維摩經疏 1.19

1.19

第一明修小悲。即是地前。第二彼有疾菩薩應念我病非真非有已下明修大悲。即是地上。就前小悲中先論其意後釋其文。論其意者。地前菩薩直來之人修其小悲。小悲體相即是眾生緣及以法緣。悲以緣彼所化眾生名眾生緣。悲心緣彼化眾生法名為法緣。然凡欲教化罪眾生。須要同彼六道眾生受六道身方能攝化。若是地上諸大菩薩神力大故遂能變化作六道身隨有攝化。地前菩薩神力小故不能化身。若不教化復成破菩薩戒。然今菩薩即須用彼實惑業受六道身。問曰。地前菩薩何處有惑。答曰。四住煩惱據彼地前菩薩神力並能斷盡。欲將此惑潤業受生故有斷不斷。論其見一處住地。地前菩薩並患悉斷盡更無遣餘。三愛住地留而不斷。三受現行亦斷不留。斷現行故異彼凡夫。留住地故異聲聞也。將此三受隨眠煩惱潤彼無始已來六道之業更加悲願之力。為此義故方為此義故方得受生六道教化。然此菩薩因實惑業以受生。故入地獄中亦受輕苦。以受苦故速生厭離。悲願力故還復入中。此即地前菩薩悲相如是。雖經文中分為兩別。第一正明修悲。第二文殊師利是為已下明結歎顯勝。就前第一正修悲中文次相生有其五。後是有疾菩薩以無所受者。此即第一明自□受。有疾菩薩者十解第二剎那已迴向終心已還箇中菩薩。此諸菩薩計其功能並能斷彼六道果報有受之身。故言以無所受。而受諸受者。此即第二明為物現受。以慈悲故欲化眾生。是故現起六道受身。故言而受諸受也。未具佛法亦不滅受而取證。此即第三明受不息。未具初地已上佛法。終不滅此三有受身因於聲聞中道證滅也。設身有苦念惡趣眾生起大悲心者。此即第四明依受生悲。明諸菩薩在地獄中雖受輕苦念眾生故起大悲心不生厭離。言大悲者。實是小悲通名大也。我既調伏亦當調伏一切眾生者。此即第五明依悲起化。文中次第別有三分。此即第一明起化心。菩薩念言。我修智故自利調伏更須修悲亦當調伏一切眾生也。但除其病而不除法者。此即第二明知化宜。病者是心法者是境。境有其妄。論其妄境從心而生。但斷其心境自不起。故不除法。語其真境本不可斷。豈得言除。故佛性論云。三性幾應知幾不應知。答曰。一切皆應知。幾應斷幾不應斷。答曰。二性不可斷。一性可斷。分別性本無故不可斷。真實性實有故不可斷。依他性緣和有故是以可斷。問曰。依他緣和有可許。觀之得無生分別。一向無不應觀得無相。答曰。觀法異斷法異。義如別解。為斷病本而教導之者。此即第三明其化相。自下進問。何謂病本謂有攀緣此答。病本攀緣者。心心取前境名作攀緣。從有攀緣則為病本。但使有心則能起病故名為本。下問攀緣之處。何所攀者。於何處所起此攀緣者煩惱病。謂之三界者答也。於三界中有攀緣者。能起□□自下欲斷攀緣問取其法。云何斷攀緣者問也。以無所得若無所得則無攀緣者答也。無所得者空也。教其□作無相無生觀。觀心體空名無所得。心既無得。即無攀緣。攀緣既無。何有病本。何謂無所得者。所得者進問無所得觀。依何而成下答。謂二見亦有作本作。謂離二見義只相似。此明答也。不起二見名無所得。何謂二見者進問二見之相。答言。謂內見外見是無所者。內者是根。外者是塵。心緣此二名為二見。又內者涅槃。外者生死。緣此二故名為二見。教諸眾生觀法無相觀相無生。是故名為無所得也。上來修小悲訖。自下結歎顯勝。先結後歎。文殊師利是為有病菩薩調伏其心此明結也。自下歎修顯勝。先結說須譬喻。後合譬為斷老病死苦。是菩薩菩提者。為斷眾生老病死苦是菩薩道也。此即順彰有益。若不如是己所修治為無惠利者。若不如是兼斷眾生者。病死者菩薩所行則無施惠眾之利。□□□彰有損。自下譬喻。譬如勝怨乃可為勇者。如人自除□□□復能為他降伏怨敵。此名勝怨。謂之為勇也。自下□□□□兼除老病死者菩薩之謂也。如是菩薩自除老死兼□□□□老病死方是菩薩之稱謂也。上來明修小悲。

First is explaining the cultivation of lesser compassion, which belongs to [the levels] prior to the stages. Second, from "That ill bodhisattva should reflect: 'My illness is neither real nor existent'" onward, explains the cultivation of great compassion, which belongs to [the levels] on the stages. Within the former lesser compassion, its import is discussed first, and then the text is explained. In discussing its import: direct-path practitioners among bodhisattvas prior to the stages cultivate their lesser compassion. The essential nature of lesser compassion consists of the condition of sentient beings and the condition of dharmas. Because compassion conditions those sentient beings who are transformed, it is called "the condition of sentient beings"; because the compassionate mind conditions the dharmas that transform sentient beings, it is called "the condition of dharmas." However, when one wishes to teach and transform sinful sentient beings, one must share in the rebirths of those sentient beings in the six destinies and receive bodies in the six destinies; only then can one gather and transform them. If it were the great bodhisattvas on the stages, because their supernormal powers are vast, they can then emanate and assume bodies in the six destinies according to need to gather and transform them. Because bodhisattvas prior to the stages have smaller supernormal powers, they cannot emanate bodies. If they do not teach and transform, that would furthermore constitute breaking the bodhisattva precepts. Therefore, the present bodhisattva must employ real defilement and karma to take rebirth in bodies of the six destinies. Question: Where do bodhisattvas prior to the stages have defilements? Answer: In terms of the supernormal powers of those bodhisattvas prior to the stages, they are entirely capable of severing all the afflictions of the four entrenchments. Yet because they wish to use these defilements to moisten karma and take rebirth, there is what is severed and what is not severed. Regarding the ground of dwelling in single-minded view, bodhisattvas prior to the stages loathe it and sever it completely without residue. The grounds of dwelling of the three attachments are retained and not severed. The active manifestations of the three feelings are also severed and not retained. Because active manifestations are severed, they differ from ordinary persons; because the grounds of dwelling are retained, they differ from śrāvakas. Bringing forth these latent