維摩經義疏 1.5

1.5

There are altogether two sections: the first explains the basis of the title; the second interprets the title of the basis. The basis of the title consists of six [points]: 1. subsuming the general into three; 2. combining the three into two; 3. bringing the two back to one; 4. obliterating the one into non-being; 5. distinguishing the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; 6. examining similarities and differences. The basis of Vimalakīrti's inconceivable liberation is the Dharma-gate of Non-duality. Because of the realization of the non-dual path, there is non-dual wisdom; because of non-dual wisdom, one can adapt and transform without fixed direction. Therefore the sūtra states: "Mañjuśrī's Dharma is ever thus; the Dharma King has only one single Dharma. All unobstructed persons emerge from saṃsāra by a single path." Thus, non-duality is the source of all sages. Indeed, if one wishes to explain the branches, one must first investigate their root; therefore, this chapter is established to discuss the non-dual Dharma. Question: Since the Dharma-gate of Non-duality is the fundamental principle, we wish to hear its essentials. Answer: A single path being pure is called "non-dual"; the ultimate truth serving as a norm is why it is called "Dharma"; being supremely wondrous, empty, and unobstructed is why it is called "gate." It is the convergence of all teachings and the spiritual mansion that unites all sages, the original intention of Jingming manifesting illness, and the reason for Mañjuśrī's inquiring after his health. Since you wish to hear of it, I shall now briefly explain it. To broadly explain non-duality, there are three stages: First, the multitude spoke on non-duality, but had not yet made clear that non-duality is wordless; this is termed the lower. Mañjuśrī, although making clear that non-duality is wordless, still spoke about wordlessness; this is termed the intermediate. Jingming perceived that non-duality is wordless and was able to be wordless regarding non-duality; this is termed the superior. Truly, because the Path transcends the four propositions, the ultimate sage meets it with profound silence. Non-duality being the ultimate—the meaning resides here. Question: The dharmakāya is formless, yet takes shape when responding to beings; the ultimate point is wordless, yet the profound texts spread extensively. This is taking form in formlessness and speaking in wordlessness. Thus one sees that Mañjuśrī's speech is deep, while Jingming's silence is shallow. The meaning of the discourse on three stages is not yet clear. Answer: The explanation of the three stages is to clarify the depth and shallowness of the principle; it has not yet distinguished responding to beings and providing teachings. To challenge the root with the branches—how could that accord with the profound purport? Now I shall unfold its meaning for you again. The non-dual principle is the basis of the inconceivable; responding to beings and providing teachings are the traces of the inconceivable. Without the root there is nothing to manifest the traces, so teachings are established on the basis of principle; without the traces there is nothing to reveal the root, so one relies on teachings to communicate the principle. If so, one must first realize the principle as wordless, and only then can one have speech in response to beings. Although the multitude spoke of the principle, they had not yet made clear that the ultimate principle is wordless; thus they had not yet arrived at the principle. Mañjuśrī immediately proclaimed that the principle is wordless, yet still spoke about the ultimate principle; this too did not yet accord with the principle. Jingming perceived that the principle is wordless and was able to be wordless regarding the principle; only then was the principle attained. Because he was wordless in accordance with the principle, he was able to speak without words; because he was formless in accordance with the principle, he was able to take form without forms. The multitude could not yet be wordless in accordance with the principle, so how could they speak without words? They could not yet be formless in accordance with the principle, so how could they take form without forms? Therefore Mañjuśrī's speech is shallow, and Jingming's silence is deep. The intention of the discourse on the three stages is manifested here. Objection: If the explanation of the three stages is established, the statement of non-duality is negated. Why? Since it is called non-dual, how can there be three? If there are three, how can it be called non-dual? The matters contradict each other, their senses like spear and shield. Answer: This is because you confuse principle with teaching, and so you think they contradict each other. If one recognizes that principle is one while teaching is three, they match like the two halves of a tally. Why? The multitude used words to dismiss phenomena, but did not silence the words that dismiss phenomena. Mañjuśrī wished to silence the words that dismiss phenomena, so he borrowed