維摩經義疏 3.4

3.4

"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.