維摩詰所說經 文殊師利問疾品第五
維摩詰知道文殊師利與大眾要來，便把室內所有物品和侍者都撤去。房間空了，卻沒有連病床也撤去：只留一張床，他因病臥在上面。
若空只是什麼都沒有，這張床便顯得多餘。可是本品偏偏從這裡開始問：病沒有形相，為什麼還能問疾？身是假合，為什麼仍要安慰病者？空病也空，為什麼仍要領受種種感受？
維摩詰的答案，不是『我的病與眾生無關』，正好相反：眾生有病，他便有病；眾生病癒，他才病癒。就像只有一個孩子的父母，孩子得病，父母也隨著病；孩子痊癒，父母也隨著痊癒。菩薩的病，從大悲而起。
所以空室沒有把眾生擋在門外。維摩詰說，空要在六十二見中求，六十二見要在諸佛解脫中求，諸佛解脫又要在一切眾生的心行中求。越問空，越問回眾生所在之處。
身病也是如此。病不是四大中的任何一大，卻也不離地、水、火、風；病無形不可見，眾生所受的苦卻沒有被抹去。有疾菩薩要說身無常、苦、無我、空寂，同時又不能叫另一位病者厭身、樂滅、棄眾生。
除去我想，不是轉而住在法想；離開法想，也不是轉而住在空病。法想仍是大患，經文又隨即說空病也空。沒有一個可執取的受者，仍然領受種種感受；觀眾生病非真非有，仍然不捨大悲。
於是，病床上的人也要作醫王。他由自己的苦憶念惡趣眾生，不只求調伏自己，也要調伏一切眾生；只除疾病，不除去法。能兼除自己與眾生的老病死苦，才像戰勝怨敵那樣，可稱為勇。
本品最後三十二次說菩薩行：行空而植眾德本，行無相而度眾生，行無作而現受身；觀佛土寂靜如空，仍示現清淨佛土；乃至得佛道、轉法輪、入涅槃，也不捨菩薩之道。
房間已空，一床仍在。這不是空得不徹底，而是大悲沒有把眾生遺落：不住身，不棄身；不住病，不逃病；不住空，也不捨任何一位仍在病中的眾生。
Vimalakīrti knew that Mañjuśrī and the assembly were coming, so he removed every object and every attendant from the room. The room was empty, yet he did not remove the sickbed as well: he left only one bed and lay upon it in illness.
If emptiness meant only that nothing was there, this bed would seem superfluous. Yet this chapter begins precisely here and asks: If illness has no form, why can one still inquire about it? If the body is a provisional composite, why must one still comfort the sick? If even the illness of emptiness is empty, why must one still undergo the various feelings?
Vimalakīrti's answer is not, “My illness has nothing to do with sentient beings.” It is exactly the opposite: when sentient beings are ill, he is ill; only when sentient beings recover does he recover. It is like parents who have only one child: when the child falls ill, the parents fall ill as well; when the child recovers, the parents recover as well. The bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.
The empty room therefore does not shut sentient beings outside the door. Vimalakīrti says that emptiness should be sought within the sixty-two views, that the sixty-two views should be sought within the liberation of the buddhas, and that the liberation of the buddhas should in turn be sought within the activities of mind of all sentient beings. The further the inquiry into emptiness proceeds, the more it returns to the place where sentient beings are.
So it is with bodily illness. The illness is not any one of the four elements, yet neither is it apart from earth, water, fire, and wind. The illness has no form and cannot be seen, yet the suffering undergone by sentient beings has not been erased. A sick bodhisattva must speak of the body's impermanence, suffering, absence of self, and empty quiescence, while at the same time not telling another sick person to detest the body, delight in cessation, or abandon sentient beings.
Removing the conception of self does not mean turning to abide in a conception of dharmas; leaving the conception of dharmas does not mean turning to abide in the illness of emptiness. The conception of dharmas remains a grave affliction, and the sūtra immediately goes on to say that the illness of emptiness is also empty. Even though no apprehensible recipient can be found, the various feelings are still undergone; even while contemplating that the illnesses of sentient beings are neither real nor established, great compassion is still not abandoned.
Thus the person on the sickbed must also become a king of physicians. From his own suffering he recollects sentient beings in the evil destinies; he seeks not only to discipline himself but also to discipline all sentient beings, removing only the illness and not removing the dharmas. Only one who can remove the suffering of aging, illness, and death for both oneself and sentient beings can be called brave, like a warrior who has defeated an enemy.
At the end of this chapter, “this is the conduct of the bodhisattva” is stated thirty-two times: practicing emptiness while planting the roots of virtue; practicing signlessness while liberating sentient beings; practicing wishlessness while manifesting the reception of a body; contemplating buddha-lands as quiescent like space while still manifesting pure buddha-lands; and even attaining the Buddha's Way, turning the Dharma wheel, and entering nirvāṇa while still not abandoning the bodhisattva path.
The room is empty, yet one bed remains. This does not mean that the emptiness is incomplete. It means that great compassion has not left sentient beings behind: not abiding in the body and not abandoning the body; not abiding in illness and not fleeing illness; not abiding even in emptiness, and not abandoning a single sentient being who is still ill.
姚秦三藏鳩摩羅什譯《維摩詰所說經》卷中〈文殊師利問疾品第五〉· 大正藏 T14n0475〔起 T14 0544a22〕。段/行首〔T14 …〕＝大正藏頁·欄·行錨。
〔T14 0544a22〕維摩詰所說經卷中 姚秦三藏鳩摩羅什譯 文殊師利問疾品第五 爾時佛告文殊師利：「汝行詣維摩詰問疾。」 文殊師利白佛言：「世尊！彼上人者，難為詶對。深達實相，善說法要，辯才無滯，智慧無礙；一切菩薩法式悉知，諸佛祕藏無不得入；降伏眾魔，遊戲神通，其慧方便，皆已得度。雖然，當承佛聖旨，詣彼問疾。」 於是眾中諸菩薩、大弟子、釋、梵、四天王等，咸作是念：「今二大士文殊師利、維摩詰共談，必說妙法！」即時八千菩薩、五百聲聞、百千天人皆欲隨從。 於是文殊師利與諸菩薩、大弟子眾及諸天人，恭敬圍繞，入毘耶離大城。 爾時長者維摩詰心念：「今文殊師利與大眾俱來！」即以神力空其室內，除去所有及諸侍者；唯置一床，以疾而臥。 文殊師利既入其舍，見其室空，無諸所有，獨寢一床。時維摩詰言：「善來文殊師利！不來相而來，不見相而見。」 文殊師利言：「如是！居士！若來已，更不來；若去已，更不去。所以者何？來者無所從來，去者無所至，所可見者，更不可見。且置是事，居士！是疾寧可忍不？療治有損，不至增乎？世尊慇懃致問無量。居士！是疾何所因起？其生久如？當云何滅？」 維摩詰言：「從癡、有愛，則我病生。以一切眾生病，是故我病；若一切眾生病滅，則我病滅。所以者何？菩薩為眾生故入生死，有生死則有病；若眾生得離病者，則菩薩無復病。譬如長者唯有一子。其子得病，父母亦病；若子病愈，父母亦愈。菩薩如是，於諸眾生愛之若子。眾生病，則菩薩病；眾生病愈，菩薩亦愈。又言『是疾何所因起？』菩薩病者，以大悲起。」 文殊師利言：「居士！此室何以空無侍者？」 維摩詰言：「諸佛國土亦復皆空。」 又問：「以何為空？」 答曰：「以空空。」 又問：「空何用空？」 答曰：「以無分別空故空。」 又問：「空可分別耶？」 答曰：「分別亦空。」 又問：「空當於何求？」 答曰：「當於六十二見中求。」 又問：「六十二見當於何求？」 答曰：「當於諸佛解脫中求。」 又問：「諸佛解脫當於何求？」 答曰：「當於一切眾生心行中求。又仁所問：『何無侍者？』一切眾魔及諸外道，皆吾侍也。所以者何？眾魔者樂生死，菩薩於生死而不捨；外道者樂諸見，菩薩於諸見而不動。」 文殊師利言：「居士所疾為何等相？」 維摩詰言：「我病無形不可見。」 又問：「此病身合耶？心合耶？」 答曰：「非身合，身相離故；亦非心合，心如幻故。」 又問：「地大、水大、火大、風大，於此四大，何大之病？」 答曰：「是病非地大，亦不離地大；水、火、風大，亦復如是。而眾生病從四大起，以其有病，是故我病。」 爾時文殊師利問維摩詰言：「菩薩應云何慰喻有疾菩薩？」 維摩詰言：「說身無常，不說厭離於身；說身有苦，不說樂於涅槃；說身無我，而說教導眾生；說身空寂，不說畢竟寂滅；說悔先罪，而不說入於過去；以己之疾，愍於彼疾；當識宿世無數劫苦，當念饒益一切眾生；憶所修福，念於淨命，勿生憂惱，常起精進；當作醫王，療治眾病：菩薩應如是慰喻有疾菩薩，令其歡喜。」 文殊師利言：「居士！有疾菩薩云何調伏其心？」 維摩詰言：「有疾菩薩應作是念：『今我此病，皆從前世妄想顛倒、諸煩惱生，無有實法，誰受病者？所以者何？四大合故，假名為身；四大無主，身亦無我。又此病起，皆由著我，是故於我不應生著。』既知病本，即除我想及眾生想。當起法想，應作是念：『但以眾法合成此身；起唯法起，滅唯法滅；又此法者各不相知，起時不言我起，滅時不言我滅。』彼有疾菩薩為滅法想，當作是念：『此法想者，亦是顛倒，顛倒者是即大患，我應離之。』云何為離？離我、我所。云何離我、我所？謂離二法。云何離二法？謂不念內外，諸法行於平等。云何平等？謂我等、涅槃等。所以者何？我及涅槃，此二皆空。以何為空？但以名字故空。如此二法，無決定性，得是平等，無有餘病，唯有空病；空病亦空。是有疾菩薩以無所受而受諸受，未具佛法，亦不滅受而取證也。 〔T14 0545a15〕「設身有苦，念惡趣眾生，起大悲心。我既調伏，亦當調伏一切眾生；但除其病，而不除法，為斷病本而教導之。何謂病本？謂有攀緣，從有攀緣，則為病本。何所攀緣？謂之三界。云何斷攀緣？以無所得，若無所得，則無攀緣。何謂無所得？謂離二見——何謂二見？謂內見、外見——是無所得。文殊師利！是為有疾菩薩調伏其心，為斷老病死苦，是菩薩菩提。若不如是，己所修治，為無慧利。譬如勝怨，乃可為勇。如是兼除老病死者，菩薩之謂也。 「彼有疾菩薩應復作是念：『如我此病，非真非有，眾生病亦非真非有。』作是觀時，於諸眾生若起愛見大悲，即應捨離。所以者何？菩薩斷除客塵煩惱而起大悲，愛見悲者，則於生死有疲厭心；若能離此，無有疲厭，在在所生，不為愛見之所覆也。所生無縛，能為眾生說法解縛，如佛所說：『若自有縛能解彼縛，無有是處；若自無縛能解彼縛，斯有是處。』是故菩薩不應起縛。何謂縛？何謂解？貪著禪味，是菩薩縛；以方便生，是菩薩解。又無方便慧縛，有方便慧解；無慧方便縛，有慧方便解。何謂無方便慧縛？謂菩薩以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生；於空、無相、無作法中，而自調伏，是名無方便慧縛。何謂有方便慧解？謂不以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生，於空、無相、無作法中，以自調伏而不疲厭，是名有方便慧解。何謂無慧方便縛？謂菩薩住貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等諸煩惱，而植眾德本，是名無慧方便縛。何謂有慧方便解？謂離諸貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等諸煩惱，而植眾德本，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，是名有慧方便解。文殊師利！彼有疾菩薩，應如是觀諸法。又復觀身無常、苦、空、非我，是名為慧，雖身有疾，常在生死，饒益一切，而不厭倦，是名方便；又復觀身，身不離病，病不離身，是病是身，非新非故，是名為慧，設身有疾，而不永滅，是名方便。 「文殊師利！有疾菩薩應如是調伏其心，不住其中，亦復不住不調伏心。所以者何？若住不調伏心，是愚人法；若住調伏心，是聲聞法。是故菩薩不當住於調伏、不調伏心，離此二法，是菩薩行。在於生死，不為污行；住於涅槃，不永滅度，是菩薩行；非凡夫行，非賢聖行，是菩薩行；非垢行，非淨行，是菩薩行；雖過魔行，而現降眾魔，是菩薩行；求一切智，無非時求，是菩薩行；雖觀諸法不生，而不入正位，是菩薩行；雖觀十二緣起，而入諸邪見，是菩薩行；雖攝一切眾生，而不愛著，是菩薩行；雖樂遠離，而不依身心盡，是菩薩行；雖行三界，而不壞法性，是菩薩行；雖行於空，而植眾德本，是菩薩行；雖行無相，而度眾生，是菩薩行；雖行無作，而現受身，是菩薩行；雖行無起，而起一切善行，是菩薩行；雖行六波羅蜜，而遍知眾生心、心數法，是菩薩行；雖行六通，而不盡漏，是菩薩行；雖行四無量心，而不貪著生於梵世，是菩薩行；雖行禪定解脫三昧，而不隨禪生，是菩薩行；雖行四念處，而不永離身、受、心、法，是菩薩行；雖行四正勤，而不捨身心精進，是菩薩行；雖行四如意足，而得自在神通，是菩薩行；雖行五根，而分別眾生諸根利鈍，是菩薩行；雖行五力，而樂求佛十力，是菩薩行；雖行七覺分，而分別佛之智慧，是菩薩行；雖行八聖道，而樂行無量佛道，是菩薩行；雖行止觀助道之法，而不畢竟墮於寂滅，是菩薩行；雖行諸法不生不滅，而以相好莊嚴其身，是菩薩行；雖現聲聞、辟支佛威儀，而不捨佛法，是菩薩行；雖隨諸法究竟淨相，而隨所應為現其身，是菩薩行；雖觀諸佛國土永寂如空，而現種種清淨佛土，是菩薩行；雖得佛道轉于法輪、入於涅槃，而不捨於菩薩之道，是菩薩行。」 說是語時，文殊師利所將大眾其中八千天子，皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
