維摩經義疏 3.4

3.4

「佛告大迦葉：汝行詣維摩詰問疾」。第三次命迦葉。問：迦葉既為上座，何不前命？答：布薩受食，可依年獵；銜命擊揚，宜用辨慧。問：若爾，《法華》何故前序迦葉？答：彼經明會三之義，迦葉為稟異之初。義各有由，無相害也。摩訶迦葉者，翻為大龜，是其姓也。別名必鉢羅，此云普逐，是王舍城摩訶陀國婆羅門種。夫妻二人。身並金色，俱共厭世出家，皆得阿羅漢果。於十弟子內，苦行第一。「迦葉白佛言：世尊！我不堪任詣彼問疾」。此第二辭不堪。就文為三：謂標、釋、結。此即標也。「所以者何？憶念我昔貧里而乞食」。此第二次釋呵也。就文為三：一被呵之由、二能呵之旨、三明得益。此初章也。於貧里而行乞者，凡有四義，一者貧人昔不種福，是故今又不殖，來生復貧。復貧相繫，無得脫時。今欲愍其長苦，故從乞也。二者四大聲聞得滅盡定，而迦葉為得定之勝，其有施者能令現世獲報。欲濟其交切之苦，故從貧乞。三者富貴則嬌奢難化，貧窮易受道法。今欲度之，故乞也。四者若從富貴乞，則有名利之嫌。今往貧里，有會小欲之行。「時維摩詰來謂我言：唯大迦葉！有慈悲心而不能普，捨豪富從貧乞」。此第二明能呵之旨。就文為二：初呵聲聞慈悲、次教菩薩乞法。雖有慈悲不能普者，即捨富從貧，於貧有悲、捨富無慈，名為不普。又捨富從貧，即是自現行悲、自現行慈，則有可譏之迹，是故被呵。所以偏呵悲者，捨富從貧以慈為主，故前呵其悲偏。「迦葉！住平等法，應次行乞食」。此下第二說菩薩乞法，以教聲聞。夫乞食有六：一行乞食、二入聚洛、三有所見聞、四明噉食、五有福田、第六總結。初門四句：第一對聲聞悲偏，說平等乞食。夫生死流轉、貴賤無常，或今貧後富、或今富後貧。大而觀之，苦樂不異。是以凡住平等之法，應次第行乞，不宜捨富而從貧也。「為不食故應行乞食」。此第二句，明乞食意也。聲聞為欲食而行乞食；今明不應爾也，為不食故應行乞食耳。言不食者，即是食之實相，以此心行乞食也。「為壞和合相故應取揣食」。此第三明取食法也。聲聞受取揣食，為資養五陰。今明不應建於此心受揣食，應為壞和合相故取揣食。和合者，謂五陰聚集以此成身，名和合也。揣食者，食有四種：一者揣食，以香味觸和合成之，以可揣握，故名為揣，即欲界食也。二曰願食，如兒見沙囊，而命不絕，是願食也。三曰業食，地獄不食而活，由其罪業應久受苦痛也。四曰識食，無色眾生以識相續，命不斷也。「為不受故應受彼食」。此第四句，明受食也。聲聞以人為能受食、食為所受。以能受所受，故名受食。今明不見人為能受、食為所受，應以此心受彼食也。文雖四句，義有二章：初平等乞，謂功德業；後之三句，明於智慧。智慧則異凡、功德則超聖，故非凡夫行。非賢聖行，是菩薩行，豈止誨彼聲聞？夫欲行乞，當依此法也。「以空聚相入於聚落」。此第二句，明入聚落。然行乞食必入聚落，故次辨之耳。聲聞以有聚相入於聚落，故明以空聚相入於聚落。空聚者，聚落之內空，無貧富人也。若然，不應捨富而從貧。又即聚落本畢竟空，名空聚落。若爾，亦不應有取捨心。