維摩經義疏 4.10.1

4.10.1

「爾時長者維摩詰心念：今文殊師利與大眾俱來。 即以神通力空其室內，除去所有及諸侍者，唯置一床，以疾而臥」。 此第二明不來而至。 就文亦四：一空室待賓、二文殊默領、三居士慰問、四文殊酬答。 所以空室待賓者，凡有六義：一以室類如來剎土、二欲總攝群生以為侍者、三借座燈王、四答普現色身問、五請飯香土、六凡諸空論長悉由之。 又亦得生後五品：空無床座，生〈不思議品〉； 空無侍者，生〈觀眾生品〉； 天女現身，且是其事，空無眷屬，生〈佛道品〉； 空理無二，生〈不二法門品〉； 空無飲食，生〈香積品〉。 問：何故唯置一床，以疾而臥？ 答：空室則明實慧，以疾而臥辨方便慧。 又空室為明波若，臥疾以明大悲。 又空室具上六義，臥疾欲顯菩薩大悲之病及眾生癡愛之疾也。 「文殊師利既入其舍，見其室空無諸所有，獨處一床」。 此第二文殊默領。 言見之者得其旨，上空室現疾既表空悲二道、權實兩慧，今還領此意也。 「時維摩詰言：善來。 文殊師利！ 不來相而來，不見相而見」。 此第三淨名慰問。 言不來相而來者，有人言：法身無來、應身有來，故云不來相而來。 有人言：真諦無來、世諦有來，故言不來相而來。 有人言：實法無來、相續有來。 有人言：法界體無來、法界用有來。 有人言：中道無來、假名有來。 今明此文，非但近是賓主交言以相慰問，遠貫一經該通眾教，故前以此言標其篇首，如《大品》無住住之言、《涅槃》不聞聞之旨。 所以標此言者，為時眾謂文殊從菴園而來，及以淨名相見故。 今明文殊。 來是不來而來、見是不見而見，異凡夫二乘人也。 以能不來而來、不見而見，故為善之極矣。 「文殊師利言：如是。 居士！ 若來已更不來，若去已更不去。 所以者何？ 來者無所從來、去者無所至，所可見者更不可見」。 此第四文殊師利酬答，成淨名之意也。 若來已更不來者，此明三時無來義也。 來已則來事已謝，故無來也。 又言去已更不去者，菴園望方丈則見文殊有去，方丈望菴園則見文殊有來，故明去來義也。 來者無所從來者，此明菴園空也。 去者無所至，此明方丈空也。 來去既爾，見義亦然。 「且置是事」。 第二正明問疾。 就文為兩：一請停傍論、二正問疾。 不來來、不見見，雖是一化大宗，而言異於辨疾，聖旨未宣，故宜息傍論也。 「文殊師利言：居士所疾，寧可忍不」。 此下第二正明問疾。 就文為兩：初明居士疾、次辨眾生疾。 此二亦是深行菩薩及發心之人二種疾也。 初章有三：一論疾體、二論空室、三論疾相。 初文，前問次答。 問有二意：一奉述佛問、二自發問。 初有三問：前問疾之輕重，可忍為輕、不可忍為重，故言寧可忍不。 「療治有損」。 此第二問對治之損也。 「不至增乎」。 此第三問不治之增也。 「世尊慇懃致問無量」。 此總騰聖意，結前生後也。 「居士是疾何所因起」。 此第二文殊自發問。 亦有三問：初問病因，因何得病也。 「其生久如」。 此問得病來久近也。 「當云何滅」。 此問對治，病何時可滅也。 「維摩詰言：從癡有愛則我病生」。 此第二答問也。 上有六問，但答後三，兼前三也。 如答病因及久遠問，即兼答初病輕重及後病增之問。 若答病滅之問，即兼答第二病損問也。 就答後三問，即為三別，但次第不同，前答第二久遠問、次答第三病滅問、後答第一病因問。 從癡有愛則我病生者，眾生以癡故起愛，愛故受身，身故有病。 以愍彼病故，則有菩薩之病也。 眾生之病無始有之，菩薩悲眾生故起病，則病亦久矣。 「以一切眾生病，是故我病； 一切眾生病滅，則我病滅」。 此答第三病滅問，有法、譬、合。 菩薩之病，為物故生； 彼病既滅，則吾病亦滅。 「所以者何？ 為眾生故入生死，有生死則有病；

"At that time the elder Vimalakīrti thought: 'Now Mañjuśrī is coming together with the great assembly.' He immediately used his supernormal power to empty his room, removing everything he owned and all his attendants, leaving only a single couch on which he lay sick." This is the second [section], explaining [his] arriving without coming. Within the text there are also four parts: first, emptying the room to await the guests; second, Mañjuśrī silently grasping [the intent]; third, the householder's greeting; and fourth, Mañjuśrī's reply. As for emptying the room to await the guests, there are six meanings in all: first, using the room to represent the Tathāgata's realm; second, desiring to embrace all sentient beings to make them his attendants; third, borrowing thrones from the King of Lamps; fourth, answering the question of the universal manifestation of physical form; fifth, requesting food from the Fragrant Realm; and sixth, all the profound discourses on emptiness stem from it. Furthermore, it also gives rise to the subsequent five chapters: empty of couches and thrones, it gives rise to the "Inconceivable Chapter"; empty of attendants, it gives rise to the "Contemplating Sentient Beings Chapter"; the heavenly maiden manifesting her body is also this matter; empty of retinue, it gives rise to the "Buddha Path Chapter"; the principle of emptiness being non-dual, it gives rise to the "Dharma Door of Non-Duality Chapter"; empty of food and drink, it gives rise to the "Fragrance Accumulated Chapter." Question: Why did he only place a single couch and lie sick [upon it]? Answer: The empty room reveals real wisdom; lying sick discerns expedient wisdom. Furthermore, the empty room reveals prajñā; lying sick reveals great compassion. In addition, the empty room possesses the six meanings above; lying sick is meant to reveal the bodhisattva's illness of great compassion and sentient beings' illness of ignorance and craving. "When Mañjuśrī entered his house, he saw his room empty of all possessions, with only a single couch." This is the second [part], Mañjuśrī silently