佛命文殊師利前往問疾
那時，佛告訴文殊師利：『你前往維摩詰那裡，探問他的病況。』
文殊師利稟告佛說：『世尊！那位上人很難與他酬答。他深深通達實相，善於宣說佛法的要旨，辯才暢達而沒有滯礙，智慧通達而沒有障礙；一切菩薩行法的軌則，他全都明白，諸佛祕密之藏，他沒有不能進入的；他能降伏眾魔，自在運用神通，在智慧與方便上也都已通達。雖然如此，我仍當承受佛的神聖旨意，前往探問他的病況。』
於是，會中的菩薩、大弟子、帝釋、梵天、四天王，都這樣想：『如今兩位大士文殊師利和維摩詰一同談論，必定會宣說微妙的佛法！』當下便有八千位菩薩、五百位聲聞以及百千天人，都想跟隨前往。
文殊師利便與眾菩薩、大弟子眾以及諸天人，在恭敬圍繞之下，進入毘耶離大城。
空室一床，賓主相見
這時，長者維摩詰心裡想：『現在文殊師利正和大眾一同前來！』他隨即運用神力，使室內完全空下來，撤去其中所有物品，也遣走所有侍者；只留下了一張床，自己因病躺在床上。
文殊師利進入他的住處以後，看見室內空空的，什麼物品都沒有，只有維摩詰獨自臥在一張床上。這時維摩詰說：『歡迎你來，文殊師利！你以沒有來相的方式而來，以沒有見相的方式而見。』
文殊師利說：『正是如此，居士！如果已經來了，就不會再來；如果已經去了，也不會再去。為什麼呢？所謂來，沒有一個地方可以說是它從那裡來；所謂去，也沒有一個地方可以說是它到那裡去；至於所見的，也不能再把它當作一個可見之物來見。
『我們暫且放下這件事。居士！你的病還能忍受嗎？治療以後是否有所減輕，沒有繼續加重吧？世尊非常殷勤，對你有說不盡的問候。居士！這個病是從什麼原因生起的？已經生了多久？又應當怎樣才能消除？』
眾生病，所以菩薩病
維摩詰說：『我的病從愚癡和對存在的貪愛而生。因為一切眾生有病，所以我也有病；如果一切眾生的病消除了，我的病也就消除。為什麼呢？菩薩為了眾生而進入生死；有生死就有病。如果眾生能夠離開疾病，菩薩也就不再有病。
『譬如一位長者只有一個兒子。兒子得了病，父母也就病了；兒子的病若痊癒，父母也隨著痊癒。菩薩也是如此，愛護一切眾生，就像愛護自己的孩子一樣。眾生有病，菩薩也有病；眾生的病痊癒，菩薩的病也痊癒。
『你又問：這個病是從什麼原因生起的？菩薩的病，是從大悲心生起的。』
從空室問到眾生心行
文殊師利問：『居士！這個房間為什麼空空的，也沒有侍者？』
維摩詰答：『諸佛的國土也同樣全都是空。』
文殊師利又問：『憑什麼而空？』
維摩詰答：『以空而空。』
又問：『既然本來是空，為什麼還要用空來使它空？』
答：『因為是不作分別的空，所以是空。』
又問：『空可以加以分別嗎？』
答：『分別本身也是空。』
又問：『那麼應當到什麼地方去尋求空？』
答：『應當到六十二種見解之中去尋求。』
又問：『六十二種見解又應當到什麼地方去尋求？』
答：『應當到諸佛的解脫之中去尋求。』
又問：『諸佛的解脫又應當到什麼地方去尋求？』
答：『應當到一切眾生種種心念活動之中去尋求。
『你又問，為什麼沒有侍者？一切眾魔和所有外道，都是我的侍者。為什麼呢？眾魔喜愛生死，菩薩卻在生死之中而不捨離；外道喜愛種種見解，菩薩卻在種種見解之中而不動搖。』
病沒有形相，也不是四大中的一大
文殊師利問：『居士的病是什麼樣子？』
維摩詰答：『我的病沒有形狀，不可看見。』
又問：『這個病是與身相合，還是與心相合？』
答：『不是與身相合，因為身相本來離；也不是與心相合，因為心如幻化。』
又問：『地大、水大、火大、風大，在這四大之中，究竟是哪一大的病？』
答：『這個病不是地大，卻也不離地大；對水大、火大、風大，也都應當這樣說。眾生的病從四大而起；因為眾生有病，所以我也有病。』
怎樣安慰一位有病的菩薩
這時，文殊師利問維摩詰：『菩薩應當怎樣安慰、勸導一位有病的菩薩？』
維摩詰說：
『第一，要向他說明這個身體無常，卻不要叫他厭惡、捨離身體。
『第二，要向他說明這個身體有苦，卻不要叫他以涅槃為自己所貪求的安樂。
『第三，要向他說明這個身體沒有一個主宰的我，同時仍要說應當教導眾生。
『第四，要向他說明這個身體空寂，卻不要說應當走向徹底的寂滅。
『第五，要說應當懺悔過去所作的罪業，卻不要說罪入於過去。
『第六，要由自己所受的疾病，憐愍其他眾生所受的疾病。
『第七，要認識自己在過去無數劫中曾受的種種苦，並且常想著要利益一切眾生。
『第八，要憶念自己所修的福德，顧念清淨的生活方式，不要生起憂愁和煩惱，應當常常發起精進。
『第九，要自任為治病的醫王，療治一切眾生的種種疾病。
『菩薩應當這樣安慰、勸導有病的菩薩，使他生起歡喜。』
有疾菩薩先從誰在受病問起
文殊師利問：『居士！有病的菩薩應當怎樣調伏自己的心？』
維摩詰說：『有病的菩薩應當這樣想：我現在這個病，全都從過去世的虛妄分別、顛倒以及種種煩惱而生。這裡沒有一個真實不變的法，那麼究竟是誰在承受這個病呢？為什麼這樣說？由於地、水、火、風四大和合，只是假借一個名稱叫作身體；四大之中沒有主宰，這個身體之中也沒有一個我。這個病的生起，又全都由於執著有我；所以不應當再對我生起執著。
『知道病的根本以後，就應當除去有我的想法，以及把眾生看作實有的想法。接著應當生起只是諸法的觀察，這樣想：只是許多法和合，才構成這個身體；生起時，只是法生起，消滅時，也只是法消滅。這些法彼此各不相知；生起時不會說是我生起，消滅時也不會說是我消滅。
『這位有病的菩薩，為了消除對法的執取，還應當這樣想：這種把法當作實有的想法，同樣也是顛倒；顛倒就是大病，我應當離開它。
『怎樣才叫作離開？就是離開我和我所有。
『怎樣離開我和我所有？就是離開相對的兩法。
『怎樣離開相對的兩法？就是不再念著內與外，使一切法都行於平等。
『怎樣叫作平等？就是我與涅槃平等。為什麼呢？我和涅槃這兩者全都是空。
『它們憑什麼而空？只是因為名稱而說空。這兩種法都沒有固定不變的自性。能夠達到這樣的平等，就沒有其他的病，只剩下對空的執著這個病；而對空的執著，也同樣是空。
『所以，有病的菩薩不執取所受，卻仍領受種種受。在佛法還沒有完全具足以前，也不消滅感受而求取證入。』
由自己的苦，念到惡趣眾生的苦
維摩詰又說：『假使身體正在受苦，就要憶念惡道中的眾生，發起大悲心。我既然要調伏自己，也應當調伏一切眾生。只是除去那個病，卻不除去法；要為了斷除疾病的根本而教導眾生。
『什麼叫作疾病的根本？就是有所攀緣；只要有所攀緣，就成為疾病的根本。
『所攀緣的是什麼？就是三界。
『怎樣斷除攀緣？要以無所得來斷；如果無所得，也就沒有攀緣。
『什麼叫作無所得？就是離開兩種見。
『哪兩種見？就是內見與外見。離開這兩種見，就是無所得。
『文殊師利！這就是有病的菩薩調伏自己內心的方法。這樣做，是為了斷除老、病、死的苦，這正是菩薩的菩提。如果不這樣做，自己所作的一切修治，便沒有智慧，也不能帶來利益。譬如戰勝怨敵，才可以稱為勇士；同樣地，能夠同時除去自己與眾生的老、病、死，才稱得上菩薩。』
大悲不能和愛見纏在一起
維摩詰說：『那位有病的菩薩還應當這樣想：正如我的這個病不是真實的，也不是確定存在的，眾生的病也不是真實的，不是確定存在的。
『作這種觀察時，如果對眾生生起了愛見大悲，就應當把它捨離。為什麼呢？菩薩應當斷除像外來塵垢一樣的煩惱，而生起大悲。由愛見所生的悲，會使人對生死生起疲厭；如果能離愛見大悲，便無疲厭。無論生在何處，都不被愛見所覆。
『自己的受生不被繫縛，才能為眾生說法，解除他們的繫縛。如佛所說：如果自己還有繫縛，卻能解除別人的繫縛，沒有這種可能；如果自己沒有繫縛，而能解除別人的繫縛，才有這種可能。所以，菩薩不應當生起繫縛。』
什麼是縛，什麼是解
維摩詰說：『什麼叫作繫縛？什麼叫作解脫？貪戀禪定中的滋味，是菩薩的繫縛；運用方便而受生，是菩薩的解脫。
『此外，只有智慧卻沒有方便，是繫縛；智慧具有方便，是解脫。只有方便卻沒有智慧，是繫縛；方便具有智慧，是解脫。
『什麼叫作沒有方便的智慧所成的繫縛？菩薩以帶著愛著和見取的心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生，同時又在空、無相、無作的法中只調伏自己，這叫作沒有方便的智慧所成的繫縛。
『什麼叫作具有方便的智慧所成的解脫？菩薩不以帶著愛著和見取的心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生；他在空、無相、無作的法中調伏自己，卻不感到疲倦和厭離，這叫作具有方便的智慧所成的解脫。
『什麼叫作沒有智慧的方便所成的繫縛？菩薩安住在貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等種種煩惱之中，同時栽植種種功德善根，這叫作沒有智慧的方便所成的繫縛。
『什麼叫作具有智慧的方便所成的解脫？菩薩離開貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等種種煩惱，栽植種種功德善根，並把這些善根迴向無上正等正覺，這叫作具有智慧的方便所成的解脫。
『文殊師利！那位有病的菩薩應當這樣觀察一切法。』
慧與方便交互照見身病
維摩詰又說：『再者，觀察這個身體是無常、是苦、是空、不是一個主宰的我，這叫作智慧；身體雖然有病，卻仍然常在生死之中利益一切眾生，而不感到厭倦，這叫作方便。
『再者，觀察身體不離疾病，疾病也不離身體；這個病與這個身，既非新有，也非舊有，這叫作智慧；即使身體有病，也不求永遠寂滅，這叫作方便。』
不住調伏，也不住不調伏
維摩詰說：『文殊師利！有病的菩薩應當這樣調伏自己的心，卻不住在調伏之中，也不住在不調伏的心中。為什麼呢？如果住在不調伏的心中，那是愚人的作法；如果住在調伏的心中，那是聲聞的作法。所以菩薩不應當停住在調伏或不調伏任何一邊。』
接著，維摩詰逐項說明什麼是菩薩行：
- 離開調伏與不調伏這相對的兩法，這是菩薩行。
- 身在生死之中，行為卻不被染污；安住於涅槃，也不永遠滅度，這是菩薩行。
- 既不是凡夫的行，也不是賢聖的行，這是菩薩行。
- 既不是染垢的行，也不是清淨的行，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然已超越魔的行為，卻仍示現降伏眾魔，這是菩薩行。
- 尋求一切智，卻不在不適當的時候求取證入，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然觀察一切法不生，卻不進入固定的正位，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然觀察十二因緣的生起，卻仍進入種種邪見之中，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然攝受一切眾生，卻不對眾生生起愛著，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然愛樂遠離，卻不把身心滅盡作為依止，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然行於三界，卻不破壞法性，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然行於空，卻仍栽植種種功德善根，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然行於無相，卻仍度化眾生，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然行於無作，卻仍示現領受身體，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然行於無起，卻仍發起一切善行，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧六種波羅蜜，卻遍知眾生的心以及各種心所，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行天眼、天耳、他心、宿命、神足、漏盡六種神通，卻不把一切漏盡作為自己的終點，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行慈、悲、喜、捨四無量心，卻不貪著投生梵天世界，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行禪定、解脫與三昧，卻不隨著所得的禪定而受生，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行觀身、觀受、觀心、觀法四念處，卻不永遠離棄身、受、心、法，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行斷除已生惡、使未生惡不生、使未生善生起、使已生善增長的四正勤，卻不捨棄身心的精進，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行欲、精進、心、觀四如意足，卻能獲得自在的神通，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行信、精進、念、定、慧五根，卻能分辨眾生各自根機的敏銳與遲鈍，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行信、精進、念、定、慧五力，卻仍樂於尋求佛的十力，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行念、擇法、精進、喜、輕安、定、捨七覺分，卻仍分別了知佛的智慧，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行正見、正思惟、正語、正業、正命、正精進、正念、正定八聖道，卻仍樂於修行無量佛道，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行止與觀這兩種助道之法，卻不究竟墮入寂滅，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然修行一切法不生不滅，卻仍以種種相好莊嚴自己的身體，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然示現聲聞與辟支佛的威儀，卻不捨棄佛法，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然隨順一切法究竟清淨的形相，卻仍因應眾生所需而為他們示現相應的身形，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然觀察諸佛國土永遠寂靜、如同虛空，卻仍示現種種清淨佛土，這是菩薩行。
- 雖然證得佛道、轉動法輪、進入涅槃，卻仍不捨棄菩薩之道，這是菩薩行。
八千天子發心
說這些話的時候，在文殊師利所帶領的大眾之中，有八千位天子全都發起了追求無上正等正覺的心。
The Buddha Instructs Mañjuśrī to Inquire about the Illness
At that time, the Buddha told Mañjuśrī, “Go to Vimalakīrti and inquire about his illness.”
Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha, “World-Honored One! It is very difficult to exchange words with that eminent man. He has profoundly comprehended the true mark, is skilled in teaching the essentials of the Buddha-Dharma, has eloquence that flows without obstruction, and possesses unobstructed wisdom. He understands all the rules of bodhisattva practice and can enter every secret treasury of the buddhas. He can subdue the many Māras, freely employ spiritual powers, and has thoroughly mastered both wisdom and skillful means. Even so, I shall accept the Buddha's sacred command and go inquire about his illness.”
The bodhisattvas, great disciples, Śakra, Brahmā, and the Four Heavenly Kings in the assembly all thought, “Now that the two great beings Mañjuśrī and Vimalakīrti will converse together, they will surely teach the wondrous Dharma!” At once, eight thousand bodhisattvas, five hundred śrāvakas, and a hundred thousand heavenly beings all wished to follow them.
