維摩經義記卷第四 4.55

4.55

"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.