「所見色與盲等」。此第三次明見聞。夫入聚落，必有見聞，凡夫見聞則生諸結，二乘視聽則怖畏六塵。今雙斥聖凡，故辨菩薩法也。見色與有等者，非謂閉目不視，然終日見而無所見，故稱為盲。「所聞聲與響等」。聞響不生憙怒，聽聲宜可同之。「所嗅香如風等」。風行香林而無心受，今聞香亦應同之。「所食味不分別」。法無定相，由分別取相謂之為味，若不分別則非味也。「受諸觸如智證」。小乘智證滅時，心無所染。身受諸觸，宜可同之。「知諸法如幻相，無自性、無他性」。諸法從因緣生，故無自他性。如會指成捲，故捲無自性。指亦如是，故無自他性。「本自不然，今則無滅」。喻向無自故無他也。如有燃故有滅；本自不燃，今則無滅。有自故有他耳。本無自，何有他耶？「迦葉！若能不捨八邪入八解脫、以邪相入正法」。此第四呵其正食。若能悟邪正不二，便得平等觀，乃可食人施也。八解脫，即八背捨。違八解脫，名為八邪。所以偏明此之法等者，良由迦葉謂捨八邪，得八解脫、有滅盡定，能生物福，故偏說也。邪正既一，便不相乖，故復云入也。「以一食施一切、供養諸佛及眾賢聖，然後可食」。上示其受食，為物福田。此教其受食，復為施主。既得邪正等觀，便是無礙無盡法門，能以一食施於一切，如後鉢飯事也。若未得真悟，受食之時宜應作心，上供三寶、下施四生，即是建無盡無礙心也。「如是食者，非有煩惱、非離煩惱」。有煩惱食，凡夫也。離煩惱食，二乘也。今勸雙捨凡聖，故非有無也。「不入定意、非起定意」。小乘人有二時入定：一者將欲食時前入定，作不淨觀，然後起定方食；二者噉食以後復入禪定，生施主福。此之二時，入定則不食、食則不入定。菩薩得無礙觀，終日食而終日定，故無出入之名。又大士體道未曾靜散，故非入非起、非住世間非住涅槃。凡夫之食，願壽命長存，為住世間。二乘受食，欲入涅槃。又聲聞受食，名住世間，後欣取滅稱住涅槃。今並異之，故兩非也。以菩薩不食而食，故非住涅槃；食無所食，故非住世間。「其有施者，無大福無小福、不為益不為損」。此第五次明福田。若迦葉得平等觀，則能外說平等法，能令施主復平等心，不計福之大小、己之損益。又解：大小據前人、損益就迦葉，田勝則施主得大福、田劣則獲小福，得食則獲五事為益、不得則無五事為損，故損益據迦葉。「是為正入佛道，不依聲聞」。此第六總結。如上所明，便得平等觀，名正入道，則能自利利人，故不依聲聞。「迦葉！若如是食，為不空食人之施也」。既有正悟，便是良田，故不虛人施。「時我，世尊！聞說是語，得未曾有，即於一切菩薩深起敬心，復作是念：斯有家名，辨才智慧乃能如是，其誰不發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心！我從是來，不復勸人以聲聞辟支佛行」。此第三明迦葉蒙益。凡有五句：一歎法希有。二得敬勝人。復作是念，第三讚嘆。斯有家名者，在家大士。淨名遐布，誰不發心？第四勸發心。我從是來，第五迦葉自立大志。「是故不任詣彼問疾」。不堪有三：標、釋竟，今總結也。

