維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.58

3.58

一切法下第四總就諸法以教。文中有二。初觀法生滅類顯性空。二法皆妄見下觀法無相類罪相空。前中有三。初法次喻後合。初法中生滅不住者。妄法虛空忽有名生。謝往稱滅。不住者妄法虛空忽有名生。謝往稱滅。生滅推遷時無暫住。何以故。諸法體空故。如幻如電者。第二舉喻。如幻者顯自性無常。如電者顯念念無常。以幻塵似有而無故喻無住。電轉忽有忽無故。譬如念無常也。諸法不相待乃至一念不住者。第三舉法合喻。由前念無常不待後念。後念無常不赴前念。剎那不住。故知無常也。諸法皆妄見下第二此明相空。還有法喻合三。以意思之。此中應問。若使諸法悉非有者。現見眾生苦樂不同見聞等異。此義何也。經即答云。諸法皆妄見。此明向前垢淨等法隨想而說說相差別。就實以論皆是妄見。悟其真理由來平等。何有染淨之異。凡所見聞皆是妄有非真實也。此云何知。經云。如夢無憂喜妄見有之現無憂喜亦復如是。炎者炎中無水妄謂有之。現見男女等相亦如是也。水中月者。水實無月。妄見有之。觀陰無我亦如是也。鏡中像者。像無去來。妄謂有之。現無生滅亦如是也。當知皆是妄見故非有似有。實無體。住無住即空。何有罪垢也。是名奉下結嘆勸學。行順法律達罪非有。即無犯律之咎。名為奉律。之解相非相即無取相之失。故稱善解。如來是奉律。行無不妙。如是解法智無不真。欲使學者慕彼高風故。今淨名示茲教也。

From 'All dharmas...' downward is the fourth part, generally instructing with respect to all dharmas. In the text there are two parts: first, contemplating the arising and ceasing of dharmas, analogously revealing their nature as empty; second, from 'Dharmas are all false perceptions' downward, contemplating the marklessness of dharmas, analogously showing that the marks of offenses are empty. In the former part there are three sections: first the dharma, then the metaphor, and finally the application. In the first section on the dharma, 'Arising and ceasing without abiding': deceptive dharmas are empty; suddenly having existence is called arising, and passing away is called ceasing. 'Without abiding': deceptive dharmas are empty; suddenly having existence is called arising, and passing away is called ceasing. Arising and ceasing transition, never abiding for a moment. Why is this? Because the substance of all dharmas is empty. 'Like a phantom, like lightning' is the second section, providing metaphors. 'Like a phantom' reveals impermanence of self-nature. 'Like lightning' reveals moment-to-moment impermanence. Because the dust-like phantasms seem to exist but do not, they symbolize non-abiding. Lightning flashes suddenly into existence and suddenly into non-existence, so it is compared to moment-to-moment impermanence. 'Dharmas do not await one another, not abiding even for a single thought-moment' is the third section, adducing the dharma to apply the metaphor. Because the preceding thought-moment is impermanent, it does not await the subsequent thought-moment; the subsequent thought-moment is impermanent, and does not reach back to the preceding thought-moment. Not abiding for a kṣaṇa, we therefore know they are impermanent. From 'Dharmas are all false perceptions' downward is the second part; this explains that marks are empty. It also has three sections: dharma, metaphor, and application. Consider them carefully. Here one should ask: if all dharmas are completely non-existent, then we visibly see sentient beings having different experiences of suffering and pleasure, and differences in seeing, hearing, and so forth. What is the meaning of this? The sūtra then answers: 'Dharmas are all false perceptions.' This explains that the previous dharmas of defilement and purity are spoken of in accordance with thoughts, speaking of differences in marks. Discussed in terms of reality, they are all false perceptions. Awakening to their true principle, they are fundamentally equal; how could there be distinctions between defiled and pure? Whatever is seen and heard is falsely existent and not real. How is this known? The sūtra says: just as in a dream there is neither sorrow nor joy, yet one falsely sees them as existing, so too in the present there is neither sorrow nor joy. 'A mirage': in a mirage there is no water, yet one falsely thinks it exists; the currently perceived marks of male, female, and so forth are also like this. 'The moon in the water': in water there is really no moon, yet one falsely sees it as existing; contemplating the aggregates as without self is also like this. 'An image in a mirror': an image has no coming or going, yet one falsely thinks it does; in the present, absence of arising and ceasing is also like this. One should know that all are false perceptions; therefore they are non-existent yet appear to exist. In reality they have no substance. Abiding in non-abiding is precisely emptiness; how could there be the defilement of offenses? From 'This is called upholding...' downward concludes with praise and encourages study. When practice accords with the Vinaya and realizes that offenses are non-existent, then there is no fault of violating the Vinaya; this is called 'upholding the Vinaya.' When one understands that marks are non-marks, then there is no fault of grasping at marks; therefore it is termed 'well-understanding.' The Tathāgata's upholding of the Vinaya is such that his practice is entirely wondrous; such understanding of dharmas has wisdom that is entirely true. Desiring that students admire that lofty standard, Vimalakīrti now demonstrates this teaching.