維摩經疏 1.14

1.14

自下次問調伏。文中有三。第一文殊問。第二維摩答。第三明說利益。文殊師利言居士有疾菩薩云何調伏其心者。第一問也。有疾菩薩者問彼十解初心已去乃至金剛已還箇中菩薩通名有疾。道理而言。地前菩薩直來之者受分段報有病事故名為有疾。初地已上實非有疾。然今約就煩惱以為疾故。初地已上有彼法執無明住地故。是以通名有疾菩薩也。云何調伏其心者。調者調令離過。伏者伏令修善。今時問彼十解已去菩薩云何修觀斷除煩惱令得身中究竟無病。故言云何調伏其心也。自下維摩答。答意者。教彼地前菩薩修加行智證取生空斷除人我。亦復教學法空之觀厭伏法我。初地已上教修根本無分別智證入本有法空真如斷除法我證二空故永除二我。我不生是名調伏。既□自調伏。復須利他。故亦教之修起大悲隨有攝化。論其答意義在於此。文中有二。第一明其所修。第二不住其中已下顯其所成。所修者修智修悲。所成者成不住道行也。就前所修中文復有二。第一正明所修。第二結成調伏。就前第一正明所修中。文有三對修智修悲。始從初文乃至應如是觀諸已來為第一對修智修悲。又復觀身無常已下為第二對修智修悲。後云又復觀身身不離病已下為第三對修智修悲。問曰。此之三對有何差別。答曰。若依疏釋。四義明異。不能繁述。略舉一義。前第一對約就甚深空理修智修悲。次第二對約就苦無常理明修智修悲。後第三對約身病事明修智悲復。次更依別釋者。初對為上根人說。次對為中根人說。後對為下根人說。就第一對中文有其二。第一正教智悲。第二結勸修學。就前正教智悲中麁科有二。細分有四。麁科二者。第一明其修智。第二是有疾菩薩以無所受已下明其修悲。細分四者。前修中修小智及大智。後修悲中修小悲及大悲。故成四也。道理言之。修小智時即修小悲。修大智時即修大悲。然說法家欲令智悲相異。是故別說。此乃說之次第非行之次第也。就前修智之中文有兩分。第一明修小智。第二得是平等已下明修大智。修小智者即當地前。修大智者即在地上。就前修小智中文更有二。第一教生空觀。第二彼有疾菩薩為滅法想已下教作法空觀。問曰。地前菩薩修彼小智。只可作生空觀。云何亦作法空觀。答曰。地前菩薩十解初心斷彼見一處住地。人我執盡證得生空。三愛住地但斷現行。論其種子。留而不斷。從十解第二念已去學法空觀伏彼界外無明種子法執之心。是即生空證得成就。若也法空修學未證。故地持論云。種性菩薩二障清淨。若煩惱障斷故清淨一切智障者伏故名清淨。故知地前菩薩學法空觀伏法執也。

