the Dharma the benefits of going forth": relying on the Sūtra on the Merits of Going Forth, if someone were to kill the sentient beings of a trichiliocosm, and someone were to rescue them to obtain release; or if someone gouged out the eyes of the sentient beings of a trichiliocosm, and someone cured them to make them whole—the merit of going forth is greater than that saving and curing, corresponding to that merit. He explained these benefits for them. "'At that time Vimalakīrti came and said to me: "Rāhula, you should not speak of the benefits of the merit of going forth."'" This is the second [part], the purport of the reproof. The text has two parts: first reproving what Rāhula said, and next Jingming discerning the benefits of going forth. Kumārajīva said: "Rāhula was worsted for four reasons: 1. He did not see people's capacities, prescribing medicine that was not suited to them. 2. The merit of going forth is immeasurable, yet he spoke of it as limited. 3. It is itself the true mark, yet he spoke of it in terms of marks. 4. Going forth is fundamentally for the sake of the true mark of nirvāṇa, yet Rāhula did not speak of its foundation." Jizang says: There are two kinds of household: the first is the physical household, meaning parents, wife, and children; the second is the mental household, which is afflictions. The elders' sons had no sense of leaving the physical household, but had the sense of leaving the mental household; though Rāhula praised leaving the physical household, it was of no benefit to the situation. If he had spoken of leaving the mental household, then it would have been beneficial. To speak when one should not speak, and not to speak when one should speak, is to miss the capacity; hence he was worsted. "'"Why is this? To have no benefit and no merit is to go forth. Conditioned dharmas may be said to have benefit and merit. Going forth is for the sake of the unconditioned Dharma; in the unconditioned Dharma there is neither benefit nor merit."'" This is the second [part], Jingming speaking of the Dharma of going forth. The elders' sons precisely harboured an attitude of attainment, supposing that there are people who can go forth, that there is a home to go forth from, that the home is a fault and sin, and that going forth has merit. These are all minds with attainment, which are conditioned dharmas and are all called "home." Vimalakīrti broke their attached minds, and therefore praised the unconditioned Dharma. The unconditioned is the fruit, and going forth is the cause; since the fruit is unconditioned, how could the cause have attachment? If one can be detached and without reliance, only then is it going forth. "'"Rāhula, one who goes forth has neither that nor this, nor anything in between."'" Being in the secular world is "this"; going forth is "that"; the expedient means of going forth is called "in between." Now forgetting both of these is precisely going forth. "'"He is free from the sixty-two views and abides in nirvāṇa."'" Having forgotten both this and that as well as the middle, and further being free from all views, he then abides in the fruit of nirvāṇa. "'"He is accepted by the wise and walks where the noble walk."'" Bodhisattvas prior to the stages produce understanding relying on the teaching, and are called the wise; faithfully following this Dharma is called being accepted. Ascending the stages, matching the correct principle, they are called noble; the noble mind roaming therein is therefore called walking. "'"He subdues all māras and crosses over the five destinies."'" A sūtra says: "When one person goes forth, the palaces of Māra all tremble"; first shaking the palaces of Māra, and ultimately subduing them in mind—having subdued the four māras, one must certainly transcend the five destinies. Ordinary persons can escape the four destinies, but cannot escape the heavenly destiny. Going forth to seek extinction, then the five destinies are crossed over. "'"He purifies the five eyes, attains the five powers, establishes the five roots, and does not afflict others."'" Although going forth in the two vehicles crosses over the five destinies, it cannot purify the five eyes; leaving the secular world in the Mahāyāna can purify the five eyes. There are two kinds of five eyes: first, with respect to five kinds of people there are five: humans have the flesh eye, gods have the divine eye, the two vehicles have the wisdom eye, bodhisattvas have the dharma eye, and buddhas have the buddha eye. When one person possesses all five: seeing what is manifest within is the flesh eye; seeing beyond obstructions is the divine eye; illuminating the true mark is the wisdom eye; illuminating the cessation of dharmas in the two vehicles is called the dharma eye; illuminating the Buddha-nature while being ignorant of no dharma is called the buddha eye. Here the latter five are discussed, and hence they are called "purified." Faith, diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom are the five; these five, in the mind of a person of dull faculties, are roots, while in the mind of a person of sharp faculties, are powers. In terms of one person, they differ from beginning to end. At home there are wife, children, and possessions; if encountering conditions, one will surely afflict others. When going forth, the Way transcends worldly matters and the causes of affliction naturally cease; hence it says "not afflicting others." "'"He is free from manifold evils and crushes the non-Buddhists."'" Practicing good in the secular world is still mixed with what is not good; when going forth to seek the Way, since the Way is purely undefiled, the practice is unmixed. Going forth is not for the sake of crushing others, yet all evils naturally vanish, just as when the sun rises, it does not intend to destroy darkness, yet darkness naturally is destroyed. "'"He transcends nominal designations."'" The sūtras speak of four types: 1. Saṃsāra is a nominal designation, while nirvāṇa is not a nominal designation. Saṃsāra is fleeting, illusory, and false, and therefore nominal; nirvāṇa is real, and therefore not nominal. 