維摩經義疏 6.7.3

6.7.3

「非福田、非不福田，非應供養、非不應供養」下，慢之得罪，故非福田； 敬之得福，故非不福田。 非不福田，即應供養； 非福田，即不應供養。 有人言：法身無所受，故非福田； 應物受供，故非不福田。 又不同善人，故非福田； 不同罪人，故非不福田。 「非取非捨」。 非福，故非取； 非不福田，故非捨。 「非有相非無相」下，寂漠無形故非相，三十二相故非無相。 「同真際，等法性」下，法身無相，則是真際，或者謂佛為異，故言同耳。 「不可稱、不可量，過諸稱量」下，體非輕重，故不可稱； 邊表莫測，故不可量。 「非大非小」下，大於天地，不可為小； 細入無間，不可為大。 能大小者，其無大小也。 「非見非聞，非覺非知」下，非色故非見，非聲故非聞，非香味觸故非三情所覺，非法故非意所知。 「離眾結縛」，既非見聞覺知，於何生結縛耶？ 「等諸智、同眾生，於諸法無分別」下，智同群智之智，人同眾人之人，以如斯觀，故無分別。 又同眾人之智，故云等諸智。 亦無大聖之佛殊彼眾生，故云同眾生。 人法齊觀，則息想念，故於諸法無分別也。 「一切無失，無濁無惱」下，三業離過故一切無失，無失故無濁，無濁則無惱。 「無作無起，無生無滅」下，法身無為，絕於施造，孰能作之令起、生之使滅乎？ 「無畏無憂，無喜無厭，無著」。 若有生滅，是可畏法，便欣生而憂滅矣。 欣憂既生故可厭著也，而法身並無。 「無已有、無當有、無今有，不可以一切言說分別顯示。 世尊！ 如來身為若此，作如是觀。 以斯觀者，名為正觀； 若他觀者，名為邪觀」。 總結佛身，勸觀察也。 「爾時，舍利弗問維摩詰：汝於何沒而來生此」下，第二、次明迹不思議。 就文為二：初辨淨名生無生義、次現無動佛土。 身子致問，有三因緣：一者見其神德奇妙，來處必美，故問所從也； 二者上云如自觀身實相，實相無生，而今現有生，將成自觀之義，故以沒生問也。 三者上已顯法身，今次開迹用，是故問之。 「維摩詰言：汝所得法有沒生乎？ 舍利弗言：無沒生也。 若諸法無沒生相，云何問言汝於何沒而來生此？ 於意云何？ 譬如幻師幻作男女，寧有沒生耶？ 舍利弗言：無沒生也。 汝豈不聞佛說諸法如幻相乎？ 答曰：如是。 若一切法如幻相者，云何問言汝於何沒而來生此？ 舍利弗！ 沒者為虛誑法敗壞之相，生者為虛誑法相續之相。 菩薩雖沒，不盡善本； 雖生，不長諸惡」下，然善惡者皆是虛誑相續敗壞法耳。 然凡夫生則長惡，沒則盡善； 菩薩生則長善，沒則盡惡。 雖有沒生同，長盡不一，然俱是虛誑敗壞之相，何異幻化耶？ 「是時，佛告舍利弗：有國名妙喜，佛號無動，是維摩詰於彼國沒而來生此。 舍利弗言：未曾有也！ 世尊！ 是人乃能捨清淨土，而來樂此多怒害處。 維摩詰言：舍利弗！ 於意云何？ 日光出時，與冥合乎？ 答曰：不也。 日光出時，則無眾冥。 維摩詰言：夫日何故行閻浮提？ 答曰：欲以明照，為之除冥。 維摩詰曰：菩薩如是，雖生不淨佛土，為化眾生，不與愚闇而共合也，但滅眾生煩惱闇耳」下，前辨無生，此出生處，應物而唱，來始非益。 無生即是法身，生謂應迹。 又諸佛說法，常依二諦，無生就真，生則約俗。 「是時大眾渴仰，欲見妙喜世界無動如來及其菩薩、聲聞之眾。 佛知一切眾會所念，告維摩詰言：善男子！ 為此眾會現妙喜國無動如來及諸菩薩、聲聞之眾，眾皆欲見」下，此文第二明現無動國所以現，有三因緣：一者欲令此會修淨土行，故得往生； 二者欲顯淨名不思議德； 三者將還妙喜身本生處。 捨茲淨土，入斯穢國，明大士慈悲之緣也。 文有四句：一大眾欲見、二淨名現土、三時眾得益、四還歸本處。 此初文也。

From "Neither a field of merit nor not a field of merit; neither deserving offerings nor not deserving offerings" onward: disdaining it incurs guilt, hence it is not a field of merit; revering it brings merit, hence it is not 'not a field of merit'. Being not 'not a field of merit', it is deserving of offerings; being not a field of merit, it is not deserving of offerings. Some say: the dharmakāya receives nothing, hence it is not a field of merit; yet responding to beings it receives offerings, hence it is not 'not a field of merit'. Furthermore, it is not the same as a good person, hence it is not a field of merit; nor is it the same as a guilty person, hence it is not 'not a field of merit'. "Neither taking nor discarding": being not merit, it does not take; being not 'not a field of merit', it does not discard. From "Neither having characteristics nor lacking characteristics" onward: quiescent and formless, hence it is not characteristics; possessing the thirty-two marks, hence it is not lacking characteristics. From "Identical with the reality limit, equal to the nature of phenomena" onward: the dharmakāya being markless is itself the reality limit; yet someone might consider the Buddha to be different, hence it says "identical". From "Unweighable, immeasurable, surpassing all weighing and measuring" onward: its substance is neither light nor heavy, hence it cannot be weighed; its limits cannot be fathomed, hence it cannot be measured. From "Neither great nor small" onward: greater than heaven and earth, it cannot be deemed small; fine enough to enter where there is no space, it cannot be deemed great. Being able to be great or small, it has no greatness or smallness. From "Neither seen nor heard, neither sensed nor known" onward: not being matter, it