"The Buddha told Mahākāśyapa: 'Go to Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.'" This is the third instruction, commanding Kāśyapa. Question: Kāśyapa is an elder; why was he not commanded first? Answer: The poṣadha ceremony and the receiving of meals may follow seniority, but undertaking a mission to debate and expound requires eloquence and wisdom. Question: If so, why does the Lotus Sūtra introduce Kāśyapa first? Answer: That sūtra clarifies the meaning of uniting the three [vehicles into one], and Kāśyapa was the foremost among those who received this distinct [teaching]. Each text has its reason, and they do not contradict one another. "Mahākāśyapa" is translated as "Great Turtle," which is his family name. His personal name is Pippala, here rendered as "universal pursuer"; he belonged to the brahmin caste in the kingdom of Magadha in Rājagṛha. Husband and wife both had bodies of a golden complexion; together they grew weary of the world, left the household life, and both attained the fruit of arhatship. Among the ten disciples, he was foremost in ascetic practices (dhūta).

"Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, I am not capable of going to him to inquire about his illness.'" This is the second [part], declining capability. In the text there are three sections: the statement, the explanation, and the conclusion. This is the statement.

"Why is this? I recall that in the past I was begging for food in a poor neighbourhood." This is the second [section], explaining the reproof. In the text there are three parts: first, the reason for being reproved; second, the purport of the reprover; and third, the clarification of the benefit gained. This is the first part. Begging for alms in a poor neighbourhood generally has four meanings: First, poor people did not plant blessings in the past, and consequently they do not plant them now either, so they will be poor again in future lives; bound by recurring poverty, they have no occasion for release. Now, wishing to pity their enduring suffering, he begged from them. Second, among the four great śrāvakas who had attained the concentration of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti), Kāśyapa was superior in attaining this samādhi, so anyone who gave alms to him could obtain recompense in the present life; wishing to relieve their acute misery, he begged from the poor. Third, the wealthy and noble are arrogant and extravagant, making them hard to transform, whereas the impoverished easily accept the Dharma; wishing now to liberate them, he begged from them. Fourth, if one begs from the rich and noble, there is the suspicion of seeking fame and gain; going now to a poor neighbourhood accords with the practice of having few desires.

"At that time Vimalakīrti came and said to me: 'O Mahākāśyapa! You have a compassionate mind, yet it is not universal: you abandon the wealthy and beg from the poor.'" This is the second [part], clarifying the purport of the reprover. In the text there are two parts: first, reproving the śrāvaka's compassion; next, teaching the bodhisattva's method of begging. Although he has compassion, it cannot be universal because he abandons the rich to approach the poor: having compassion for the poor while lacking kindness toward the rich is called "not universal." Moreover, abandoning the rich to approach the poor is an outward show of his own compassion and benevolence, leaving traces open to ridicule; hence he was reproved. As for why his compassion alone is singled out for rebuke: abandoning the rich to approach the poor is based primarily on compassion, so his partiality in compassion was rebuked first.

"'Kāśyapa! Abiding in the equal Dharma, you should beg for food in succession.'" From here down is the second part, explaining the bodhisattva's method of begging to teach the śrāvaka. Begging for alms has six aspects: first, begging for food; second, entering the village; third, what is seen and heard; fourth, eating the food; fifth, the field of merit; and sixth, the general conclusion. The first section has four lines. The first line, countering the śrāvaka's partiality in compassion, explains begging for food with equanimity. Transmigration in saṃsāra and nobility and lowliness are impermanent: one may be poor now and rich later, or rich now and poor later. Viewed comprehensively, suffering and pleasure are not different. Therefore, anyone who abides in the equal Dharma should beg in succession; it is not fitting to abandon the rich and approach the poor.

"'One should beg for food for the sake of not eating.'" This second line clarifies the intention of begging for food. The śrāvaka begs for food out of a desire to eat; now it is clarified that this should not be so: one should beg for food for the sake of not eating. "Not eating" means the true mark of food; one should beg for food with this mind.

"'For the sake of breaking the mark of composite entities, one should take morsel food.'" This third [line] clarifies the method of taking food. The śrāvaka receives and takes morsel food in order to nourish the five aggregates. Now it is clarified that one should not establish this intention when receiving morsel food; one should take morsel food for the sake of breaking the mark of composite entities. "Composite" refers to the five aggregates gathering together to form the body, which is called composite. "Morsel food": there are four kinds of food. First, morsel food, which is formed by the combination of aroma, taste, and tangibility; because it can be held in morsels, it is called morsel food—this is food of the desire realm. Second, food of volitional intention: just as a child looking at a bag of sand keeps from dying, this is food of volitional intention. Third, food of karma: beings in hell live without eating because their sinful karma dictates that they must endure suffering for a long time. Fourth, food of consciousness: beings in the formless realm have their life continue without interruption through the continuity of consciousness.

