維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.34

3.34

汝若實得空無諍三昧者。何不於食法乃至縛解諸法一切皆等。莫生分別。既見汝今捨貧從富除貧取脫。背彼邪師歸佛正法。正是相違。斯則有見不亡取捨未息。云何得稱空三昧。若欲合彼大空平等無諍三昧者。應須不見食之美惡。乃至邪正無二。不生分別。若能如是然可取食也。就初於食不等中句別有三。一將食類法。二以法類食。三結聽取食。唯須菩提於食等諸法亦等者。此即初句。汝今捨貧從富。見食善惡。即知於食不等。萬法同相以法性為實。即知汝於法不等。又將食類法。觀食體空名為食等。以此類餘名為法等也。諸法等者。第二句以法類食。觀法性空無有染淨名為法等。以此類食名食亦等。如是行乞乃可取食者。第三句結聽取食。萬法同相准一可知若於法食平等者。以此行乞即是福田。乃可取食也。可取食等者。取富人之妙食等貧舍之穢飡。若能於此麁妙食等。即能於諸法亦等。若達萬法皆等。即能於食亦等。得此等心是真福田。乃可取食也。

"If you have truly attained the empty samādhi of non-contention, why are you not equal toward the dharma of food, and even toward all dharmas such as bondage and liberation? Do not produce discriminations! Since it is seen that you now abandon the poor to follow the rich, eliminate poverty to take liberation, and turn your back on heretical teachers to take refuge in the Buddha's right Dharma, this is precisely contradictory. This means your grasping onto views has not vanished, and your taking and leaving have not ceased; how can this be called the samādhi of emptiness? If you wish to accord with that great-emptiness, equal samādhi of non-contention, you must not see the goodness or badness of food, and even wrong and right as non-dual, without producing discriminations. If you can be like this, only then may you take the food." Regarding the first [point], inequality concerning food, there are three distinct clauses: first, comparing food to dharmas; second, comparing dharmas to food; third, concluding with permission to take the food. "Only, Subhūti, if you are equal regarding food, you are also equal regarding all dharmas": this is the first clause. You now abandon the poor to follow the rich, seeing food as good or bad; that is knowing that you are not equal regarding food. The myriad dharmas share the same characteristic, with the nature of dharmas being the reality; that is knowing that you are not equal regarding dharmas. Furthermore, comparing food to dharmas: contemplating that the substance of food is empty is called being equal regarding food; comparing this to the rest is called being equal regarding dharmas. "If all dharmas are equal": the second clause compares dharmas to food. Contemplating that the nature of dharmas is empty, without defilement or purity, is called dharmas being equal; comparing this to food is called food also being equal. "Begging alms like this, only then may you take the food": the third clause concludes with permission to take the food. The myriad dharmas share the same characteristic, and by following this one, the rest can be known; if one is equal regarding dharmas and food, begging alms with this is indeed a field of merit, and only then may one take the food. "May take the food" and so forth: taking the fine food of the rich is equal to the foul meal of the poor house. If one can be equal regarding this coarse and fine food, one will be able to be equal regarding all dharmas as well. If one understands that the myriad dharmas are all equal, one will be able to be equal regarding food as well. Attaining this equal mind is a true field of merit, and only then may one take the food.