維摩經疏 1.8

1.8

自下兩問顯出維摩大悲所依。悲依空成故問室空。悲隨有生故問無侍。亦可。上來三問單明方便。自下兩問雙明實惠方便。問其室空即顯實惠。無侍即顯方便。文中先明文殊問。第二維摩答。文殊師利言居士此室何以空無侍者問也。何以空一問問其室空。何以無侍兩問問其無侍。自下維摩答□□先答室空後答無侍。維摩詰云諸佛國土亦復皆空者。此正答也。一切十方諸佛國土悉皆是空。我今此室國土之例。是故亦空。自下文殊進問維摩重答。又問何以為空者。文殊進問也。空有兩種。一者理空。二者事空。理空者。法界真如理體自空。事空者。除去所有事中作空。問言居士室空為是理空為是事空。故言以何為空。自下維摩答。以空空。我今室空是其理空。理體非一遍一切處故言空空。又復理空空却事空。故言空空。又復理空之中有其二種。一者生空。二者法空。有二空故故言空空。又復理中空之體自不可得。空亦空故故言空空。

The two questions below reveal that upon which Vimalakīrti's great compassion relies: because compassion is accomplished relying on emptiness, he asks about the room's emptiness; because compassion arises in accordance with existence, he asks about the lack of attendants. Alternatively, the three questions above purely clarify skillful means, whereas the two questions below clarify both real wisdom and skillful means—asking about the room's emptiness reveals real wisdom, while the lack of attendants reveals skillful means. In the text, it first clarifies Mañjuśrī's inquiry, and second, Vimalakīrti's answer. Mañjuśrī saying, 'Householder, why is this room empty and without attendants?' is the question. 'Why is it empty?' is one question, inquiring about the room's emptiness; 'Why are there no attendants?' is two questions, inquiring about the lack of attendants. Below, Vimalakīrti answers […], first answering the room's emptiness and later answering the lack of attendants. Vimalakīrti says, 'The Buddha-lands of the various Buddhas are also all empty'—this is the direct answer. All the Buddha-lands of the ten directions are entirely empty; this room of mine is of the same kind as those lands, and is therefore also empty. Below, Mañjuśrī advances a question and Vimalakīrti answers again. Also asking, 'With what is it empty?' is Mañjuśrī advancing his question. Emptiness is of two kinds: first, the emptiness of principle; second, the emptiness of phenomena. The emptiness of principle means that the essential substance of the principle of the dharmadhātu and tathatā is itself empty. The emptiness of phenomena means removing what exists to produce emptiness amidst phenomena. He asks, 'Householder, is the room's emptiness the emptiness of principle, or the emptiness of phenomena?'; therefore, he says, 'With what is it empty?' Below, Vimalakīrti answers: 'Empty with emptiness.' 'My room's present emptiness is the emptiness of principle. The substance of the principle is not one, yet pervades all places; therefore, it is said to be "empty with emptiness." Furthermore, the emptiness of principle empties out the emptiness of phenomena; therefore, it is said to be "empty with emptiness." Moreover, within the emptiness of principle there are two kinds: first, the emptiness of persons; second, the emptiness of dharmas. Because there are two kinds of emptiness, it is said to be "empty with emptiness." Furthermore, within principle, the substance of emptiness is itself unobtainable; emptiness is also empty, therefore it is said to be "empty with emptiness."'