Next below is the question on subduing. Within the text there are three parts: first, Mañjuśrī asks; second, Vimalakīrti answers; third, it clarifies the benefit of the teaching. "Mañjuśrī said: 'Householder, how should a sick bodhisattva subdue their mind?'" is the first, the question. As for "a sick bodhisattva," it asks about those bodhisattvas from the initial mind of the ten understandings up to the diamond-[like samādhi], who are collectively called "having sickness." In terms of principle, bodhisattvas prior to the stages who have proceeded directly receive the retribution of fragmented [life and death] and have the fact of sickness; therefore they are called "having sickness." Those on the first bhūmi and above do not actually have sickness, but here, in terms of taking afflictions to be sickness, because those on the first bhūmi and above have that grasp of dharmas and the ground of ignorance, they are collectively called "bodhisattvas having sickness." As for "how should they subdue their mind?": "subduing" (tiao) means training them to leave faults behind; "subduing" (fu) means suppressing them to cultivate goodness. Now it asks how those bodhisattvas from the ten understandings onward cultivate contemplation to sever afflictions and cause themselves to ultimately have no sickness in their bodies; therefore it says, "how should they subdue their mind?" Below, Vimalakīrti answers. The purport of the answer is: teaching those bodhisattvas prior to the stages to cultivate preparatory wisdom, realize the emptiness of persons, and sever the self of persons; and also teaching them the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas to suppress the self of dharmas. For those on the first bhūmi and above, he teaches them to cultivate fundamental nonconceptual wisdom, enter into the inherently existent true thusness of the emptiness of dharmas, sever the self of dharmas, and realize the two emptinesses, thereby forever eliminating the two selves. When the self does not arise, this is called subduing. Having [already] subdued oneself, one must furthermore benefit others; therefore he also teaches them to give rise to great compassion and gather and transform according to what is present. The meaning of his answer lies in this. In the text there are two parts: first, clarifying what is cultivated; second, from "not abiding therein" onward, revealing what is accomplished. What is cultivated is cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. What is accomplished is accomplishing the practices of the non-abiding path. Within the preceding "what is cultivated," the text again has two parts: first, directly clarifying what is cultivated; second, concluding the accomplishment of subduing. Within the first, directly clarifying what is cultivated, the text has three pairs of cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. From the beginning of the text up to "one should contemplate in this way" constitutes the first pair of cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. Again, from "furthermore contemplating the body as impermanent" onward constitutes the second pair of cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. Later, from "furthermore contemplating the body: the body is not separate from sickness" onward constitutes the third pair of cultivating wisdom and cultivating compassion. Question: What is the difference among these three pairs? Answer: If one relies on the commentary's explanation, four meanings clarify the difference; I cannot relate them in full, so I will briefly raise one meaning. The first pair cultivates wisdom and compassion in terms of the profound principle of emptiness. The second pair explains cultivating wisdom and compassion in terms of the principles of suffering and impermanence. The third pair explains cultivating wisdom and compassion in terms of the matter of bodily sickness. Furthermore, according to another explanation: the first pair is spoken for people of superior faculties; the next pair is spoken for people of middling faculties; the last pair is spoken for people of inferior faculties. Within the first pair, the text has two parts: first, directly teaching wisdom and compassion; second, concluding with an exhortation to cultivate and train. Within the former, directly teaching wisdom and compassion, the rough outline has two parts, and the fine division has four. The two of the rough outline: first, clarifying the cultivation of wisdom; second, from "that sick bodhisattva, through having nothing received" onward, clarifying the cultivation of compassion. The four of the fine division: in the former cultivation, one cultivates lesser wisdom and greater wisdom; in the latter cultivation of compassion, one cultivates lesser compassion and greater compassion; thus they make four. In terms of principle, when cultivating lesser wisdom, one immediately cultivates lesser compassion; when cultivating greater wisdom, one immediately cultivates greater compassion. However, expositors of Dharma wish to make wisdom and compassion distinct, and therefore speak of them separately. This is the sequence of explanation, not the sequence of practice. Within the former cultivation of wisdom, the text has two sections: first, clarifying the cultivation of lesser wisdom; second, from "attaining this equality" onward, clarifying the cultivation of greater wisdom. Cultivating lesser wisdom precisely corresponds to prior to the stages; cultivating greater wisdom is on the stages. Within the former cultivation of lesser wisdom, the text again has two parts: first, teaching the contemplation of the emptiness of persons; second, from "that sick bodhisattva, in order to extinguish the conception of dharmas" onward, teaching the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas. Question: Since bodhisattvas prior to the stages cultivate that lesser wisdom, they should only practice the contemplation of the emptiness of persons; why do they also practice the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas? Answer: Bodhisattvas prior to the stages, at the initial mind of the ten understandings, sever that ground of clinging to a single view; the grasp of a self of persons is exhausted, and they realize the emptiness of persons. In the grounds of the three attachments, they only sever active occurrences; regarding their seeds, they retain them and do not sever them. From the second thought of the ten understandings onward, they learn the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas to suppress that mind of grasping at dharmas, which is the seeds of ignorance outside the realms. This is realizing and accomplishing the emptiness of persons. As for the emptiness of dharmas, they train in it but have not yet realized it. Therefore the Bodhisattvabhūmi Sūtra says: 'A bodhisattva of the gotra is purified of the two hindrances: if the affliction hindrance is severed, it is purified; the hindrance to all-knowledge is called purified because it is suppressed.' Thus we know that bodhisattvas prior to the stages learn the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas to suppress the grasp of dharmas.