維摩經義疏 6.7.1

6.7.1

"Akṣobhya": here translated as "Immovable"; it is also called "Free from Anger". Previously, the [chapter] title was established from the Dharma; now it takes its name from a person. Furthermore, the preceding was the name of a cause; now it is the fruit [and its] cause. Moreover, previously person and Dharma were raised together—the bodhisattva being the person, and practice being the Dharma; now both object and wisdom are fully provided in the title: "seeing" refers to the wisdom capable of contemplating, and "Akṣobhya" is the object contemplated. Question: Why is there this chapter? Answer: Generally there are four meanings. First, previously this teaching was spoken for that land, and now for these conditions one contemplates that Buddha; indeed, because reception and awakening are not the same, the portals of transformation are not single. Second, the preceding "Bodhisattva Practice Chapter" explained cultivation of practice, and now explains that with practice accomplished, one is thus able to see the Buddha. Question: The two vehicles also see that Buddha; should they cultivate the Buddha's practices? Answer: They merely see the Buddha of the two vehicles, not the true Buddha. Thus, when the five hundred śrāvakas were in the Avataṃsaka assembly, they only saw the sixteen-foot body, identical with the bodies of the two vehicles, cultivating distinct and different roots of goodness, but did not behold the true dharmakāya of the Mahāyāna. Third, the preceding taught the portal of the cause, appropriately followed now by clarifying the dharmas of the fruit. Fourth, from the beginning of the sūtra up to now, the inconceivable was briefly delineated; from this text onward, the unfathomableness of the origin and traces is extensively clarified. "Contemplating the true character of the body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus" refers to the inconceivable origin; next, explaining the transference of Abhirati to enter this land refers to the inconceivable traces. Question: The inconceivable was already clarified above; how is it different from the present? Answer: Comprehensively determining from beginning to end, there are four propositions in all: first, the inconceivable of the great entering the small, as in borrowing the seats from the King of Lamps; second, the inconceivable of the small satisfying the great, as in requesting food from the Land of Fragrance; third, the inconceivable of using the great to enter the great, transporting that Abhirati to enter this Sahā world, the two lands coexisting without increase or decrease, which is called inconceivable. But this matter is easily understood and does not await explanation. The chapter opens into three: first, clarifying the origin of the dharmakāya; second, explaining the traces of the Immovable One; third, praising the Dharma and commending the person. In the first text, there is first a question, and next an answer. From "At that time the World-Honoured One asked Vimalakīrti: 'You wish to see the Tathāgata; by means of what do you contemplate the Tathāgata?'" onward, the Buddha asks Jingming for three reasons: first, from the beginning of the sūtra onward, when the Buddha's body shone with radiant light and sound, the assembly at that time merely grasped the marks of a person and did not see the dharmakāya; therefore he asked Jingming to cause them to behold the true Buddha. Second, above Jingming said that all Buddhas can be seen; the assembly at that time thought that the Buddha could be seen and that there was a person able to see. If so, that is still the view of a Buddha, not seeing the Buddha. Therefore he now clarifies the dharmakāya to put an end to those two views. Question: When the bodhisattvas from Gandhavatī came to see the Buddha, they also gave rise to delusion and attachment; why did he not refute it? Answer: They merely gave rise to an inferior notion; how could they produce defilement? Therefore he waited until they were about to leave to explain it. Third, he was about to clarify that there is neither superior nor inferior. When the Immovable Buddha came alongside Śākyamuni, fearing there would be dual minds of superior and inferior, he beforehand clarified the single contemplation of the dharmakāya; this is why he asked. From "Vimalakīrti said: 'As I contemplate the true character of my own body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus'" onward is the answer. Question: In the four assemblies of this sūtra, the dharmakāya is explained in three places; what is the difference? Answer: The "Upāya Chapter", in contrast to the faults and perils of saṃsāra, praises the merits of the dharmakāya; the "Disciples Chapter" opens up the distinction between origin and traces: the dharmakāya is untainted and unconditioned, while the responsive traces have birth and cessation. This chapter specifically clarifies that the substance of the dharmakāya is cut off from the hundred negations, while its form is equipped with