維摩經義疏 3.6

3.6

"The Buddha told Pūrṇamaitrāyaṇīputra: 'Go to Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.'" This is the fifth [instruction], commanding Pūrṇa. The preceding four great śrāvakas have finished, and next is the master of the Tripiṭaka. In the text there are two parts: first the command, and second the refusal. Master [Kumāra]jīva says: "'Pūrṇa' is his personal name, translated here as 'Full'. 'Maitrāyaṇī' is his mother's name, translated here as 'Beneficent Companion'. Her name was combined to form his name." The Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha says: "The reason he was called 'Full' is that his family had no son and prayed to the river god. The mother then dreamed by night of seeing a precious vessel brimming full of rare jewels, which thereupon entered her womb. The next morning she related this to a deity. The deity said: 'You shall bear a son whose wisdom will be full.' Therefore he was named Full. 'Maitra' is translated here as 'Loving Practice'. In the Four Veda treatises there is a chapter on loving practice; his mother recited it, so she was named Loving Practice. Combining them, he is called 'Son of Full and Compassion'." Among the ten disciples, he was foremost among masters of the Dharma and excelled in understanding the Abhidharma. / "Pūrṇa said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, I am not competent to go there to inquire about his illness.'" This is the second part, declining as incompetent. In the text there are also three parts: stating, explaining, and concluding. This is the initial statement. / "'Why is this? I recall that in the past, in the Great Forest, I was expounding the Dharma under a tree to some newly initiated monks.'" This is the second part, explaining his incompetence. It comprises four sections: first, explaining the reason he was rebuked; second, explaining the intent of the one who rebuked; third, explaining that the assembly at that time received benefit; and fourth, that [Pūrṇa] Maitrāyaṇīputra submitted. This is the first passage. Master Jīva says: "Near Vaiśālī there is a park and grove; in the grove there is a pool named the Monkey Pool. Inside the park there are monk's quarters, which are one of the three vihāras of Vaiśālī." Pūrṇa was inside expounding the Dharma to the newly initiated. / "'At that time Vimalakīrti came and said to me: "Ah, Pūrṇa! First you should enter samādhi and observe these people's minds, and only then expound the Dharma.'" This is the second [section], the intent of the one who rebuked. In the text there are four parts: first, rebuking him for expounding the Dharma contrary to their inclinations; second, rebuking him for expounding the Dharma contrary to their faculties; third, reiterating the rebuke for expounding contrary to inclinations; and fourth, reiterating the rebuke for expounding contrary to faculties. "Inclination" means their present desires and delights; "faculty" means their past rooted origins. This is the first passage. "First you should enter samādhi and observe these people's minds": the wisdom of the Hinayana has limitations and obstructions, and furthermore they cannot abide constantly in samādhi. Whenever they make an observation, they see while in samādhi, but do not see when out of samādhi. Moreover, those whose power of samādhi is profound see the faculties of sentient beings to the limit of eighty thousand kalpas; those whose power of samādhi is shallow see only a few lifetimes. These newly initiated monks had faculties rooted in the Mahayana, yet he expounded the Hinayana teaching to them; therefore [Vimalakīrti] told him to enter samādhi. / "'"Do not place impure food in a precious vessel."'" Impure food is the Hinayana teaching; the precious vessel is the Mahayana capacity. / "'"You should know what these monks are thinking in their minds. Do not equate lapis lazuli with crystal."'" The monks' minds were great, which you ought to have known. Lapis lazuli is jade; crystal is a cheap gem. You should not treat the lapis lazuli of the great mind as equal to the rock crystal of the Hinayana; you ought to discern well the superiority and inferiority of the two capacities, small and great. / "'"You are unable to know the rooted origins of sentient beings; do not arouse them with the Hinayana teaching. They themselves are without sores; do not wound them."'" This is the second, rebuking him for going against their rooted origins. The first sentence directly rebukes him for not knowing their faculties; "do not arouse them" rebukes his conferring the Hinayana teaching. A person with Mahayana root-nature is likened to being without sores; expounding the small impairs the great, which is like wounding them. / "'"If one wishes to travel the great highway, do not show them a narrow lane. Do not put the great ocean into a cow's footprint; do not equate the light of the sun with that of a firefly."'" This is the third, reiterating that he did not recognize their capacities and inclinations. Bodhisattvas have three matters: first, seeking the Buddha path; second, saving sentient beings; and third, practicing the myriad practices. The great capacity is like wishing to travel the great highway, while the Hinayana teaching is like a narrow lane; this is a metaphor set forth for seeking the Buddha path. Universally saving sentient beings: their mind is like the great ocean; the Hinayana teaching is like a cow's footprint. Turning the great to enter the small is like "putting into". Master [Seng]zhao says: "Great things should be placed in great places; why turn a dragon-elephant into a rabbit path, or pour the great ocean into a cow's footprint?" This jointly explains the two sentences. Universally practicing the myriad practices: their mind is like the sun and moon; generating Hinayana practice: their mind is like a firefly. Light and darkness being so far apart, they should not be equated. / "'"Pūrṇa! These monks long ago generated the Mahayana mind, but forgot this intention along the way. How could you instruct and guide them with the Hinayana teaching? As I view it, the wisdom of the Hinayana is slight and shallow, just like a blind person who cannot distinguish the sharpness or dullness of the faculties of all sentient beings."'" This is the fourth, reiterating the rebuke for not recognizing their rooted origins. "Wisdom is slight and shallow" is the substance of Hinayana wisdom; "cannot distinguish" is the function of Hinayana wisdom. / "'Then Vimalakīrti at once entered samādhi, causing these monks to recognize their past lives on their own, having in the past planted the roots of numerous virtues under five hundred buddhas and dedicated them toward anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.'" This is the third, explaining the receipt of benefit. In the text there are four parts: first, entering samādhi; second, recovering their original mind; third, expounding the Dharma for them; and fourth, awakening to non-retrogression. These are two teachings with two corresponding benefits. "Two teachings" means the two karmas of speech and thought; the two benefits differ in shallowness and depth. This is the first teaching. / "'Immediately they opened up and recovered their original mind. Thereupon the monks bowed their heads in homage at Vimalakīrti's feet.'" This is the first benefit. Question: When Jingming entered samādhi, how was he able to cause the monks to know their past lives? Answer: The Bodhisattvabhūmi explains that a bodhisattva's supernormal cognition of past lives has six kinds: first, knowing one's own past lives; second, knowing another's past lives; third, causing another to know one's own past lives; fourth, causing another to know their own past lives; fifth, causing another to know another's past lives; and sixth, causing those known sentient beings mutually to know one another. Here it is the fourth, causing another to know their own. / "'Then Vimalakīrti expounded the Dharma for them.'" This is the second teaching. / "'They no longer retrogressed from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.'" This is the second benefit. / "'I consider that a śrāvaka who does not observe people's faculties ought not to expound the Dharma.'" Fourth is his submitting [to his inadequacy]. / "'Therefore, I am not competent to go there to inquire about his illness.'" For his incompetence there were three parts: after stating and explaining, now he sums up in conclusion.