Mañjuśrī then entered the great city of Vaiśālī together with the bodhisattvas, the assembly of great disciples, and the heavenly beings, surrounded by their reverence.
An Empty Room, One Bed, and the Meeting of Host and Guest
At this time, the elder Vimalakīrti thought, “Mañjuśrī is now coming with the great assembly!” He immediately used his spiritual power to empty the room completely, removing everything in it and dismissing all the attendants. He left only one bed and lay upon it in illness.
After Mañjuśrī entered his residence, he saw that the room was empty, with nothing at all in it, and that Vimalakīrti alone lay upon one bed. Vimalakīrti then said, “Welcome, Mañjuśrī! You come with no mark of coming and see with no mark of seeing.”
Mañjuśrī said, “It is just so, layman! If one has already come, one will not come again; if one has already gone, one will not go again. Why? What is called coming has no place from which it can be said to come; what is called going likewise has no place to which it can be said to go; and as for what is seen, it cannot again be seen as some visible thing.
“Let us set this matter aside for the moment. Layman, is your illness bearable? Has treatment brought some relief, without the illness continuing to worsen? The World-Honored One is deeply concerned and sends you immeasurable greetings. Layman, from what cause did this illness arise? How long has it been present? And how can it be removed?”
Because Sentient Beings Are Ill, the Bodhisattva Is Ill
Vimalakīrti said, “My illness arises from delusion and craving for existence. Because all sentient beings are ill, I too am ill. If the illnesses of all sentient beings are removed, my illness will also be removed. Why? For the sake of sentient beings, a bodhisattva enters saṃsāra. Where there is saṃsāra, there is illness. If sentient beings can leave illness behind, the bodhisattva will no longer be ill.
“It is like an elder who has only one child. When the child falls ill, the parents fall ill as well; if the child's illness is cured, the parents are cured as well. A bodhisattva is the same: he cherishes all sentient beings as he would cherish his own child. When sentient beings are ill, the bodhisattva is ill; when the illnesses of sentient beings are cured, the bodhisattva's illness is cured as well.
“You also asked, ‘From what cause did this illness arise?’ A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.”
From the Empty Room to the Activities of Sentient Beings' Minds
Mañjuśrī asked, “Layman, why is this room empty and without attendants?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “All buddha-lands are likewise entirely empty.”
Mañjuśrī asked again, “By virtue of what are they empty?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “They are empty by emptiness.”
He asked again, “Since they are originally empty, why use emptiness to empty them?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “Because emptiness is without discrimination, they are empty.”
He asked again, “Can emptiness be discriminated?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “Discrimination itself is also empty.”
He asked again, “Then where should emptiness be sought?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “It should be sought within the sixty-two views.”
He asked again, “Where, then, should the sixty-two views be sought?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “They should be sought within the liberation of the buddhas.”
He asked again, “Where, then, should the liberation of the buddhas be sought?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “It should be sought within all the various activities of mind of sentient beings.
“You also asked why there are no attendants. All the many Māras and all the followers of other paths are my attendants. Why? The many Māras delight in saṃsāra, yet the bodhisattva does not abandon saṃsāra. Followers of other paths delight in the various views, yet the bodhisattva remains unmoved among those views.”
The Illness Has No Form and Is Not Any One of the Four Elements
Mañjuśrī asked, “What is the form of the layman's illness?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “My illness has no form and cannot be seen.”
He asked again, “Is this illness conjoined with the body or conjoined with the mind?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “It is not conjoined with the body, because the mark of the body is originally separate; nor is it conjoined with the mind, because the mind is like an illusion.”
He asked again, “Among the four elements of earth, water, fire, and wind, which element is ill?”
Vimalakīrti answered, “This illness is not the earth element, yet neither is it apart from the earth element. The same should be said of the water, fire, and wind elements. The illnesses of sentient beings arise from the four elements. Because sentient beings are ill, I too am ill.”
How to Comfort a Sick Bodhisattva
At this time, Mañjuśrī asked Vimalakīrti, “How should a bodhisattva comfort and counsel a sick bodhisattva?”
Vimalakīrti said:
“First, explain that this body is impermanent, but do not tell him to detest and abandon the body.
“Second, explain that this body is suffering, but do not tell him to covet the happiness of nirvāṇa for himself.
“Third, explain that this body has no governing self, while still saying that sentient beings should be taught.
“Fourth, explain that this body is empty and quiescent, but do not say that one should proceed toward ultimate quiescent cessation.
“Fifth, say that one should repent of wrongdoings committed in the past, but do not say that wrongdoing enters into the past.
“Sixth, through the illness one undergoes oneself, have compassion for the illnesses undergone by other sentient beings.
“Seventh, recognize the many kinds of suffering one has undergone over countless past eons, and constantly think of benefiting all sentient beings.
“Eighth, recollect the merit one has cultivated, attend to a pure way of life, do not give rise to sorrow or affliction, and constantly arouse diligent effort.
“Ninth, take it upon oneself to be a king of physicians who cures the various illnesses of all sentient beings.
“A bodhisattva should comfort and counsel a sick bodhisattva in this way, causing him to give rise to joy.”
A Sick Bodhisattva Begins by Asking Who Undergoes the Illness
Mañjuśrī asked, “Layman, how should a sick bodhisattva discipline his own mind?”
Vimalakīrti said, “A sick bodhisattva should think in this way: This present illness of mine arises entirely from false discrimination, inversion, and the various afflictions of past lives. No real and unchanging dharma exists here, so who is it that undergoes this illness? Why is this said? Because the four elements of earth, water, fire, and wind come together, the provisional name ‘body’ is borrowed. There is no ruler among the four elements, and there is no self within this body. The arising of this illness is itself entirely due to attachment to a self; therefore, one should no longer give rise to attachment to self.
“After knowing the root of the illness, one should remove the conception of self and the conception that sentient beings truly exist. One should then give rise only to contemplation of dharmas and think in this way: It is only the coming together of many dharmas that constitutes this body. When it arises, only dharmas arise; when it ceases, only dharmas cease. These dharmas do not know one another. When they arise, they do not say, ‘I arise’; when they cease, they do not say, ‘I cease.’