grasping [the intent]. Saying that he "saw it" means he grasped its purport: the preceding empty room and manifestation of illness expressed the two paths of emptiness and compassion, the two wisdoms of the expedient and the real, and now he similarly grasped this intent. "Then Vimalakīrti said: 'Welcome, Mañjuśrī! You have come without the characteristics of coming; you are seen without the characteristics of being seen.'" This is the third [part], Jingming's greeting. As for saying "come without the characteristics of coming," someone said: "The dharmakāya does not come, while the response-body does come; therefore it says 'come without the characteristics of coming.'" Someone said: "In ultimate truth there is no coming, while in worldly truth there is coming; therefore it says 'come without the characteristics of coming.'" Someone said: "In real entities there is no coming, while in continuity there is coming." Someone said: "In the essence of the dharmadhātu there is no coming, while in the functioning of the dharmadhātu there is coming." Someone said: "In the Middle Way there is no coming, while in conventional designations there is coming." Now I clarify this text: not only is this an immediate exchange of words between guest and host to greet one another, it extends distantly through the entire sūtra and encompasses all teachings. Therefore he used these words beforehand to mark the head of this section, like the words on "dwelling without dwelling" in the Large Sūtra, and the principle of "hearing without hearing" in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]. The reason for presenting these words is that the assembly at that time thought that Mañjuśrī had come from the Āmrapālī Grove to meet with Jingming. Now it is explained that Mañjuśrī's coming is a coming without coming, and his seeing is a seeing without seeing, unlike ordinary beings and people of the two vehicles. Because he can come without coming and be seen without being seen, it is the ultimate excellence. "Mañjuśrī said: 'It is so, householder! If one has already come, one does not come again; if one has already gone, one does not go again. Why is that? One who comes has nowhere from which to come, and one who goes has nowhere to go; that which can be seen can no longer be seen.'" This is the fourth [part], Mañjuśrī's reply, fulfilling Jingming's meaning. As for "if one has already come, one does not come again," this clarifies the meaning of no coming in the three times. Once coming is already done, the event of coming has already ceased, and therefore there is no coming. Furthermore, as for saying "if one has already gone, one does not go again": looking from the Āmrapālī Grove toward the ten-foot room, one sees that Mañjuśrī has gone; looking from the ten-foot room toward the Āmrapālī Grove, one sees that Mañjuśrī has come; hence he explains the meaning of going and coming. As for "one who comes has nowhere from which to come," this clarifies that the Āmrapālī Grove is empty. "One who goes has nowhere to go" clarifies that the ten-foot room is empty. Going and coming being thus, the meaning of seeing is also like this. "Let us set this matter aside." Second is directly explaining the inquiry about illness. Within the text there are two parts: first, requesting to stop peripheral discussion; second, directly inquiring about the illness. Coming without coming and seeing without seeing are indeed the great overarching theme of the one transformation, but the words differ from analyzing the illness, and the sage's intent has not yet been proclaimed, so it is appropriate to cease