[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [維摩經疏卷第三．第六](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772) › 3.27 # 維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.27 維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.27 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.27) 以空聚想入聚落者。第二呵畏境界相翻失顯得。於中有二。初句總教。所見色下第二別言。聚落者村坊城邑白衣住處名為聚落。迦葉乞食必入聚落。見有貧富即捨富從貧。今觀聚落性空眾生非有。何為捨富從貧畏而不入。若然即終日聚落終日平等也。別中約就根塵等法以理正教。以聲聞人未證法空見塵是有對之起怖故。教令觀空。於乞食時多於六塵而生諸結故須教觀。此文之中於六塵境依法各異。於色塵境教觀根空而為對治。於聲塵境教觀境空而為對治。於香味兩塵教觀識空而為對治。於觸塵境教觀能取所取性空而為對治。於法塵境亦教觀境空而為對治。一相如此互從皆得。所見色與盲等者。夫入聚落必有見聞。凡夫見聞即空諸結。二乘見聽怖以六塵。令雙厈凡小故辯菩薩法也。盲人無根於境不著故不分別色形美惡。故無達順。行者觀眼從因緣生無性故空。即識不生。故無分別。故下經云。若知眼性於色不貪不恚不癡。是即寂滅安住其中。非是閉目不見名為盲人。常對四色而不取相故是如盲。譬如五指塗空。空無像現。眼亦如是。雖對色塵了眼性空見無所見。故如盲也。若約互從因緣和合眼能見色。今觀眼空。識亦非有。識性既空。識即不生。三法體空即無分別。所以如盲也。故法句經云。眼自不見。屬諸因緣緣。非見性眼即是空。色屬眼時名色為色。若眼性空。色亦無實也。所聞聲與響等者。聲從緣生。無有自性。無性即空。與響何異。所嗅香與風等者。香隨風轉。自體不實。既譬如風不空何也。又云。風行香林無心分別。行人亦示了識性空。雖復嗅香竟無別也。遠云。風事浮麁人多不著觀。香似彼故無貪著也。所食味不分別者。六味緣生根非自有。妄識體空何所分別。遠云。瓢杓無心雖在諸味不生分別。行者應爾。當如瓢杓不生分別。受諸觸如智證者。如聖人證果之時理無能所。行者亦爾。觀身空故無其能觸。境空故無其所觸。能所雙亡故如智證也。知諸法如幻相無自性無他性者。陰界入等名為諸法。法體性空故云如幻。從緣而生故無自性。無自性故亦無他性。自他既無即不共生。所以不然。不無因故。故不滅。又云。不無因者。有因當不生。無因依何生也。既無有生亦無有滅。故中論云。諸法不自生亦不從他生不共不無因。是故知無生。又云。無自性者籍緣生也。無他性者自因生也。本自不生者謂無作用也。今即無滅者緣生似有也。對法論云。自種有故不從他生。待緣生故非自作。俱無作用故不共生。有功能故不無因也。又云。釋有三義。一總。二即。三相待。總者諸法當分無不是自。但言無自即以總破諸法使無他也。即者舉他望自。自即為他。今既無自即亦無他也。相待者自他相待。既明無自。更待誰說他。故前明無自。此明無他也。法本不然。今無滅者然猶生也。解有三義。一約圓成。二空真如性無生滅。故云不然不滅。二依他從緣而生。生即不生。從緣而滅。滅無所滅。故稱不然不滅。三約遍計。愚夫橫計當情似有。體性本空實無生滅。故云不然不滅也。 > "Entering a settlement with the thought of an empty village": second, reprimanding the characteristic of dreading sensory fields, overturning the fault to reveal the gain. In this there are two parts: the initial phrase is the general teaching; from "the visual form seen" onward is the second, specific discussion. A settlement: hamlets, wards, cities, and towns—dwelling places of laypersons—are called settlements. When Kāśyapa begged for food, he necessarily entered settlements; seeing that there were poor and rich, he then abandoned the rich to follow the poor. Now, observing that settlements are empty in nature and sentient beings do not exist, why abandon the rich to follow the poor, dreading them and not entering? If so, then entering settlements all day is equality all day. In the specific discussion, based on phenomena such as faculties and dusts, it directly teaches according to principle. Because śrāvakas have not yet realized dharma-nairātmya, they see dusts as real entities and give rise to dread toward them; therefore he teaches them to contemplate emptiness. When begging for food, they often give rise to fetters regarding the six dusts; therefore he must teach them to contemplate. In this text, in relation to the six dust-realms, each is treated distinctively according to the phenomenon: regarding the realm of visual form, he teaches contemplating the emptiness of the sense faculty as an antidote; regarding the realm of sound, he teaches contemplating the emptiness of the objective realm as an antidote; regarding the two dusts of scent and taste, he teaches contemplating the emptiness of consciousness as an antidote; regarding the realm of touch, he teaches contemplating the emptiness of the natures of the grasper and the grasped as an antidote; regarding the realm of mental objects, he also teaches contemplating the emptiness of the objective realm as an antidote. One characteristic is like this, yet adapting them reciprocally is entirely permissible. "The visual form seen is equal to a blind person": whenever one enters a settlement, there is necessarily seeing and hearing. When ordinary persons see and hear, they empty no fetters; the two vehicles seeing and hearing are terrified of the six dusts. To reject both ordinary people and the Lesser Vehicle, he expounds the bodhisattva Dharma. A blind person lacks the sense faculty and does not cling to the realm, hence does not discriminate between beautiful and ugly visual forms, and therefore has neither compliance nor resistance. When the practitioner contemplates the eye as born from causes and conditions, lacking self-nature and therefore empty, consciousness does not arise, and hence there is no discrimination. Therefore a later sūtra says: "If one knows the nature of the eye, one has no greed, hatred, or delusion toward forms; this is quiescence, and one dwells peacefully within it." It is not that closing the eyes and not seeing is called a blind person. Constantly confronting the four colors without grasping characteristics, he is therefore like a blind person. For example, if the five fingers smear empty space, no image appears in space; the eye is also like this. Although confronting the dust of visual forms, understanding the nature of the eye to be empty, in seeing there is nothing seen, hence like a blind person. If in terms of reciprocal adaptation, through the combination of causes and conditions the eye can see visual forms; now contemplating the eye as empty, consciousness also does not exist. Since the nature of