myriad virtues. Question: Why explain these three portals? Answer: Only when equipped with the three portals is the Buddha's body made manifest. First, one must contrast it with the faults and perils of saṃsāra to praise the merits of the dharmakāya, causing them to loathe this saṃsāra and aspire to seek the Buddha's body. Doubters now see that the Buddha's body is still conditioned and has not escaped the taints; why is it worthy of being aspired to? Therefore the second section opens up the origin and traces: the conditioned and tainted are the responsive traces; the untainted and unconditioned are truly the dharmakāya. Some, hearing that for the dharmakāya there is no burden that is not exhausted and no virtue that is not perfected, then claim that it is different from sentient beings. Therefore this section clarifies that contemplating the true character of the body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus; sentient beings and the Buddha are not two. Equipped with these three portals, the meaning is complete, not only applying intimately to this text, but broadly penetrating many sūtras. Furthermore, the first refutes ordinary persons, the second rebukes the two vehicles, and the last instructs bodhisattvas. The first addressed ordinary persons: in the "Upāya Chapter", ordinary persons asked about the illness, so he spoke for them of the faults and perils of saṃsāra and the merits of the dharmakāya. Next, the "Disciples Chapter" directly scolded the śrāvakas, who thought the Buddha's body was identical with the two vehicles, so he opened up the distinction between origin and traces. Bodhisattvas then [differentiate] the Buddha's body, thinking it permanent while sentient beings spontaneously arise and cease; therefore now, contemplating the true character of the body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus, dissolving the two views. Master Kumārajīva said: "There are three ways of contemplating the Buddha: first, contemplating the physical form; second, contemplating the dharmakāya; third, contemplating the emptiness of nature. Among the three kinds of contemplative portals, Jingming answers using the portal of the emptiness of nature; thus he says: 'Contemplating the true character of the body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus.'" Now I say: this section directly clarifies that the dharmakāya is cut off from the four propositions and hundred negations, which is the meaning of the emptiness of nature. Question: How is the true character identical to the Buddha's body? Answer: The Buddha's body is cut off from the four propositions, and the true character of sentient beings is also cut off from the four propositions; therefore the true character is precisely the dharmakāya. Thus the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā says: "Suchness has neither coming nor going; Suchness is precisely the Buddha." Question: Suchness and true character are merely the contemplative objects of ultimate truth; how can they be the Buddha's wondrous wisdom? Answer: One who poses this question does so merely from the minds of human teachers, not from the words of sūtras and treatises. The Avataṃsaka says: "Mind, Buddha, and sentient beings—these three are without distinction." The *Zhengguan lun* says: "It is also named Suchness, dharma-nature, and nirvāṇa." Can one say that nirvāṇa is also without knowing? Therefore the dharmakāya has no knowing, yet there is nothing it does not know; the meaning of Suchness is also like this. Question: Contemplating the true character of the body, contemplating the Buddha is also thus: how is this called seeing the Buddha? Answer: Thinking that the Buddha is different from the body is dualistic viewing, not seeing the Buddha. Attaining non-dual contemplation is then called seeing the Buddha. From "I contemplate the Tathāgata as not coming from the prior limit, not going to the posterior limit, and now not abiding" onward, this fully explains that the substance of the dharmakāya is cut off from the hundred negations, while its form is equipped with myriad virtues. This first phrase clarifies that it is not of the three times, intending to explain that the dharmakāya is not conditioned. The conditioned of ordinary persons inevitably falls into the three times; since it is not of the three times, it is therefore not conditioned. From "Not contemplating form, not contemplating the suchness of form, not contemplating the nature of form; not contemplating sensation, perception, volition, or consciousness, not contemplating the suchness of consciousness, not contemplating the nature of consciousness" onward, the five aggregates are also conditioned; therefore next, with respect to the five aggregates, he clarifies that it is not the dharmakāya. Regarding each single aggregate, three kinds of contemplative portals are provided: first, not contemplating form is not contemplating existence; second, not contemplating the suchness of form is not contemplating emptiness;