peripheral discussion. "Mañjuśrī said: 'Is the householder's illness bearable?'" From here down is the second [part], directly explaining the inquiry about illness. Within the text there are two parts: first, explaining the householder's illness; next, discerning sentient beings' illness. These two are also the two kinds of illness of deep-practicing bodhisattvas and those who have generated the mind [for awakening]. The first section has three parts: first, discussing the substance of the illness; second, discussing the empty room; third, discussing the characteristics of the illness. In the first passage, first there is the question, followed by the answer. The question has two intents: first, respectfully conveying the Buddha's inquiry; second, posing a question himself. The first [intent] has three questions: first, asking about the severity of the illness—being bearable means mild, while being unbearable means severe—hence he says, "Is it bearable?" "Has treatment brought relief?" This is the second question, [asking about] reduction through counteractive remedies. "Has it not reached the point of worsening?" This is the third question, [asking about] worsening through lack of treatment. "The World-Honoured One inquires solicitously and boundlessly." This summarizes the sage's intent, concluding what came before and introducing what follows. "From what cause did this illness of the householder arise?" This is the second [intent], Mañjuśrī posing questions himself. There are also three questions: first, asking about the cause of the illness—due to what did he contract the illness? "How long has it been since it arose?" This asks how long ago he contracted the illness. "How should it be eliminated?" This asks about counteractive treatment—when the illness can be eliminated. "Vimalakīrti said: 'From ignorance there is craving, and thus my illness arose.'" This is the second [part], answering the questions. Above there were six questions; he only answers the latter three, which encompass the former three. Answering the questions on the cause of the illness and its duration simultaneously answers the initial question on severity and the subsequent question on the worsening of the illness. Answering the question on the elimination of the illness simultaneously answers the second question on the illness's reduction. Regarding the answers to the latter three questions, there are three distinct parts, but the order is different: first he answers the second question on duration, next he answers the third question on the elimination of the illness, and finally he answers the first question on the cause of the illness. As for "from ignorance there is craving, and thus my illness arose": sentient beings give rise to craving due to ignorance; because of craving they take on a body, and because of a body they have illness. Out of pity for their illness, there is the bodhisattva's illness. Sentient beings' illness has existed from beginningless [time]; because the bodhisattva has compassion for sentient beings, he gives rise to illness, and thus the illness has also lasted long. "Because all sentient beings are ill, therefore I am ill; when all sentient beings' illness is eliminated, then my illness will be eliminated." This answers the third question on the elimination of the illness; it has the doctrine, a simile, and the application. The bodhisattva's illness arises for the sake of [all] beings; once their illness is eliminated, my illness will also be eliminated. "Why is that? For the sake of sentient beings, he enters saṃsāra; where there is saṃsāra, there is illness;"