“To remove attachment to dharmas, this sick bodhisattva should further think: This conception that takes dharmas to be truly existent is itself also inverted. Inversion is a grave illness; I should leave it behind.
“What is called leaving it behind? Leaving self and what belongs to self.
“How does one leave self and what belongs to self? By leaving the two relative dharmas.
“How does one leave the two relative dharmas? By no longer thinking in terms of inner and outer and by letting all dharmas proceed in equality.
“What is called equality? Self and nirvāṇa are equal. Why? Self and nirvāṇa are both empty.
“By virtue of what are they empty? They are said to be empty only because of names. Neither of these two dharmas has a fixed and unchanging own-nature. Reaching this equality, there is no other illness; only the illness of attachment to emptiness remains, and attachment to emptiness is likewise empty.
“Therefore, a sick bodhisattva does not grasp what is received, yet still undergoes the various feelings. Before the Buddha-Dharma is completely fulfilled, he does not extinguish feelings in order to seek realization.”
From One's Own Suffering to the Suffering of Sentient Beings in the Evil Destinies
Vimalakīrti continued, “If the body is suffering, one should recollect sentient beings in the evil destinies and arouse great compassion. Since I seek to discipline myself, I should also discipline all sentient beings. Remove only the illness, but do not remove the dharmas. Teach sentient beings in order to cut off the root of illness.
“What is called the root of illness? It is engagement with objects. Whenever there is engagement with objects, it becomes the root of illness.
“What is the object of that engagement? The three realms.
“How does one cut off engagement with objects? Cut it off through non-attainment. If there is non-attainment, there is no engagement with objects.
“What is called non-attainment? Leaving the two views behind.
“Which two views? The inner view and the outer view. Leaving these two views is non-attainment.
“Mañjuśrī! This is the way a sick bodhisattva disciplines his own mind. It is done to cut off the suffering of aging, illness, and death; this is precisely the bodhisattva's awakening. If he does not do this, none of his self-cultivation possesses wisdom or brings benefit. Just as only one who defeats an enemy can be called a warrior, so one who can remove aging, illness, and death for both oneself and sentient beings can be called a bodhisattva.”
Great Compassion Must Not Be Entangled with Affectionate Views
Vimalakīrti said, “That sick bodhisattva should further think: Just as this illness of mine is not real and is not established as existent, the illnesses of sentient beings are likewise not real and are not established as existent.
“While making this contemplation, if he gives rise toward sentient beings to great compassion entangled with affectionate views, he should abandon it. Why? A bodhisattva should cut off afflictions that are like adventitious dust and give rise to great compassion. Compassion born from affectionate views causes weariness with saṃsāra. If he can leave behind great compassion entangled with affectionate views, there will be no weariness. Wherever he is born, he will not be covered by affectionate views.
“Only when his own birth is not bound can he teach the Dharma to sentient beings and release them from bondage. As the Buddha said: For one who is still bound to release the bonds of others is impossible; for one who is not bound to release the bonds of others is possible. Therefore, a bodhisattva should not give rise to bondage.”
What Is Bondage, and What Is Liberation?
Vimalakīrti said, “What is called bondage? What is called liberation? Craving the flavor of meditation is a bodhisattva's bondage; taking birth through skillful means is a bodhisattva's liberation.
“Furthermore, wisdom without skillful means is bondage; wisdom endowed with skillful means is liberation. Skillful means without wisdom is bondage; skillful means endowed with wisdom is liberation.
“What is bondage produced by wisdom without skillful means? A bodhisattva adorns buddha-lands and brings sentient beings to maturity with a mind bearing craving and attachment to views, while merely disciplining himself within the dharmas of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness. This is bondage produced by wisdom without skillful means.
“What is liberation produced by wisdom endowed with skillful means? A bodhisattva does not adorn buddha-lands and bring sentient beings to maturity with a mind bearing craving and attachment to views. He disciplines himself within the dharmas of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, yet does not become weary or averse. This is liberation produced by wisdom endowed with skillful means.
“What is bondage produced by skillful means without wisdom? A bodhisattva abides within desire, anger, wrong views, and the various other afflictions while planting the various roots of virtue. This is bondage produced by skillful means without wisdom.
“What is liberation produced by skillful means endowed with wisdom? A bodhisattva leaves desire, anger, wrong views, and the various other afflictions behind, plants the various roots of virtue, and dedicates these roots of virtue to unsurpassed perfect awakening. This is liberation produced by skillful means endowed with wisdom.
“Mañjuśrī! That sick bodhisattva should contemplate all dharmas in this way.”
Wisdom and Skillful Means Illuminate Bodily Illness Together
Vimalakīrti continued, “Furthermore, contemplating this body as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without a governing self is called wisdom. Although the body is ill, always benefiting all sentient beings within saṃsāra without becoming weary is called skillful means.
“Furthermore, contemplating that the body is not apart from illness and that illness is not apart from the body, and that this illness and this body are neither newly existent nor formerly existent, is called wisdom. Even though the body is ill, not seeking eternal quiescent cessation is called skillful means.”
Abiding Neither in Discipline nor in Non-Discipline
Vimalakīrti said, “Mañjuśrī! A sick bodhisattva should discipline his mind in this way, yet abide neither in discipline nor in a mind that is not disciplined. Why? To abide in an undisciplined mind is the practice of fools; to abide in a disciplined mind is the practice of śrāvakas. A bodhisattva therefore should not remain on either side, discipline or non-discipline.”
Vimalakīrti then explained, item by item, what constitutes the conduct of the bodhisattva:
- Leaving behind the two relative dharmas of discipline and non-discipline: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Remaining in saṃsāra while one's conduct is undefiled; abiding in nirvāṇa without passing into eternal cessation: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Practicing neither as an ordinary person nor as a sage: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Practicing neither defilement nor purity: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although already transcending the conduct of Māra, still manifesting the subjugation of the many Māras: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Seeking omniscience without seeking realization at an untimely moment: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although contemplating that all dharmas do not arise, not entering a fixed right position: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although contemplating the arising of the twelve links of dependent origination, still entering among the various wrong views: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although gathering in all sentient beings, not giving rise to attachment to sentient beings: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although delighting in seclusion, not taking the extinction of body and mind as one's reliance: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing within the three realms, not destroying the Dharma-nature: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing emptiness, still planting the various roots of virtue: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing signlessness, still liberating sentient beings: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing wishlessness, still manifesting the reception of a body: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing non-activation, still arousing every wholesome practice: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the six perfections of giving, ethical discipline, patience, diligent effort, meditation, and wisdom, fully knowing the minds and various mental factors of sentient beings: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the six higher knowledges of the divine eye, divine ear, knowing others' minds, recollecting past lives, spiritual power, and exhaustion of the outflows, not making the exhaustion of all outflows one's own endpoint: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the four immeasurables of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, not craving birth in the Brahmā world: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing meditation, liberations, and samādhis, not taking birth in accordance with the meditation attained: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the four establishments of mindfulness by contemplating body, feeling, mind, and dharmas, not forever abandoning body, feeling, mind, and dharmas: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the four right efforts—abandoning arisen evil, preventing unarisen evil from arising, arousing unarisen good, and increasing arisen good—not abandoning diligent effort of body and mind: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the four bases of spiritual power—aspiration, diligent effort, mind, and contemplation—attaining mastery in spiritual powers: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the five faculties of trust, diligent effort, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, distinguishing whether the capacities of individual sentient beings are sharp or dull: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the five powers of trust, diligent effort, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, still delighting in seeking the ten powers of a buddha: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the seven factors of awakening—mindfulness, investigation of dharmas, diligent effort, joy, pliancy, concentration, and equanimity—still discerning and knowing a buddha's wisdom: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the Noble Eightfold Path of right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration, still delighting in practicing the immeasurable Buddha-Way: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing calm and insight as the two dharmas supporting the path, not ultimately falling into quiescent cessation: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although practicing the non-arising and non-ceasing of all dharmas, still adorning one's body with the various marks and excellent characteristics: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although manifesting the dignified conduct of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, not abandoning the Buddha-Dharma: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although conforming to the mark of the ultimate purity of all dharmas, still manifesting for sentient beings forms suited to their needs: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although contemplating the buddha-lands as eternally quiescent and like space, still manifesting the various pure buddha-lands: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
- Although attaining the Buddha's Way, turning the Dharma wheel, and entering nirvāṇa, still not abandoning the bodhisattva path: this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.
Eight Thousand Sons of the Gods Arouse the Mind of Awakening
While these words were being spoken, eight thousand sons of the gods in the assembly led by Mañjuśrī all aroused the mind that seeks unsurpassed perfect awakening.