afflictions of the three feelings to moisten their karma of the six destinies from beginningless time, and further adding the power of compassionate vows—precisely for this reason are they able to take rebirth in the six destinies to teach and transform. However, because these bodhisattvas take rebirth due to real defilement and karma, upon entering the hells they also suffer light misery. Because they suffer misery, disgust and renunciation quickly arise. By the power of compassionate vows, they re-enter it again. Such is the nature of compassion for bodhisattvas prior to the stages. Although within the sūtra text it is divided into two parts: first, directly explaining the cultivation of compassion; second, from "Mañjuśrī, this is..." onward, concluding with praise to reveal its supremacy. Within the first, directly cultivating compassion, the sequence of the text produces five [points]. Next, "that ill bodhisattva, by receiving nothing": this is the first, explaining [receiving nothing] oneself. "The ill bodhisattva" refers to bodhisattvas from the second moment of the ten understandings through the completion of the dedication of merit. If one calculates the capabilities of these bodhisattvas, they can all sever the receptive bodies of retribution in the six destinies; hence it is said, "by receiving nothing." "Yet receives all sensations": this is the second, explaining manifesting reception for the sake of beings. Due to loving-kindness and compassion, wishing to transform sentient beings, they therefore manifest and give rise to receptive bodies in the six destinies; hence it is said, "yet receives all sensations." "Not yet having perfected the Buddha-dharmas, nor extinguishing sensation to realize [the fruit]": this is the third, explaining that sensation does not cease. Not yet having perfected the Buddha-dharmas of the first bhūmi and above, they never extinguish these receptive bodies of the three existences to realize cessation midway following the śrāvakas. "If the body suffers misery, reflecting on sentient beings in evil realms and giving rise to a mind of great compassion": this is the fourth, explaining giving rise to compassion based on sensation. It explains that although all bodhisattvas suffer light misery in the hells, because they reflect on sentient beings, they give rise to a mind of great compassion and do not give rise to disgust and renunciation. The word "great compassion" is in reality lesser compassion conventionally named "great." "Having subdued myself, I should also subdue all sentient beings": this is the fifth, explaining initiating transformation based on compassion. Within the text, in sequence, there are three distinct parts. This is the first, explaining initiating the intention to transform. The bodhisattva reflects: "Because I cultivate wisdom, I have subdued myself for my own benefit; furthermore, I must cultivate compassion, and should also subdue all sentient beings." "Only eliminating their illnesses without eliminating dharmas": this is the second, explaining knowing what is suitable for transformation. "Illness" is the mind; "dharmas" are the objects. Objects have their falsity. In discussing false objects, they are produced from the mind. Merely by severing their mind, the objects naturally do not arise; hence one does not eliminate dharmas. In speaking of true objects, they are fundamentally indestructible; how could one speak of eliminating them? Therefore the *Buddha-nature Treatise* says: "Of the three natures, how many should be known, and how many should not be known? Answer: All should be known. How many should be severed, and how many should not be severed? Answer: Two natures cannot be severed, and one nature can be severed. Because the discriminated nature is fundamentally non-existent, it cannot be severed; because the true nature is real and existent, it cannot be severed; because the dependent nature exists through the combination of conditions, it can therefore be severed." Question: That the