"'For the sake of non-receiving, one should receive that food.'" This fourth line clarifies receiving food. The śrāvaka considers the person as the receiver of food and the food as what is received; because there is a receiver and what is received, it is called receiving food. Now it is clarified that one must not see a person as the receiver or food as what is received; one should receive that food with this mind. Although the text has four lines, the meaning comprises two sections: first, begging with equanimity refers to the practice of merit; the subsequent three lines clarify wisdom. Wisdom distinguishes one from ordinary people, and merit surpasses the noble ones; hence these are neither the practices of ordinary people nor the practices of the wise and noble, but rather the practice of a bodhisattva. How could this be limited to instructing that śrāvaka? Anyone who wishes to beg for alms should rely on this method.

"'Enter the village with the mark of an empty village.'" This second [line] clarifies entering the village. Since begging for food necessarily involves entering a village, it is explained next. The śrāvaka enters the village with the mark of an existing settlement; therefore it is explained that one should enter the village with the mark of an empty village. "Empty village" means that the interior of the village is empty, devoid of rich and poor persons. If so, one should not abandon the rich to approach the poor. Furthermore, the village itself is fundamentally completely empty (atyanta-śūnya), hence called an empty village. If so, one should also have no mind of grasping or rejecting.

"'The forms seen are equal to [what is seen by] the blind.'" This third [part] clarifies seeing and hearing. Entering a village inevitably involves seeing and hearing: ordinary people give rise to defilements upon seeing and hearing, while those of the two vehicles fear the six dusts upon looking and listening. Now, refuting both ordinary people and noble ones, the bodhisattva's practice is expounded. "Seeing forms is equal to [what is seen by] the blind" does not mean closing the eyes and not looking; rather, though seeing all day long, there is nothing seen, hence called "blind."

"'The sounds heard are equal to an echo.'" Hearing an echo does not give rise to joy or anger; listening to sounds should be treated in the same way.

"'The scents smelled are equal to the wind.'" The wind moves through a fragrant forest without a mind that receives it; now smelling scents should also be treated in the same way.

"'The tastes eaten are not discriminated.'" Dharmas have no fixed mark; it is through discrimination and grasping marks that one calls something a taste; if one does not discriminate, then it is not a taste.

"'Experiencing tactile sensations is like realization through wisdom.'" When the Hīnayāna wisdom realizes cessation, the mind is untainted. The body experiencing tactile sensations should be treated in the same way.

"'Know that all dharmas are like illusions, lacking self-nature and lacking other-nature.'" All dharmas arise from causes and conditions, and therefore lack self-nature and other-nature. Just as joining the fingers forms a fist, the fist has no self-nature. The fingers are also like this; hence there is neither self-nature nor other-nature.

"'Fundamentally not burning, they now have no extinction.'" This is an analogy for the preceding lack of self and other. If there is burning, there is extinction; being fundamentally unburned, there is now no extinction. It is because there is a self that there is an other. If fundamentally there is no self, how could there be an other?

"'Kāśyapa! If you can enter the eight liberations without abandoning the eight wrong paths, and enter the true Dharma by means of the marks of what is wrong...'" This fourth [part] reproves his proper eating. If one can awaken to the non-duality of the wrong and the true, one attains the contemplation of equanimity, and only then may one eat people's offerings. The eight liberations are the eight renunciations (aṣṭa-vimokṣa). Opposing the eight liberations is called the eight wrong paths. The reason this practice of equality is specifically highlighted is precisely because Kāśyapa believed that by abandoning the eight wrong paths one attains the eight liberations and possesses the concentration of cessation, which can produce blessings for beings; hence it is specifically stated. Since the wrong and the true are identical, they do not oppose each other; therefore it says "enter."