佛命文殊師利問疾，本來只是一句付囑；維摩詰卻先把室內所有物品和侍者都撤去，只留一張床，自己臥病其上。從這一刻起，病不再只是身體的一件事：來與去、見與不見、空與分別、身與心、我與法、慧與方便，都在這間空室裡被一一問起。
本品明說的一句，是「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」但經文並沒有停在大悲的讚歎。它接著追問：若病從大悲起，菩薩怎樣在病中不著我？怎樣觀空而不住空？怎樣悲愍眾生而不讓悲心夾帶愛見？又怎樣既調伏自己的心，仍不住在調伏之中？全品由問疾開始，最後落在三十二句菩薩行：每一句都不是離開世間去另找清淨，而是在所行之中不住於一邊。
為什麼文殊師利明知難答，仍然前往？
佛要文殊師利前往問疾，文殊師利先說維摩詰難以酬對。他所列的不只辯才：維摩詰深達實相，善說法要，知道一切菩薩法式，能入諸佛祕藏，能降伏眾魔，也已通達智慧方便。這一番話說明這場相見的分量，卻沒有成為推辭。文殊師利仍說要承佛聖旨前往。
會眾聽見兩位大士將要共談，八千菩薩、五百聲聞、百千天人都想同行。於是問疾從一項付囑，成為大眾共同隨行的一場法會。經文沒有讓文殊師利單獨進城；他帶著菩薩、弟子與天人，在恭敬圍繞中進入毘耶離。
這也使後來的空室更為醒目。來者眾多，室中卻沒有為眾人陳設座具；只有一床和一位示疾的居士。經文把眾人的期待帶到室門前，再把所有可見的陳設撤去，讓問答從『善來』開始。
空室不是沒有問題，而是所有問題由此展開
維摩詰知道文殊師利與大眾將來，便以神力空其室內，除去所有物品和侍者，只留下自己臥病的一床。文殊師利親見室空，維摩詰卻先不談室，也不談病，而說：「不來相而來，不見相而見。」
文殊師利順著這句話回答：已經來了，就不再來；已經去了，就不再去。來沒有可指認的來處，去沒有可指認的去處，所見也不能再被固定成一個可見之物。兩人並沒有否認文殊師利已經入室相見；他們是在已來、已見之中，不把來者、去者與所見執取為可再得之相。
文殊師利隨即把這一層問答暫放一旁，回到佛所付囑的病。他問病是否能忍、治療是否減輕、是否加重，也傳達佛殷勤無量的問候；再問病因、病久與病滅。這些問句一項不缺，既問身體當下所受，也問病從何起、何時才能盡。
因此，空室並不是把具體病苦抹去。維摩詰臥病一床，文殊師利也如實問病情與療治。來去無相和身病可問，同時出現在一場對話裡；本品後面所有『觀而不捨』的句式，已在這個相見中展開。
眾生的病從癡愛起，菩薩的病從大悲起
維摩詰先說自己的病從癡與有愛而生，接著立刻轉向一切眾生：因為眾生病，所以他病；若眾生病滅，他的病也滅。這不是把菩薩的病歸為自己的癡愛。經文接著說，菩薩為眾生而入生死，有生死便有病；眾生若能離病，菩薩便不再有病。
一子之譬把這層關係說得貼近。長者只有一個孩子，孩子生病，父母也病；孩子病癒，父母也癒。菩薩對一切眾生愛之如子，所以眾生病，他便病；眾生癒，他便癒。經文不是遠觀眾生之苦，再從旁生起憐憫，而是以父母隨子病苦，說明菩薩不把眾生之病留在自己之外。
所以維摩詰最後才回扣最初的問題：菩薩的病，以大悲而起。眾生之病的根是癡與有愛；菩薩隨眾生而病的根則是大悲。兩種病在經文中相連，來源卻沒有被混成一事。
這一句也限定了病滅的尺度。菩薩不是只等自己身體好轉便說病盡；維摩詰明說，若一切眾生病滅，他的病才滅。大悲既使他隨眾生而病，也使病的終點不離眾生之癒。
為什麼要在六十二見中求空？
問完病因，文殊師利才問室中為何空無侍者。維摩詰沒有先解釋家具去了哪裡，而說諸佛國土也全都是空。於是問答從眼前一室，推到佛土；又從佛土之空，追問以何為空、為何用空、空能否分別，以及空究竟到哪裡去求。
答案一層一層把可執取之處撤去：經問空當於何求，答當於六十二見中求；問見當於何求，答當於諸佛解脫中求；乃至以無分別空故空、空可分別耶、分別亦空。經文只逐問逐答推去，未另立理由。
接著，維摩詰並不叫人離開邪見，另到一個清淨地方求空。他說空應當在六十二見中求；六十二見又應當在諸佛解脫中求；諸佛解脫則應當在一切眾生心行中求。從邪見到解脫、從解脫到眾生心行，經文沒有另設一處與眾生現前心行無關的空。
侍者的答案與此相應。眾魔喜愛生死，菩薩在生死中卻不捨；外道喜愛種種見，菩薩在種種見中卻不動。因此魔與外道都被說成侍者。菩薩既不因生死而捨生死，也不因諸見而被諸見動搖；他所不捨與所不動的地方，正是眾生所在的地方。
病沒有形相，卻也不離眾生的四大
文殊師利再問病有什麼形相，維摩詰答病無形而不可見。問病與身相合還是與心相合，答是既非與身相合，因為身相離；也非與心相合，因為心如幻。
然而，無形不可見不等於病與身體全無關係。文殊師利進一步問，地、水、火、風四大之中，究竟是哪一大的病。維摩詰對每一大都用同一層答法：病不是地大，也不離地大；對水、火、風也是如此。
這裡的『非即』沒有變成『全離』。眾生之病從四大起，維摩詰因眾生有病而病。病不可被固定為四大中的一個實體，也沒有被移到四大與眾生之外。經文在同一問答中並記病無定相與眾生現受之病。
安慰病者，為什麼不能叫他厭離這個身？
文殊師利問，菩薩應怎樣慰喻有疾菩薩。維摩詰的回答不是一句『一切皆空』，而是九項成對而行的勸慰。
先說身無常，卻不說厭離於身；說身有苦，卻不說以涅槃為樂；說身無我，仍說教導眾生；說身空寂，也不說畢竟寂滅。無常、苦、無我、空寂都要如實說，然而每說一項，都不讓病者由此棄身、棄眾生或停在寂滅。
接著，說悔先前罪業，卻不說退入過去；由自己所受的病，憐愍其他病者；認識過去無數劫所受的苦，念念要利益一切眾生。病者不只回看自己的苦從何來，也把自己的病變成憐愍他病、饒益眾生的起點。
最後，憶念所修福德，顧念清淨生活，不生憂惱，常起精進；並自作醫王，療治眾病。慰喻的收束不是讓病者只求被照顧，而是令他歡喜，重新發起精進與治眾病之心。
這九項把兩種偏失都擋住：一面不掩飾無常、苦、無我與空寂；另一面也不把這些觀察變成厭身、樂滅、棄教化與棄眾生。慰病於是已經是菩薩行的練習：如實觀身，同時不捨所應作。
調心的第一步：找不到一個固定的受病者
有疾菩薩調伏其心，先要追看病從何來。經文說，此病從過去世妄想顛倒與種種煩惱而生，沒有一個實法可得，那麼誰是受病者？四大和合，假名為身；四大沒有主宰，身也沒有一個我。病又由著我而起，所以不應再著於我。
這一步不是否認有苦受。前文已殷勤問病，後文也說身若有苦，應念惡趣眾生。這裡所除的是在四大假合之身中安立一個主宰者，再把病牢牢歸給它。既知病本，便除我想與眾生想。
除我想後，經文令有疾菩薩起法想：這個身體只是眾法和合；生起時只是法生起，消滅時只是法消滅。諸法彼此不相知，生時不說『我生』，滅時也不說『我滅』。從一個固定的我，轉而如實看見眾法的起滅。
但法想不是最後住處。經文立刻說，法想本身也是顛倒，是大患，仍應離開。若把『只有法』變成新的執取，只是由我想換成法想，病並未究竟除去。
從離我、我所，到「空病亦空。」
怎樣離法想？經文由離我與我所說起。離我與我所，就是離開相對的兩法；離兩法，就是不念內外，使諸法行於平等。平等又以我與涅槃來說：我與涅槃都空，只因名字而立，沒有決定不變的自性。
這一路並不是先肯定一個實我，再把它與一個實有涅槃拉成相等；經文已先除我想，又說兩者只依名字而空。平等之中沒有剩下一個可牢牢把持的我，也沒有剩下一個可據為己有的涅槃。
即使走到這裡，仍可能留下對空的執取。所以經文說沒有其他病，只剩空病；隨即又說「空病亦空。」經文只此二句相接，未另說其所以然。
於是有疾菩薩「以無所受而受諸受」。不執取所受，並不妨礙他仍然領受種種受。佛法尚未具足，他也不消滅感受而求取證入。病中調心不是把感受切斷，也不是藉空提早結束所應完成的佛法。
只除病而不除法，如何從自己的苦走向眾生？
如果身體受苦，有疾菩薩就要憶念惡趣眾生，生起大悲。自己既求調伏，也要調伏一切眾生。經文在這裡給出一條明白的界線：「但除其病，而不除法」。所要斷的是病本，不是把一切法一併取消。
病本是什麼？是攀緣。攀緣什麼？攀緣三界。如何斷攀緣？由無所得。什麼是無所得？離開內見與外見。這串問答把病根追到內外二見；只要仍念著內外，攀緣就仍有落處。離二見，才說無所得；無所得，攀緣才斷。
這就是有疾菩薩調伏其心，也是為斷老病死苦的菩薩菩提。若不這樣調伏，自己的修治便沒有智慧與利益。經文以戰勝怨敵才稱勇士作譬：不只處理自己的病，而能兼除老病死，才是菩薩。
所以，由己苦念眾苦並不是在觀空之後再加上一項善行。前面說無所受而受諸受，這裡便由身苦念惡趣；前面說空病亦空，這裡便只除病而不除法。調心與度生沒有分成先完成自己、以後才顧他人的兩段路。
大悲既然是病根，為什麼還要捨離愛見大悲？
維摩詰先說菩薩病以大悲起，後面又說若起愛見大悲，便應捨離。前一句說菩薩隨眾生而病，後一句則明記愛見大悲使菩薩在生死中生疲厭。
有疾菩薩先觀自己的病非真非有，也觀眾生病非真非有。作這種觀察時，若起愛見大悲，經文只說應當捨離；所應斷的是客塵煩惱，所應生起的仍是大悲。經文沒有因捨愛見而捨大悲，正如前文只除病而不除法。
離開愛見，菩薩在生死中便不疲厭；無論生在何處，也不被愛見遮覆。自己的所生不被縛，才有能力為眾生說法解縛。佛所說的準則非常清楚：自己有縛而能解他縛，沒有這種可能；自己無縛而能解他縛，才有這種可能。
愛見悲使菩薩於生死有疲厭；若能離此，便沒有疲厭，在在所生也不被愛見覆蔽。自己的所生無縛，才能為眾生說法解縛。
慧若沒有方便，為什麼也會成縛？
經文先以禪定為例：貪著禪味，是菩薩的縛；以方便而受生，是菩薩的解。問題不在禪定本身，而在貪著其味，因而停住其中。方便則使菩薩受生而不被所生繫縛。
接著有兩雙縛解。第一雙是慧與方便：沒有方便的慧是縛，有方便的慧是解。若以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生，又只在空、無相、無作中調伏自己，便是無方便慧縛；若不以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生，在空、無相、無作中調伏自己而不疲厭，便是有方便慧解。
第二雙是方便與慧：沒有慧的方便是縛，有慧的方便是解。若仍住貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等煩惱而植眾德本，便是無慧方便縛；若離開這些煩惱而植眾德本，並迴向無上正等正覺，便是有慧方便解。
四種說法把兩面都守住。觀空、無相、無作不能夾帶愛見，也不能使人疲厭於成就眾生；植眾德本不能安住在貪欲、瞋恚、邪見，也不能缺少迴向無上菩提。慧不能失去方便，方便也不能離開慧。
經文隨後再用身病說兩遍慧方便。觀身無常、苦、空、非我，是慧；身雖有疾，常在生死饒益一切而不厭倦，是方便。觀身不離病、病不離身，身病非新非故，是慧；身雖有疾而不求永滅，是方便。慧如實觀身病，方便使這一觀察不以永滅為終點。
為什麼調伏了心，還不能住在調伏中？
有疾菩薩應如前調伏其心，卻不能住在調伏，也不能住在不調伏。住不調伏是愚人法；住調伏則是聲聞法。菩薩不住兩邊，離此二法，才是菩薩行。
三十二句菩薩行，都從這個不住展開。第一句先離調伏與不調伏；第二句把生死與涅槃合在一處：在生死不為污染，住涅槃又不永滅。後面或說非凡夫亦非賢聖，非垢亦非淨；或說超過魔行仍示現降魔，求一切智而不非時求，觀諸法不生而不入正位，觀十二緣起仍入諸邪見。
再往下，攝受眾生而不愛著，樂遠離而不依身心盡，行三界而不壞法性。行空仍植眾德本，行無相仍度眾生，行無作仍現受身，行無起仍起一切善行。每一句都保留所觀之法，又保留對眾生所作之行。
六波羅蜜、六通、四無量心與禪定解脫三昧也沒有被略過。菩薩行六度而遍知眾生心與心所；行六通而不以盡漏自止；行四無量心而不貪生梵世；行禪定解脫三昧而不隨禪受生。所修逐項列出，經文也逐項寫明不住之處。
四念處、四正勤、四如意足、五根、五力、七覺分、八聖道依次列出。菩薩修四念處而不永離身受心法，修四正勤而不捨身心精進，修四如意足而得自在神通，修五根而知眾生根機利鈍，修五力而樂求佛十力，修七覺分而分別佛智，修八聖道而樂行無量佛道。每一組助道法都沒有被捨棄，也沒有變成離眾生的終站。
最後幾句把止觀、無生滅、二乘威儀、清淨相、佛土與成佛事業一一納入。行止觀助道而不畢竟墮寂滅；行諸法不生不滅而以相好莊嚴其身；現聲聞、辟支佛威儀而不捨佛法；隨諸法究竟淨相而隨應現身；觀佛土永寂如空而現種種清淨佛土；乃至得佛道、轉法輪、入涅槃，仍不捨菩薩之道。
這三十二句不是把每一組相對語混成一團，而是在每一次修行中明白指出：菩薩行此法，卻不住其一邊；觀其空寂，仍不捨饒益；有所成就，也不棄所行。全品由一張病床開始，到這裡把不捨眾生展開為完整的行路。
八千天子發心，並不是病已經被說完
維摩詰說這些話時，文殊師利所帶大眾之中，有八千天子發起無上正等正覺心。經文用『說是語時』記下同時發生的法益，沒有把它另寫成一條推論，也沒有說空室中的病已經痊癒。
本品停在發心，不停在病癒。開頭所說的病滅尺度仍然在：一切眾生病滅，菩薩病才滅。八千天子此時發心，問疾對話便以這一法益收束。
空室仍空，一床仍在；但問疾已經展開為調心，調心又展開為三十二句菩薩行。病若無形，便不可執取；病若由大悲起，便不可只為自己求盡。菩薩所行，就在這兩面同時不失。
二鏡並照
本品一面直說眾生病故菩薩病，一面又層層除我想、法想與空病；一面說病由大悲起，一面又要求捨離愛見大悲。這些交錯之處，什門與慈恩各依所承漢本展開。以下只並錄兩路如何照見同一問疾法會，不用一鏡裁斷另一鏡。
什門之鏡：由悲疾入三重遣病
羅什先把空室看作發起宗旨的空相，也說是順應文殊師利樂於虛靜；道生則從空室顯出虛納之懷，又說去除所有是密標宗致；僧肇把去侍、置床分開，視為後文問答與示疾的起點。三家並不只把空室讀成『什麼都沒有』，而各自說明為何空室能生起下文。
至眾生病與菩薩病，僧肇分出癡愛與大悲兩根：群生以癡愛為病本，菩薩以大悲為病源；道生則說示疾之意在拔眾生無始癡愛，又以眾生病盡說菩薩病滅。什、肇、生在此都沒有把菩薩示疾歸回自身癡愛，也沒有把大悲從眾生之病抽離。
對空室七問，羅什分空慧與法空，僧肇由智與法互明，道生則說空相也空。三家在『以空空』『無分別空』『分別亦空』各有不同措辭；到六十二見與解脫，也都沿經中次第說邪正、見與解脫不應被執取成兩個固定自性。
調心時，羅什把進程說成先以法遣我、再以空遣法；僧肇說法想對治我想雖如藥，停住法想仍是病；道生也明言起法想不是教人著法。到空病亦空，羅什說未遣空則空成累，僧肇說由法除我、以空除法、再空於空，道生則把病安在著空而不安在空理。三家署名各異，不能把其中一說統題為僧肇。
於無所受而受諸受，羅什以苦、樂、捨三受說能解受無受而為眾生受生；道生說觀受皆無而仍有入受為化之情；僧肇則說不染有、不染空，所以能與群生同受諸受。到愛見大悲，羅什著眼於見有眾生而生愛著，道生著眼於觀中仍有愛念與所見，僧肇則說此悲雖善而雜愛見便未免於累。三路都把捨愛見與不捨大悲分開。
慈恩之鏡：由二心調伏明妙慧善巧
窺基依玄奘本先把全段分為調伏凡夫心、調伏二乘心、雙調二心。於前一段，他以無分別智與大悲相資：觀空用以離執，起悲用以不住空；又以我執、法執與兩種障說明為何除我想後仍須除法想。這是依無垢稱、妙吉祥詞系所作科釋，不反寫成維摩詰、文殊師利的經句。
對法生法滅與諸法不相知，窺基先總觀身由諸法和合、念念生滅，再別觀諸法相續而各無知；到法想大患，則分破我執與破法執。對我與涅槃平等，他又並陳空理義與應理義：一路由勝義皆空說平等，一路由所執之我與所執之涅槃皆無自性說平等。兩種讀法在疏中並列，本相不替它們決擇。
在空病亦空處，窺基同樣保留兩路：空理義說執有既病、執空也病，勝義中空病畢竟空；應理義則說所執空境既不真，能執空的心也非實。他把無所受而受諸受分為能受與所受，說離妄所受卻仍受諸受，以此同時離有病與空病。
進入大悲與縛解，窺基把不以愛見起悲連到不疲厭生死，再分味著禪定為縛、巧方便攝受生有而不貪著為解。他所說的妙慧與善巧不是兩條分離的路：只有妙慧而無善巧，不能成就有情、莊嚴佛土；只有作為而住煩惱，也不是有慧方便。觀身疾無常等屬妙慧，有疾仍耐於化生屬善巧，兩者相資才顯菩薩所行。
至品末，窺基依玄奘本計三十七句，分為不同凡夫二乘之行與得勝不捨劣之行；羅什本則以三十二次『是菩薩行』展開。句數之別來自所依漢本，不相增減。什門著重層層遣我、法、空而不失大悲，慈恩著重調伏二心、妙慧善巧而行不住道；兩鏡都把問疾承衍到菩薩不捨眾生之行，也各自保留不可混本的語彙與科次。
The Buddha's instruction that Mañjuśrī inquire about the illness is originally only a single charge, yet Vimalakīrti first removes every object and every attendant from the room, leaves only one bed, and lies upon it in illness. From that moment, illness is no longer merely a matter of the body: coming and going, seeing and not seeing, emptiness and discrimination, body and mind, self and dharmas, wisdom and skillful means are all raised one by one within this empty room.
One sentence stated explicitly in this chapter is 「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.” But the sūtra does not stop at praising great compassion. It goes on to ask: If illness arises from great compassion, how does a bodhisattva avoid attachment to self while ill? How does he contemplate emptiness without abiding in emptiness? How does he have compassion for sentient beings without letting his compassion carry affectionate views? And after disciplining his own mind, how does he still not abide in discipline? The entire chapter begins with an inquiry about illness and finally comes to the thirty-two statements of bodhisattva conduct. None of them seeks purity somewhere apart from the world; each acts within what is practiced without abiding on one side.