dependent nature exists through the combination of conditions may be granted; when contemplating it, one attains non-arising. As the discriminated nature is completely non-existent, one should not attain signlessness by contemplating it. Answer: The method of contemplation is different, and the method of severing is different, the meaning of which is as explained elsewhere. "Instructing and guiding them in order to sever the root of illness": this is the third, explaining the manner of transformation. Below, a further question is raised: "What is the root of illness? It is grasping conditions." This is the answer to the root of illness. "Grasping conditions" means that mind after mind apprehends preceding objects, which is called grasping conditions. Following upon grasping conditions, it becomes the root of illness. As long as there is mind, it is able to give rise to illness; hence it is called the root. Below asks about the locus of grasping conditions: "What does one grasp?" At what locus does one give rise to this affliction-illness of grasping conditions? "It is the three realms" is the answer. For those who grasp conditions in the three realms, they can give rise to [afflictions]. Below, wishing to sever grasping conditions, asks about obtaining its method: "How does one sever grasping conditions?" is the question. "Through non-attainment. If there is non-attainment, there is no grasping conditions" is the answer. "Non-attainment" is emptiness. Instructing them […] to practice the contemplation of signlessness and non-arising, contemplating that the essence of mind is empty is called non-attainment. Once the mind has nothing to attain, there is no grasping of conditions. Since grasping conditions is absent, where would there be a root of illness? "What is non-attainment?" As for what is attained, it further asks: upon what is the contemplation of non-attainment accomplished? The answer below: "It is the two views"—another edition also reads "It is leaving behind the two views"; the meaning is just similar. This is the answer. Not giving rise to the two views is called non-attainment. "What are the two views?" further asks about the marks of the two views. The answer says: "Internal views and external views are non-attainment." The internal is the sense faculties; the external is the sense objects. The mind conditioning these two is called the two views. Again, the internal is nirvāṇa; the external is saṃsāra. Conditioning these two is therefore called the two views. Instructing all sentient beings to contemplate dharmas as signless and contemplate signs as non-arisen is therefore called non-attainment. The above completes the cultivation of lesser compassion. From here below concludes with praise to reveal its supremacy, first concluding and then praising. "Mañjuśrī, this is how an ill bodhisattva subdues his mind": this is the conclusion. Below, praising the cultivation reveals its supremacy. First it states that a metaphor is needed, and then applies the metaphor. "Severing the suffering of old age, illness, and death is the bodhisattva's bodhi": severing sentient beings' suffering of old age, illness, and death is the bodhisattva path. This directly reveals the benefit. "If it is not like this, what one cultivates and treats is without benefit": if it is not like this—severing both sentient beings' [illness and death]—then what the bodhisattva practices provides no benefit of giving to sentient beings. […] reveals the detriment. Below is the metaphor. "Just as only conquering enemies can be called heroic": like a person who eliminates […] himself and can further subdue enemies for others, this is called conquering enemies and is termed heroic. Below […] "One who concurrently eliminates old age, illness, and death is called a bodhisattva": such a bodhisattva eliminates old age and death for himself and concurrently […] old age, illness, and death; only then is he entitled to be called a bodhisattva. The above explains the cultivation of lesser compassion.