2. Nirvāṇa is nominal, while saṃsāra is not nominal. Nirvāṇa is nameless and arbitrarily given a name, and is therefore nominal; saṃsāra is fundamentally a dharma of names and marks, not arbitrarily given a name, and is therefore not nominal. 3. Both are nominal. Because saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are mutually dependent on causes and conditions, they are therefore nominal. As the Avataṃsaka says: "Saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, both are unreal and false." 4. Neither is nominal. Setting aside names and turning to dharmas, the essence of dharmas is completely Suchness; within Suchness speech is severed, and therefore it is not a nominal designation. Here, taking the first approach, it explains that saṃsāra is a nominal designation, and by attaining nirvāṇa one transcends it. "'"He emerges from the mire and is without attachment."'" Emerging from nominal designations means leaving the fruit of saṃsāra; emerging from the mire means leaving the cause of saṃsāra. Being at home, one sinks in the mire of craving; going forth among non-Buddhists, one sinks in the mire of views. Here it shows that truly going forth leaves behind both craving and views; not only does one leave behind the craving and views of saṃsāra, one is also without attachment to the dharmas of the Way. "'"He is without self-possession, without grasping, and without disturbance."'" The reason he is without attachment is because he is without self-possession. "Acceptance" (shòu) means grasping; grasping has four kinds: grasping at desires, grasping at self, grasping at precepts and rituals, and grasping at views. Now he is without these four graspings. If within there are the four graspings, there will surely be disturbance; because the mind grasps nothing, there is no disturbance. "'"He cherishes joy within, protects the thoughts of others, accords with dhyāna meditation, and is free from manifold faults."'" A person who goes forth has three kinds of joy: 1. having present-life merit, he is naturally delighted in advance; 2. later attaining nirvāṇa, his mind is ever joyful; 3. neither grieving nor rejoicing, his mind has no reliance or attachment, which is true, pure, and wondrous joy. Furthermore, he can comply with sentient beings and not go against their intentions; hence it says "protects the thoughts of others." "Accords with dhyāna meditation": precepts can crush afflictions to make their force weak; dhyāna meditation can prevent delusions from arising; wisdom can extinguish them completely without residue. Now, keeping precepts purely, the fetters are thin and the mind is quiet, according with dhyāna; hence it says "accords with." "'"If one can be like this, this is truly going forth."'" If one can not contradict what was stated above, this is truly going forth. This summarizes it. "'Thereupon Vimalakīrti said to the elders' sons: "You should together go forth in the true Dharma. Why is this? A Buddha's era is difficult to encounter."'" This is the third [part], showing the benefit gained by the assembly at that time. There are four sentences in all: 1. Jingming urges them to go forth; 2. the elders' sons do not dare violate the Buddha's regulation; 3. Jingming repeatedly urges them to arouse the aspiration [for bodhi]; 4. the elders' sons receive the instruction. This is the first text. Jingming knew that they could not go forth physically, but wished to make them arouse the aspiration; hence he gave this urging. "'The elders' sons said: "Householder, we have heard the Buddha say: If parents do not permit it, one may not go forth."'" This is the second [part], their reply. The Vinaya says: "A person went to the monastery, and the monks readily ordained him. His parents were in great sorrow and distress, and appealed to King Śuddhodana. King Śuddhodana said: 'The prince did not let me know, and secretly went forth on his own. I was in sorrow and distress. From now on, if parents do not permit it, one may not go forth.' Bringing this matter to the Buddha, the Buddha laid down the precept: 'If parents do not permit it, one may not. If one readily ordains him, one incurs a duṣkṛta offence.'" "'Vimalakīrti said: "Indeed. You should just arouse the aspiration for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; this is itself going forth, this is itself full ordination."'" This is the third text. The reason he urges arousing the aspiration is to reveal that although their physical forms are tied to their two parents, their minds transcend the three realms, which is leaving the mental household. Having left the mental household, their body and speech have no manifold evils, which is itself the complete precepts. "'At that time, thirty-two elders' sons all aroused the aspiration for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.'" This is the fourth text. Since the elders' sons were obstructed from going forth physically, but heard that while remaining at home there is the principle of leaving the mental household, they joyfully followed it. "'Therefore, I am not fit to go there to inquire after his illness.'" This is the third [part], the general conclusion.