Why Does Mañjuśrī Go Even Though He Knows Vimalakīrti Is Difficult to Answer?
When the Buddha tells Mañjuśrī to inquire about the illness, Mañjuśrī first says that Vimalakīrti is difficult to answer. What he lists is not merely eloquence: Vimalakīrti has profoundly comprehended the true mark, skillfully teaches the essentials of the Dharma, knows all the rules of bodhisattva practice, can enter the secret treasuries of the buddhas, can subdue the many Māras, and has mastered wisdom and skillful means. These words show the gravity of the encounter, yet they do not become an excuse. Mañjuśrī still says that he will accept the Buddha's sacred command and go.
When the assembly hears that the two great beings will speak together, eight thousand bodhisattvas, five hundred śrāvakas, and a hundred thousand heavenly beings all wish to accompany them. Thus an individual charge to inquire about illness becomes a Dharma assembly in which the multitude travels together. The sūtra does not have Mañjuśrī enter the city alone. With bodhisattvas, disciples, and heavenly beings surrounding him in reverence, he enters Vaiśālī.
This makes the empty room that follows all the more conspicuous. Many have come, yet the room contains no seats arranged for the multitude; there is only one bed and one sick layman. The sūtra brings the assembly's expectations to the doorway, then removes every visible furnishing and lets the dialogue begin with “welcome.”
The Empty Room Is Not Without Questions; It Is Where Every Question Begins
Vimalakīrti knows that Mañjuśrī and the assembly are coming, so through spiritual power he empties the room, removes every object and attendant, and leaves only the one bed upon which he lies ill. Mañjuśrī sees the room empty with his own eyes, yet Vimalakīrti begins by speaking neither of the room nor of the illness. He says, 「不來相而來，不見相而見。」 — “You come with no mark of coming and see with no mark of seeing.”
Mañjuśrī follows this statement in his reply: one who has already come does not come again; one who has already gone does not go again. Coming has no identifiable place from which it comes, going has no identifiable place to which it goes, and what is seen cannot again be fixed as some visible object. The two do not deny that Mañjuśrī has entered the room and that they have met. Within the fact of having come and having seen, they refrain from grasping the one who comes, the one who goes, and what is seen as marks that can be obtained again.
Mañjuśrī then sets this exchange aside for the moment and returns to the illness about which the Buddha charged him to ask. He asks whether the illness is bearable, whether treatment has brought relief, and whether it has worsened. He also conveys the Buddha's immeasurable and earnest greetings, then asks about the illness's cause, its duration, and its removal. Not one of these questions is omitted. He asks both about what the body presently undergoes and about where the illness arose and when it can end.
The empty room therefore does not erase concrete bodily suffering. Vimalakīrti lies sick upon one bed, and Mañjuśrī truthfully asks about his condition and treatment. Signless coming and going and bodily illness open to inquiry appear together in the same conversation. Every later formulation in this chapter of “contemplating without abandoning” has already begun within this meeting.
The Illness of Sentient Beings Arises from Delusion and Craving, While the Bodhisattva's Illness Arises from Great Compassion
Vimalakīrti first says that his illness arises from delusion and craving for existence, then immediately turns to all sentient beings: because sentient beings are ill, he is ill; if the illnesses of sentient beings end, his illness also ends. This does not attribute the bodhisattva's illness to his own delusion and craving. The sūtra goes on to say that a bodhisattva enters saṃsāra for the sake of sentient beings, and where there is saṃsāra there is illness; if sentient beings can leave illness behind, the bodhisattva will no longer be ill.
The simile of the only child brings this relation close. An elder has only one child. When the child falls ill, the parents fall ill; when the child recovers, the parents recover. A bodhisattva cherishes all sentient beings as his child, so when sentient beings are ill, he is ill, and when they recover, he recovers. The sūtra does not describe someone observing the suffering of sentient beings from afar and then feeling compassion from the sidelines. Through parents suffering with their child, it shows that the bodhisattva does not leave the illness of sentient beings outside himself.
Only then does Vimalakīrti return to the initial question: the bodhisattva's illness arises through great compassion. The root of sentient beings' illness is delusion and craving for existence; the root of the bodhisattva's illness in company with sentient beings is great compassion. The sūtra connects the two illnesses without merging their sources into one matter.
This sentence also determines the scale on which the illness ends. The bodhisattva does not wait merely for his own body to recover and then declare the illness finished. Vimalakīrti clearly says that his illness ends only when the illnesses of all sentient beings end. Great compassion causes him to be ill with sentient beings, and it also keeps the end of his illness inseparable from their recovery.
Why Should Emptiness Be Sought within the Sixty-Two Views?
Only after asking about the cause of illness does Mañjuśrī ask why the room is empty and has no attendants. Vimalakīrti does not begin by explaining where the furniture went. He says that all buddha-lands are likewise entirely empty. The questions therefore move from the room before their eyes to buddha-lands, then from the emptiness of buddha-lands to what makes them empty, why emptiness is used, whether emptiness can be discriminated, and where emptiness is finally to be sought.
The answers remove one place of grasping after another. The sūtra asks where emptiness is to be sought and answers that it is to be sought within the sixty-two views; it asks where the views are to be sought and answers that they are to be sought within the liberation of the buddhas. It also says that emptiness is empty because it is without discrimination, asks whether emptiness can be discriminated, and answers that discrimination itself is empty. The sūtra proceeds only through question and answer and establishes no additional reason.
Vimalakīrti does not then tell people to leave wrong views and seek emptiness somewhere pure and separate. He says that emptiness should be sought in the sixty-two views, that the sixty-two views should be sought in the liberation of the buddhas, and that the liberation of the buddhas should be sought in all the activities of sentient beings' minds. From wrong views to liberation and from liberation to the activities of sentient beings' minds, the sūtra establishes no emptiness in some other place unrelated to their present mental activity.
The answer concerning the attendants corresponds to this. The many Māras delight in saṃsāra, yet the bodhisattva does not abandon saṃsāra. Followers of other paths delight in the various views, yet the bodhisattva remains unmoved among those views. Māras and followers of other paths are therefore called attendants. The bodhisattva neither abandons saṃsāra because it is saṃsāra nor is moved by views because they are views. The place he neither abandons nor is shaken within is precisely the place where sentient beings are.
