維摩經義記卷第四 4.55

4.55

何謂菩薩不住無為以下遍釋無為。菩薩空前有。顛心必須涉有。施行不得證空。故知人空不住。聲聞不爾。謂修夢空不以空為證。二乘修空證空而住。菩薩雖復修空而能在有施化。不證空而住。修學無相無作。不以無相無作為證者。明菩薩雖修學空無相等而能在有化物。不同二乘證空而住。雖學無起不以無起為證者。菩薩雖觀空理絕於起動而能在有化物。不同聲聞證空而住。觀於無常而不厭善本者。二乘觀無常空而證取涅槃絕於化道。菩薩雖觀無常體空而能在有化物。不厭善本證於涅槃也。觀世間苦而不惡生死。聲聞若體空在有中惡生死。菩薩觀苦體空而處生死以化物也。觀於遠離而身心修善者。二乘之人觀身心遠離體空而證滅盡涅槃不能修善。菩薩雖觀身心遠離體空而在有中身心修善以化物。觀無所歸而歸趣善法者。菩薩雖觀空理無物可歸而於有中歸向善法。觀於無生而以生法荷負一切者。雖觀空理無其生滅而在有中現於生法荷負眾生也。觀於無漏而不斷諸漏者。聲聞觀無漏空斷諸漏盡。菩薩雖斷觀無漏體空而能化物示同有漏也。觀無所行而以行法教化眾生者。雖觀空理無法可行而於有中行法教化眾生。觀於空無而不捨大悲者。雖觀空理是無而能在於生死拔苦不捨大悲也。觀正法位而不隨小乘者。雖觀性空而處有施化。不同聲聞小乘絕於化導也。觀諸法虛妄者。觀萬法體空非實。妄計者為實。無堅牢。又無我人亦無主宰。此即是假名空也。無相者明五陰體空絕於生滅相也。本願未滿而不虛福德禪定智惠者。菩薩空前願。有願中有化物修福德業。藉此之行至於佛果。本願未滿。可虛設此願證空而住。應當有中修福德禪定化眾生行也。修如此法是名不住無為。總結上不住無為也。

"What is meant by the bodhisattva not abiding in the unconditioned?" and so forth universally explains the unconditioned. Before [experiencing] emptiness, a bodhisattva has being; with reversed mind, they must enter into being. In executing their practice, they do not realize emptiness [as an end], and therefore one knows that they do not abide in personal emptiness. The śrāvakas are not like this: when they practice dreamlike emptiness, [the bodhisattva] does not take emptiness as realization. The two vehicles cultivate emptiness, realize emptiness, and abide in it. The bodhisattva, although cultivating emptiness, is nonetheless able to administer transformation within being; they do not realize emptiness and abide [there]. As for "cultivating and studying the signless and the wishless, yet not taking the signless and the wishless as realization": this clarifies that although the bodhisattva cultivates and studies emptiness, signlessness, and so forth, they can nonetheless transform beings within being, unlike the two vehicles who realize emptiness and abide [there]. As for "although studying the unarisen, not taking the unarisen as realization": although the bodhisattva contemplates the principle of emptiness as being cut off from arising and stirring, they can nonetheless transform beings within being, unlike the śrāvakas who realize emptiness and abide [there]. As for "contemplating impermanence without wearying of the roots of goodness": the two vehicles contemplate impermanence and emptiness, and thereby realize and grasp nirvāṇa, cutting off the path of transformation. Although the bodhisattva contemplates impermanence as empty in essence, they can nonetheless transform beings within being, without wearying of the roots of goodness or realizing nirvāṇa. As for "contemplating the suffering of the world without abhorring saṃsāra": if the śrāvakas recognize emptiness within being, they abhor saṃsāra. The bodhisattva contemplates suffering as empty in essence and dwells in saṃsāra to transform beings. As for "contemplating detachment, yet cultivating goodness in body and mind": persons of the two vehicles contemplate body and mind as detached and empty in essence, and thereby realize the nirvāṇa of cessation, unable to cultivate goodness. Although the bodhisattva contemplates body and mind as detached and empty in essence, within being they cultivate goodness in body and mind to transform beings. As for "contemplating that there is nowhere to take refuge, yet taking refuge in wholesome dharmas": although the bodhisattva contemplates that in the principle of emptiness there is nothing to take refuge in, within being they take refuge in wholesome dharmas. As for "contemplating the unproduced, yet taking up the burden of all [beings] through dharmas of rebirth": although they contemplate that in the principle of emptiness there is no birth or cessation, within being they manifest through dharmas of rebirth to bear the burden of sentient beings. As for "contemplating the undefiled, yet not cutting off the defilements": the śrāvaka contemplates the emptiness of the undefiled and cuts off all defilements completely. The bodhisattva, although contemplating the undefiled as empty in essence, can transform beings and manifest as identical with the defiled. As for "contemplating that there is nothing to practice, yet transforming sentient beings through the dharmas of practice": although they contemplate that in the principle of emptiness there is no dharma to be practiced, within being they practice dharmas to transform sentient beings. As for "contemplating emptiness and non-being, yet not abandoning great compassion": although they contemplate the principle of emptiness as non-being, they can rescue beings from suffering in saṃsāra without abandoning great compassion. As for "contemplating the state of the correct Dharma, yet not following the Hīnayāna": although they contemplate the emptiness of nature, they dwell in being and dispense transformation, unlike the Hīnayāna śrāvakas who cut off transformation and guidance. As for "contemplating all dharmas as illusory and false": they contemplate the myriad dharmas as empty in essence and not real; it is the false conceptualizer who considers them real, without solidity. Furthermore, there is no self or person, nor any controller: this is the emptiness of nominal designation. "Signless" clarifies that the five aggregates are empty in essence, cut off from the signs of birth and cessation. As for "their original vow not yet fulfilled, yet not rendering merit, dhyāna, and wisdom futile": the bodhisattva, prior to emptiness, made vows; within vows they transform beings and cultivate deeds of merit, and relying on these practices, they arrive at the fruit of buddhahood. When the original vow is not yet fulfilled, should one make this vow in vain and realize emptiness to abide [there]? They ought, within being, to cultivate merit, dhyāna, and the practice of transforming sentient beings. "Cultivating such dharmas is called not abiding in the unconditioned": this concludes all the above [points of] not abiding in the unconditioned.