"'...give one meal as an offering to all, making offerings to all Buddhas and the assembly of wise and noble ones, only then may you eat.'" Above, it showed him receiving food to serve as a field of merit for beings. Here, it teaches him upon receiving food to become a donor in turn. Having attained the contemplation of equality regarding the wrong and the true, this is an unimpeded and inexhaustible Dharma gate; one can give one meal as an offering to all, just as with the subsequent incident of the bowl of rice. If one has not yet attained true awakening, at the time of receiving food one should form the thought of offering it above to the Three Jewels and bestowing it below upon the four types of living beings; this is establishing an inexhaustible, unimpeded mind.

"'One who eats like this is neither with afflictions nor free from afflictions.'" Eating with afflictions is the ordinary person. Eating free from afflictions is the two vehicles. Now, encouraging the abandonment of both ordinary person and sage, he says neither presence nor absence.

"'Neither entering the concentrated mind nor arising from the concentrated mind.'" A practitioner of the Hīnayāna enters samādhi at two times: first, when about to eat, he enters samādhi beforehand to cultivate the contemplation of impurity, and only after arising from samādhi does he eat; second, after eating he enters dhyāna-concentration again to generate blessings for the donor. At these two times, when in samādhi he does not eat, and when eating he does not enter samādhi. A bodhisattva attains unobstructed contemplation: eating all day long, he is in samādhi all day long, so there is no notion of entering or emerging. Furthermore, the mahāsattva embodies the Way without ever being quiet or distracted; hence he neither enters nor arises, neither abides in the worldly realm nor abides in nirvāṇa. The ordinary person's eating is in the hope that life will endure long, which is abiding in the worldly realm. The two vehicles receive food wishing to enter nirvāṇa. Furthermore, the śrāvaka's receiving of food is called abiding in the worldly realm, while his subsequent longing for cessation is called abiding in nirvāṇa. Now, differing from both, both are denied. Because the bodhisattva eats without eating, he does not abide in nirvāṇa; because eating has nothing eaten, he does not abide in the worldly realm.

"'If there is a donor, there is neither great blessing nor small blessing, neither benefit nor harm.'" This fifth [part] clarifies the field of merit. If Kāśyapa attains the contemplation of equanimity, he can outwardly explain the equal Dharma, enabling the donor also to return to an equal mind, not calculating the greatness or smallness of blessings or the harm or benefit to oneself. Another explanation: greatness and smallness refer to the other person, while benefit and harm refer to Kāśyapa; if the field is superior the donor obtains great blessings, and if the field is inferior he obtains small blessings; if he gets food he gains five things as benefit, and if he does not he lacks five things as harm; therefore benefit and harm refer to Kāśyapa.

"'This is truly entering the Buddha path without relying on the śrāvakas.'" This sixth [part] is the general conclusion. As explained above, one attains the contemplation of equanimity, which is called truly entering the path; then one can benefit oneself and benefit others, hence not relying on the śrāvakas.

"'Kāśyapa! If you eat in this way, you do not consume people's offerings in vain.'" Having attained true awakening, one is an excellent field [of merit], and therefore does not consume people's offerings in vain.

"'At that time, World-Honoured One, hearing these words, I obtained what I had never experienced before, immediately gave rise to deep reverence for all bodhisattvas, and also had this thought: "This householder's renown, eloquence, and wisdom are actually like this; who would not generate the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi!" From that time on, I have never again exhorted people with the practices of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.'" This third [part] clarifies Kāśyapa's receiving benefit. There are five clauses in all: first, praising the Dharma as rare; second, attaining reverence for superior persons; "and also had this thought" is the third, praising; "this householder's renown" refers to the lay mahāsattva; with Jingming's renown spread far and wide, who would not generate the mind [of bodhi]?; the fourth is encouraging the generation of the mind [of bodhi]; "from that time on" is the fifth, Kāśyapa establishing his own great resolve.

"'Therefore, I am not capable of going to him to inquire about his illness.'" Being incapable has three parts: the statement and the explanation are finished, and this is now the general conclusion.