The Illness Has No Form, Yet It Is Not Apart from the Four Elements of Sentient Beings
Mañjuśrī next asks what form the illness has, and Vimalakīrti answers that it has no form and cannot be seen. Asked whether the illness is conjoined with body or mind, he says that it is not conjoined with the body because the mark of body is separate, and not conjoined with the mind because the mind is like an illusion.
Yet having no visible form does not mean that illness is wholly unrelated to the body. Mañjuśrī presses further: among the four elements of earth, water, fire, and wind, which one is ill? Vimalakīrti gives the same level of answer for each: the illness is not the earth element, yet neither is it apart from the earth element; the same applies to water, fire, and wind.
Here “not identical with” does not become “entirely separate from.” The illnesses of sentient beings arise from the four elements, and Vimalakīrti is ill because sentient beings are ill. Illness cannot be fixed as an entity within any one of the four elements, nor has it been moved somewhere outside the four elements and sentient beings. Within one exchange, the sūtra records both that illness has no fixed mark and that sentient beings presently undergo illness.
When Comforting the Sick, Why Must One Not Tell Them to Detest This Body?
Mañjuśrī asks how a bodhisattva should comfort a sick bodhisattva. Vimalakīrti's answer is not the single sentence “everything is empty,” but nine counsels that proceed in pairs.
First explain that the body is impermanent, but do not speak of detesting and leaving the body. Explain that the body is suffering, but do not speak of taking nirvāṇa as delight. Explain that the body is without self, while still speaking of teaching sentient beings. Explain that the body is empty and quiescent, without speaking of ultimate quiescent cessation. Impermanence, suffering, absence of self, and empty quiescence must all be taught truthfully, yet in teaching each one, the sick person is not allowed to abandon the body, abandon sentient beings, or stop in cessation.
Next, speak of repenting of former wrongdoings but not of entering into the past; through one's own illness, have compassion for others who are ill; know the suffering undergone over countless eons in the past and think at every moment of benefiting all sentient beings. The sick person not only looks back to see where his own suffering came from; he also makes his illness the point from which compassion for the illnesses of others and benefit for sentient beings begin.
Finally, recollect the merit cultivated, attend to a pure way of life, give rise to neither sorrow nor distress, and constantly arouse diligent effort; then make oneself a king of physicians who cures the many illnesses. The counsel does not end by having the sick person merely seek care. It causes him to rejoice and renew both diligent effort and the resolve to cure the many illnesses.
These nine counsels block two deviations at once. On one side, they do not conceal impermanence, suffering, absence of self, or empty quiescence. On the other, they do not turn these contemplations into rejection of the body, delight in cessation, abandonment of teaching, or abandonment of sentient beings. Comforting the sick is therefore already practice in bodhisattva conduct: contemplate the body as it truly is while not abandoning what should be done.
The First Step in Disciplining the Mind: No Fixed Recipient of Illness Can Be Found
To discipline his mind, a sick bodhisattva must first trace where the illness came from. The sūtra says that the illness arises from false discrimination, inversion, and the various afflictions of past lives. Since no real dharma exists that can be obtained, who is the recipient of the illness? The four elements come together and are provisionally called the body; there is no ruler among them, and the body has no self. The illness further arises from attachment to self, so one should no longer be attached to self.
This step does not deny that suffering is felt. Earlier, the illness was earnestly inquired about; later, the sūtra says that if the body suffers, one should recollect sentient beings in the evil destinies. What is removed here is the establishment of a ruler within the body provisionally composed of the four elements and then the fastening of illness securely upon it. Once the root of illness is known, the conceptions of self and sentient being are removed.
After the conception of self is removed, the sūtra has the sick bodhisattva give rise to a conception of dharmas: this body is only a composite of many dharmas; when it arises, only dharmas arise, and when it ceases, only dharmas cease. The dharmas do not know one another. When they arise, they do not say, “I arise,” and when they cease, they do not say, “I cease.” From a fixed self, the contemplation turns to seeing the arising and ceasing of dharmas as they truly are.
But the conception of dharmas is not the final place of abiding. The sūtra immediately says that the conception of dharmas is itself inverted and a grave affliction, and must still be left behind. If “there are only dharmas” becomes a new attachment, the conception of self has merely been exchanged for the conception of dharmas, and the illness has not been ultimately removed.
From Leaving Self and What Belongs to Self to 「空病亦空。」 — “The Illness of Emptiness Is Also Empty”
How does one leave the conception of dharmas? The sūtra begins from leaving self and what belongs to self. To leave self and what belongs to self is to leave the two relative dharmas; to leave those two is not to think in terms of inner and outer and to let all dharmas proceed in equality. Equality is then explained through self and nirvāṇa: both are empty, are established only through names, and have no fixed and unchanging own-nature.
This course does not first affirm a real self and then pull it into equality with a real nirvāṇa. The sūtra has already removed the conception of self and then says that both are empty only by virtue of names. Within equality, no self remains to be tightly held, and no nirvāṇa remains that can be appropriated as one's possession.
Even after reaching this point, attachment to emptiness may remain. The sūtra therefore says that there is no other illness and only the illness of emptiness remains; it immediately adds 「空病亦空。」 — “The illness of emptiness is also empty.” The sūtra places only these two sentences together and gives no further reason.
The sick bodhisattva therefore 「以無所受而受諸受」 — “undergoes the various feelings while there is nothing received.” Not grasping what is received does not prevent him from still undergoing the various feelings. Before the Buddha-Dharma is fulfilled, he does not extinguish feeling in order to seek realization. Disciplining the mind during illness neither cuts feeling off nor uses emptiness to end prematurely the Buddha-Dharma that remains to be completed.
Removing Only the Illness and Not the Dharmas: How Does One Move from One's Own Suffering toward Sentient Beings?
If the body suffers, the sick bodhisattva should recollect sentient beings in the evil destinies and give rise to great compassion. Since he seeks to discipline himself, he should also discipline all sentient beings. Here the sūtra draws a clear boundary: 「但除其病，而不除法」 — “Remove only the illness, and do not remove the dharmas.” What must be cut off is the root of illness, not all dharmas together.
What is the root of illness? Engagement with objects. What are its objects? The three realms. How is engagement cut off? Through non-attainment. What is non-attainment? Leaving the inner and outer views. This chain of questions traces the root of illness to the two views of inner and outer. As long as inner and outer are still held in thought, engagement retains a place to land. Only after leaving the two views is there non-attainment; only through non-attainment is engagement cut off.
This is how the sick bodhisattva disciplines his mind, and it is the bodhisattva's awakening that cuts off the suffering of aging, illness, and death. Without this discipline, his self-cultivation has neither wisdom nor benefit. The sūtra uses the simile that only one who defeats an enemy is called a warrior: only one who can remove aging, illness, and death not merely for himself but for sentient beings as well is a bodhisattva.
Thus recollecting the suffering of others from one's own suffering is not an additional wholesome deed appended after the contemplation of emptiness. Earlier, the sūtra spoke of undergoing the various feelings while there is nothing received; here bodily suffering leads to recollecting the evil destinies. Earlier, it said that the illness of emptiness is also empty; here it removes only illness and not dharmas. Disciplining the mind and liberating sentient beings are not divided into two roads, first completing oneself and only later attending to others.
Since Great Compassion Is the Root of Illness, Why Must Great Compassion Entangled with Affectionate Views Still Be Abandoned?
Vimalakīrti first says that the bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion, then later says that if great compassion entangled with affectionate views arises, it should be abandoned. The first statement describes the bodhisattva falling ill with sentient beings; the second explicitly says that great compassion entangled with affectionate views makes the bodhisattva weary of saṃsāra.
The sick bodhisattva first contemplates that his own illness is neither real nor existent, and likewise contemplates that the illnesses of sentient beings are neither real nor existent. If great compassion entangled with affectionate views arises while he makes this contemplation, the sūtra says only that it should be abandoned. What should be cut off are the afflictions of adventitious dust; what should still be aroused is great compassion. The sūtra does not abandon great compassion when abandoning affectionate views, just as earlier it removed only illness and did not remove dharmas.
Leaving affectionate views behind, the bodhisattva is not weary within saṃsāra. Wherever he is born, he is not covered by affectionate views. Only when his own birth is not bound does he have the capacity to teach the Dharma to sentient beings and release their bonds. The rule spoken by the Buddha is perfectly clear: for one who is bound to release the bonds of others is impossible; for one who is unbound to release the bonds of others is possible.
Compassion entangled with affectionate views makes the bodhisattva weary of saṃsāra. If he can leave it behind, there is no weariness, and wherever he is born, he is not covered by affectionate views. Only when his own birth is unbound can he teach the Dharma to sentient beings and release their bonds.
Why Does Wisdom without Skillful Means Also Become Bondage?
The sūtra first uses meditation as an example: craving the flavor of meditation is a bodhisattva's bondage; taking birth through skillful means is a bodhisattva's liberation. The problem is not meditation itself but craving its flavor and therefore stopping within it. Skillful means lets the bodhisattva take birth without being bound by that birth.
Two pairs of bondage and liberation follow. The first pair is wisdom and skillful means: wisdom without skillful means is bondage; wisdom with skillful means is liberation. Adorning buddha-lands and bringing sentient beings to maturity with a mind of craving and attachment to views, while merely disciplining oneself within emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, is the bondage of wisdom without skillful means. Not using a mind of craving and attachment to views to adorn buddha-lands and bring sentient beings to maturity, and disciplining oneself within emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness without becoming weary, is the liberation of wisdom with skillful means.
The second pair is skillful means and wisdom: skillful means without wisdom is bondage; skillful means with wisdom is liberation. Planting the various roots of virtue while still abiding in such afflictions as desire, anger, and wrong views is the bondage of skillful means without wisdom. Leaving those afflictions behind, planting the various roots of virtue, and dedicating them to unsurpassed perfect awakening is the liberation of skillful means with wisdom.
The four formulations preserve both sides. Contemplating emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness cannot carry affectionate views and cannot make one weary of bringing sentient beings to maturity. Planting the various roots of virtue cannot abide in desire, anger, and wrong views or lack dedication to unsurpassed awakening. Wisdom cannot lose skillful means, and skillful means cannot be separated from wisdom.
The sūtra then uses the sick body to state wisdom and skillful means twice more. Contemplating the body as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self is wisdom; while ill, remaining in saṃsāra to benefit all without weariness is skillful means. Contemplating that body is not apart from illness, illness is not apart from body, and body and illness are neither new nor old is wisdom; while ill, not seeking eternal cessation is skillful means. Wisdom contemplates body and illness as they truly are, while skillful means prevents that contemplation from taking eternal cessation as its endpoint.
After the Mind Has Been Disciplined, Why Can One Still Not Abide in Discipline?
A sick bodhisattva should discipline his mind as described above, yet he cannot abide either in discipline or in non-discipline. Abiding in non-discipline is the practice of fools; abiding in discipline is the practice of śrāvakas. The bodhisattva abides on neither side. Only by leaving these two dharmas does he enter bodhisattva conduct.
The thirty-two statements of bodhisattva conduct all unfold from this non-abiding. The first leaves discipline and non-discipline; the second brings saṃsāra and nirvāṇa into one statement: remaining in saṃsāra without being defiled and abiding in nirvāṇa without entering eternal cessation. Later statements speak of being neither an ordinary person nor a sage, neither defiled nor pure; transcending the conduct of Māra while still manifesting the subjugation of Māra; seeking omniscience without seeking it at an untimely moment; contemplating that dharmas do not arise without entering a fixed right position; and contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination while still entering among the various wrong views.