consciousness is empty, consciousness does not arise. When the essence of the three phenomena is empty, there is no discrimination; therefore it is like a blind person. Therefore the Dharmapada Sūtra says: "The eye itself does not see; it belongs to causes and conditions. Conditions are not the seeing nature; the eye is itself empty. When visual form belongs to the eye, form is called form. If the nature of the eye is empty, visual form is also not real." "The sound heard is equal to an echo": sound is born from conditions and has no self-nature; having no self-nature, it is empty. How does it differ from an echo? "The scent smelled is equal to the wind": scent shifts with the wind, and its own essence is not real. Since it is compared to wind, how could it not be empty? It is also said: When wind moves through a fragrant forest, it has no mind to discriminate; the practitioner also understands the nature of consciousness to be empty, so even when smelling scent, in the end there is no distinction. Yuan says: The affair of wind is unstable and coarse, and people mostly do not cling to it; contemplating scent as resembling it, one has no greedy attachment. "The flavor tasted is not discriminated": the six flavors are born from conditions, and the sense faculty does not exist of itself; the essence of deluded consciousness being empty, what could it discriminate? Yuan says: A ladle has no mind; although among various flavors, it does not produce discrimination. The practitioner should be like this: one ought to be like a ladle, not giving rise to discrimination. "Experiencing various tangibles is like the realization of knowledge": just as when an ārya realizes the fruition, in principle there is neither subject nor object; the practitioner is also like this. Contemplating the body as empty, there is no grasper of touch; the objective realm being empty, there is no object of touch. Subject and object both disappearing, it is therefore like the realization of knowledge. "Knowing all dharmas to be like illusory appearances, without self-nature and without other-nature": the aggregates, realms, and sense bases are called all dharmas. The essence of dharmas is empty by nature, hence called like an illusion. Being born from conditions, they have no self-nature; having no self-nature, they also have no other-nature. Since self and other do not exist, they are not jointly born. Why are they not so? Because they are not without cause, they are not destroyed. It is also said: As for "not without cause," if there is a cause, they should not arise; if there is no cause, on what basis would they arise? Since there is neither arising nor ceasing, the Madhyamaka-śāstra says: "Dharmas are not born from themselves, nor are they born from others, nor jointly, nor without cause; therefore know that there is no arising." It is also said: "Without self-nature" means born depending on conditions; "without other-nature" means born from their own causes. "Originally unarisen" means having no agency; "now without destruction" means born of conditions, appearing as existent. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says: Because their own seeds exist, they are not born from others; because they are born awaiting conditions, they are not self-made; because both lack agency, they are not jointly born; because they have efficacy, they are not without cause. It is also said: The explanation has three meanings: first, comprehensive; second, identical; third, interdependent. "Comprehensive": within their own domains, all dharmas are nothing other than "self"; merely saying "no self" comprehensively breaks down all dharmas and leaves no "other." "Identical": taking the other and viewing it from the self, the self is itself the other; now since there is no self, there is also no other. "Interdependent": self and other are mutually dependent; having clarified that there is no self, dependent on what further would one speak of other? Therefore the former clarified no self, and this clarifies no other. "Dharmas are originally unarisen and now without destruction": "arisen" is like being born. The understanding has three meanings: first, in terms of the consummate nature, the tathatā of two emptinesses has no arising or ceasing by nature, hence called unarisen and undestroyed; second, the dependent nature is born from conditions: arising is itself non-arising, and ceasing according to conditions, ceasing has nothing ceased, hence termed unarisen and undestroyed; third, in terms of the imputed nature, foolish persons falsely impute it as appearing to exist according to subjective sentiment, but its essence is originally empty and truly lacks arising and ceasing, hence called unarisen and undestroyed. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.26) - [Next: 3.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.28) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772~en-mt.3.27) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.27) · Pramāṇa