is not seen; not being sound, it is not heard; not being smell, taste, or tangibility, it is not sensed by the three faculties; not being mental objects, it is not known by the mind. "Free from all bonds": since it is neither seen, heard, sensed, nor known, where could bonds arise? From "Equaling all wisdom, identical with all living beings, without discrimination among phenomena" onward: wisdom equals the wisdom of the masses of wisdom, and the person equals the person of the multitude; by viewing in this way, there is no discrimination. Furthermore, being identical with the wisdom of the multitude, it is said to equal all wisdom. Nor is there a Buddha who is a great sage distinct from those living beings, hence it says "identical with all living beings". When persons and phenomena are viewed equally, conceptual thought ceases, hence "without discrimination among phenomena". From "Utterly without fault, without turbidity, without affliction" onward: the three types of karma being free of error, it is utterly without fault; without fault, hence without turbidity; without turbidity, then without affliction. From "Without action, without arising, without birth, without cessation" onward: the dharmakāya is unconditioned, cut off from doing and creating; who could act to make it arise, or bring it to birth so as to cause it to cease? "Without fear, without sorrow, without joy, without aversion, without attachment": if there were birth and cessation, that would be fearful phenomena, and one would rejoice in birth and grieve over cessation. Once joy and grief arise, aversion and attachment are possible, yet the dharmakāya is free from both. "It was not, it will not be, and it is not now; it cannot be differentiated or revealed by any words. World-Honoured One! The Tathāgata's body being such, one should view it thus. Those who view it in this way are called viewing correctly; if one views it otherwise, it is called viewing wrongly." This concludes the summary of the Buddha's body and encourages its observation. From "At that time, Śāriputra asked Vimalakīrti: 'Where did you die to come and be born here?'" onward is the second part, next explaining the inconceivable traces. In the text there are two parts: first, clarifying Jingming's meaning of birth and non-birth; second, manifesting the realm of Akṣobhya Buddha. Śāriputra raised the question for three reasons: first, seeing that his spiritual virtue was extraordinary, the place he came from must be sublime, so he asked where he had come from; second, above it was said that one should view the Buddha just as one contemplates the true mark of one's own body, and the true mark is unborn, yet now he manifests having birth—seeking to establish the meaning of contemplating oneself, he asked concerning dying and being born; third, having previously revealed the dharmakāya, he next unfolds the function of traces, and for this reason he asks. "Vimalakīrti said: 'Is there death and birth in the Dharma you have attained?' Śāriputra said: 'There is no death and birth.' 'If phenomena have no mark of death and birth, why do you ask: "Where did you die to come and be born here?" What do you think? Just as an illusionist creates men and women by illusion, is there death and birth?' Śāriputra said: 'There is no death and birth.' 