words to put an end to words. Although these two differ, both alike do not escape words, and so they take words as teaching. Jingming wished to silence Mañjuśrī's borrowed words, and so silently revealed wordlessness, thereby using wordlessness to express principle. Therefore the teaching has three stages, while the principle does not have two paths. Question: The ultimate principle is wordless, and Mañjuśrī spoke about wordlessness, so his can be considered teaching by words. Jingming perceived that the principle is wordless and was able to be wordless regarding the principle; why is his also called a teaching? Answer: It is because you have not subtly sought the purport that you have this doubt. If you examine it closely, the earlier explanation has already made it evident. Why? Jingming relied on the characteristic of silence to reveal the wordless principle. That which is expressed being wordless is the principle; the characteristic that can express it is called the teaching. Therefore the teaching has three gates, while the principle is non-dual. Question: If the ultimate principle is wordless, and Mañjuśrī spoke about wordlessness and so was not yet ultimate, then the ultimate principle is also formless, and Jingming manifested the characteristic of formlessness; how could he have arrived at the ultimate principle? Answer: Just as Mañjuśrī spoke about wordlessness, he also manifested the characteristic of formlessness. Jingming, having realized that the principle is wordless, was able to be wordless regarding wordlessness; he also realized that the principle is formless, and thus was formless regarding formlessness. Therefore, when both name and characteristic are dismissed, non-duality is subtly fathomed. Question: Since Jingming already realized that the principle is formless, why did he manifest the characteristic of formlessness? Answer: If he had not manifested the characteristic of formlessness, by what means could he have put an end to words? It was in order to put an end to words that he took on the characteristic of formlessness. Question: If so, although words were put to an end, the characteristic still remained. That is like fleeing a mountain peak only to head into a ravine: neither escapes distress. Answer: Words are like names, so names are subtle; characteristics are like physical forms, and when in physical form, they are coarse. Once one awakens to the fact that the principle is free of names and words, one grasps that the Path is not physical forms or characteristics; thus peak and ravine are both fled, and all distress is completely avoided. Question: If so, then the words of the multitude were not ultimate, and Jingming's silence was the first to arrive; why did he not directly reveal wordlessness instead of taking the roundabout way of three paths? Answer: When Zhongni encountered Boxue, the Path was present at a single glance. When the Wondrously Virtuous One faced Jingming, they likewise silently understood each other. However, since those who achieve profound awakening are obscure, the teaching that draws beings forward must be clarified; therefore these three gates were opened to provide access to non-duality. Question: Since those who achieve profound awakening are obscure, and the teachings that draw beings forward are as numerous as dust and sand, why open only three gates and not broadly establish stages and ranks? Answer: The first gate uses words to obliterate phenomena; the next borrows words to put an end to words; the final gate relies on silence to eliminate the borrowed words. In this, no principle is lacking and no teaching is incomplete; therefore only three are explained. Question: Since Jingming is the master of this entire sūtra, and non-duality is furthermore the central purport of all sūtras, why did he not speak of it himself instead of commanding the assembly to speak together? Answer: It was to rely on people's superiority and inferiority to demonstrate that teachings have depth and shallowness. The multitude were merely retinue, showing that their roots in the Path were still inferior: they could only use words to obliterate phenomena, but could not silence the words that obliterate phenomena. Mañjuśrī, having accepted the lofty decree and directly met and stimulated [the debate], had an intermediate spiritual capacity: he could both borrow words to obliterate phenomena and employ words to put an end to words. Jingming, as the present master of the teaching, had the deepest awakening and realization; therefore, relying on silence, he manifested that the principle completely cuts off [all words]. Question: Is this solely in reference to the master of the teaching, or also regarding the conditions for awakening? Answer: The reason for manifesting traces through three persons was fundamentally to guide beings. Those of low faculties have shallow awakening and only arrive at the first gate. Those of intermediate capacity are slightly deeper and gradually ascend to the second. Superior persons penetrate the principle and loftily ascend to the profound hall.