'Have you not heard the Buddha say that all phenomena have illusory marks?' He answered: 'Indeed.' 'If all phenomena have illusory marks, why do you ask: "Where did you die to come and be born here?" Śāriputra! Death is the mark of decay of deceptive phenomena, and birth is the mark of continuity of deceptive phenomena. Although a bodhisattva dies, he does not exhaust his roots of goodness; although he is born, he does not foster evils'" onward: good and evil are both nothing but the continuity and decay of deceptive phenomena. Yet when ordinary beings are born, they foster evil, and when they die, they exhaust goodness; when bodhisattvas are born, they foster goodness, and when they die, they exhaust evil. Although death and birth are the same, fostering and exhausting are not identical, yet both are marks of deceptive decay—how are they different from illusory transformations? From "At that time, the Buddha told Śāriputra: 'There is a realm named Abhirati, and the Buddha is called Akṣobhya. This Vimalakīrti died in that realm to come and be born here.' Śāriputra said: 'How unprecedented, World-Honoured One! That this person could forsake a pure land to come and delight in this place of much anger and harm.' Vimalakīrti said: 'Śāriputra! What do you think? When sunlight appears, does it merge with darkness?' He answered: 'No. When sunlight appears, all darkness is absent.' Vimalakīrti said: 'Why does the sun travel through Jambudvīpa?' He answered: 'Wishing to illuminate it with light and dispel darkness for its sake.' Vimalakīrti said: 'A bodhisattva is just like this: although born in an impure Buddha-land to transform living beings, he does not merge with foolish darkness, but only extinguishes the darkness of the afflictions of living beings'" onward: previously he clarified non-birth, and here he reveals the place of origin, proclaiming in response to beings that his coming is originally not without benefit. Non-birth is the dharmakāya; birth refers to responding traces. Furthermore, when the Buddhas teach the Dharma, they always rely on the two truths: non-birth concerns the ultimate, while birth pertains to the conventional. From "At that time, the great assembly yearned, wishing to see Akṣobhya Tathāgata of the Abhirati world and his assembly of bodhisattvas and śrāvakas. The Buddha, knowing the thoughts of the entire assembly, told Vimalakīrti: 'Good son! Manifest for this assembly the realm of Abhirati, Akṣobhya Tathāgata, and the assembly of bodhisattvas and śrāvakas, for all the assembly wish to see them'" onward: this passage is the second, clarifying why the realm of Akṣobhya is manifested. There are three reasons: first, wishing to cause this assembly to cultivate the practices of a pure land so that they may attain rebirth there; second, wishing to reveal Jingming's inconceivable virtue; third, about to return to Abhirati, the place of his original birth. Forsaking this pure land to enter this defiled realm illustrates the conditions of the Mahāsattva's compassion. The text has four clauses: first, the great assembly wishes to see; second, Jingming manifests the land; third, the assembly gains benefit; fourth, returning to his original abode. This is the first passage.