The sequence continues: gathering in sentient beings without attachment, delighting in seclusion without relying on the extinction of body and mind, and practicing within the three realms without destroying the Dharma-nature. One practices emptiness while still planting the roots of virtue, signlessness while still liberating sentient beings, wishlessness while still manifesting reception of a body, and non-activation while still arousing all wholesome practices. Each statement preserves the dharma contemplated and the action undertaken for sentient beings.
The six perfections, six higher knowledges, four immeasurables, and meditations, liberations, and samādhis are likewise not omitted. The bodhisattva practices the six perfections while fully knowing sentient beings' minds and mental factors; practices the six higher knowledges without stopping at the exhaustion of the outflows; practices the four immeasurables without craving birth in the Brahmā world; and practices meditation, liberations, and samādhis without taking birth in accordance with meditation. Each cultivation is listed, and the sūtra also states for each where the bodhisattva does not abide.
The four establishments of mindfulness, four right efforts, four bases of spiritual power, five faculties, five powers, seven factors of awakening, and Noble Eightfold Path are listed in sequence. The bodhisattva practices the four establishments of mindfulness without forever leaving body, feeling, mind, and dharmas; practices the four right efforts without abandoning bodily and mental diligent effort; practices the four bases of spiritual power and attains mastery in spiritual powers; practices the five faculties and knows whether sentient beings' capacities are sharp or dull; practices the five powers and delights in seeking the ten powers of a buddha; practices the seven factors of awakening and discerns a buddha's wisdom; and practices the Noble Eightfold Path while delighting in the immeasurable Buddha-Way. None of these groups of factors supporting the path is abandoned, and none becomes an endpoint separated from sentient beings.
The final statements include calm and insight, non-arising and non-ceasing, the dignified conduct of the two vehicles, the mark of purity, buddha-lands, and the work of a buddha. One practices calm and insight as supports for the path without ultimately falling into quiescent cessation; practices the non-arising and non-ceasing of dharmas while adorning the body with the marks and excellent characteristics; manifests the dignified conduct of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas without abandoning the Buddha-Dharma; accords with the ultimate pure mark of dharmas while manifesting bodies according to beings' needs; contemplates buddha-lands as eternally quiescent like space while manifesting various pure buddha-lands; and even attains the Buddha's Way, turns the Dharma wheel, and enters nirvāṇa without abandoning the bodhisattva path.
These thirty-two statements do not blend every pair of relative expressions into one mass. In every practice they make a single point clear: the bodhisattva practices this dharma without abiding on one side, contemplates its empty quiescence without abandoning benefit, and does not abandon what is practiced even after attaining something. The chapter begins from a single sickbed and here unfolds the non-abandonment of sentient beings into a complete path of practice.
The Arousal of Awakening by Eight Thousand Sons of the Gods Does Not Mean That the Illness Has Been Completely Explained
As Vimalakīrti speaks these words, eight thousand sons of the gods in Mañjuśrī's assembly arouse the mind of unsurpassed perfect awakening. The sūtra uses “while these words were being spoken” to record the benefit of the Dharma occurring at that time. It does not turn the event into a separate inference or say that the illness in the empty room has been cured.
The chapter stops at the arousal of awakening, not at recovery from illness. The measure for the illness's end stated at the beginning still stands: only when the illnesses of all sentient beings end does the bodhisattva's illness end. At this moment, the eight thousand sons of the gods arouse the mind of awakening, and the inquiry about illness concludes with this benefit of the Dharma.
The room remains empty, and the one bed remains in place. Yet the inquiry about illness has unfolded into discipline of mind, and discipline of mind has unfolded into the thirty-two statements of bodhisattva conduct. If illness has no form, it cannot be grasped; if illness arises from great compassion, it cannot be brought to an end solely for oneself. Bodhisattva conduct lies in not losing either of these two sides.
Two Mirrors Shining Side by Side
On one side, this chapter directly says that because sentient beings are ill, the bodhisattva is ill; on the other, it removes in sequence the conception of self, the conception of dharmas, and the illness of emptiness. On one side, it says that illness arises from great compassion; on the other, it requires great compassion entangled with affectionate views to be abandoned. At these interwoven points, the Kumārajīva line and the Ci'en line each develop an interpretation according to the Chinese recension they transmit. What follows records only how the two paths illuminate the same Dharma assembly of inquiry about illness. Neither mirror is used to judge the other.
The Kumārajīva-Line Mirror: Entering through Compassionate Illness into the Threefold Dispelling of Illness
Kumārajīva first sees the empty room as an empty mark that arouses the chapter's cardinal purport, and also says that it responds to Mañjuśrī's delight in emptiness and quiescence. Daosheng sees in the empty room a mind that can receive what is empty and says that removing everything secretly marks the cardinal purport. Sengzhao treats the removal of the attendants and the placing of the bed separately, reading them as the starting points for the later dialogue and the manifested illness. None of the three reads the empty room merely as “there is nothing.” Each explains why the empty room can give rise to what follows.
Regarding the illnesses of sentient beings and of the bodhisattva, Sengzhao distinguishes two roots, delusion and craving on one side and great compassion on the other: the illness of the multitude is rooted in delusion and craving, while the bodhisattva's illness has great compassion as its source. Daosheng says that the purpose of manifesting illness is to draw sentient beings out of beginningless delusion and craving, and explains the bodhisattva's recovery through the ending of sentient beings' illnesses. Kumārajīva, Sengzhao, and Daosheng do not attribute the bodhisattva's manifested illness to his own delusion and craving or detach great compassion from the illness of sentient beings.
On the seven questions of the empty room, Kumārajīva distinguishes the wisdom of emptiness from the emptiness of dharmas, Sengzhao elucidates wisdom and dharmas through one another, and Daosheng says that the mark of emptiness is itself empty. The three use different language for “empty by emptiness,” “emptiness without discrimination,” and “discrimination is also empty.” When they reach the sixty-two views and liberation, they all follow the sequence of the sūtra in saying that wrong and right, views and liberation, should not be grasped as two fixed own-natures.
In disciplining the mind, Kumārajīva describes the process as first using dharmas to dispel self and then using emptiness to dispel dharmas. Sengzhao says that although the conception of dharmas serves as medicine in counteracting the conception of self, abiding in it remains an illness. Daosheng likewise explicitly says that arousing a conception of dharmas does not teach people to become attached to dharmas. When the illness of emptiness is also empty, Kumārajīva says that if emptiness has not been dispelled, emptiness becomes a burden; Sengzhao speaks of removing self through dharmas, removing dharmas through emptiness, and then emptying emptiness; Daosheng locates the illness in attachment to emptiness, not in the principle of emptiness. Each statement bears a different attribution, and no one interpretation can be given the general heading “Sengzhao.”
Regarding undergoing the various feelings while there is nothing received, Kumārajīva uses the three feelings of suffering, pleasure, and neither suffering nor pleasure to explain understanding that feelings are not received while taking birth for sentient beings. Daosheng says that one contemplates all feelings as absent while still retaining the intent to enter feeling for the sake of transformation. Sengzhao says that by being stained neither by existence nor by emptiness, one can undergo the various feelings together with the multitude. Concerning great compassion entangled with affectionate views, Kumārajīva focuses on attachment arising from seeing sentient beings as existent, Daosheng on affectionate thoughts and perceived sentient beings remaining within contemplation, and Sengzhao on the fact that although this compassion is wholesome, when mixed with affectionate views it does not escape entanglement. All three paths keep abandoning affectionate views separate from abandoning great compassion.
The Ci'en Mirror: Clarifying Wondrous Wisdom and Skillful Means through Disciplining the Two Minds
Following Xuanzang's recension, Kuiji first divides the entire passage into disciplining the mind of ordinary people, disciplining the mind of the two vehicles, and jointly disciplining both minds. In the first part, he has non-discriminating wisdom and great compassion support one another: contemplating emptiness leaves attachment behind, while arousing compassion prevents abiding in emptiness. He also uses attachment to self, attachment to dharmas, and the two obstructions to explain why the conception of dharmas must still be removed after the conception of self is removed. This is an analysis made in the terminology of Stainless Renown and Wondrous Auspiciousness; it is not written back as a scriptural statement by Vimalakīrti and Mañjuśrī.
Regarding the arising and ceasing of dharmas and their not knowing one another, Kuiji first contemplates the body in general as composed through the combination of dharmas and arising and ceasing from moment to moment, then separately contemplates the continuity of dharmas and each one's lack of knowledge. At the grave affliction of the conception of dharmas, he distinguishes breaking attachment to self from breaking attachment to dharmas. Regarding the equality of self and nirvāṇa, he further presents both the emptiness-principle interpretation and the accord-with-principle interpretation: one path explains equality through everything being empty in ultimate truth; the other explains it through the lack of own-nature in the imagined self and imagined nirvāṇa. The commentary places both readings side by side, and this presentation does not choose between them.
At the illness of emptiness being empty, Kuiji likewise preserves two paths. The emptiness-principle interpretation says that attachment to existence is an illness, attachment to emptiness is also an illness, and in ultimate truth the illness of emptiness is ultimately empty. The accord-with-principle interpretation says that the imagined object of emptiness is not real and the mind that grasps emptiness is likewise not real. He separates receiver from received in “undergoing the various feelings while there is nothing received,” saying that one leaves the falsely received yet still undergoes the various feelings, thereby leaving both the illness of existence and the illness of emptiness.
Entering the discussion of great compassion and bondage and liberation, Kuiji connects not giving rise to compassion through affectionate views with not becoming weary of saṃsāra, then distinguishes craving the flavor of meditative concentration as bondage from gathering in birth within existence through skillful means without attachment as liberation. His wondrous wisdom and skillful means are not two separate roads. Wondrous wisdom without skillful means cannot bring sentient beings to maturity or adorn buddha-lands; action that abides in afflictions is likewise not skillful means endowed with wisdom. Contemplating the impermanence of body and illness and the other marks belongs to wondrous wisdom; while ill, enduring the work of transforming sentient beings belongs to skillful means. Only their mutual support reveals bodhisattva conduct.
At the chapter's end, Kuiji counts thirty-seven statements in Xuanzang's recension and divides them into conduct differing from that of ordinary people and the two vehicles, and conduct that attains what is superior without abandoning what is lesser. Kumārajīva's recension, by contrast, unfolds through thirty-two occurrences of “this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.” The difference in number comes from the Chinese recensions on which they rely, and neither is increased or reduced to match the other. The Kumārajīva line emphasizes successively dispelling self, dharmas, and emptiness without losing great compassion; the Ci'en line emphasizes disciplining the two minds and practicing without abiding through the mutual support of wondrous wisdom and skillful means. Both mirrors extend the inquiry about illness into the bodhisattva's conduct of not abandoning sentient beings, and each preserves its own vocabulary and divisions, which cannot be mixed across recensions.
考據Apparatus
本品從佛命文殊師利問疾起，經入城、空室、賓主相見、問疾、問空、慰喻、調心，終於三十二句菩薩行與八千天子發心。以下以羅什本本品實文為地；支謙本、玄奘本各守本欄，什門注與慈恩疏各守所依經本。三譯、兩鏡所見並錄，不判高下。
一、科判定位
羅什本本品位於《維摩詰所說經》卷中。卷題見 T14n0475 0544a22，譯者題記見 0544a24，品題「文殊師利問疾品第五」見 0544a25；正文自 0544a26 佛命問疾起，至 0546a02 八千天子發心止，0546a03 已入〈不思議品第六〉。卷題與譯者題記雖在本品所在卷首，仍與正文首句分記。
全品可依對話進程分為七段：
| 段次 | 經事 | 羅什本座標 |
|---|---|---|
| 一 | 佛命文殊師利問疾，會眾隨行 | T14n0475 0544a26–0544b08 |
| 二 | 維摩詰空室待客，賓主相見 | 0544b09–0544b17 |
| 三 | 疾從癡愛、大悲而起 | 0544b18–0544b28 |
| 四 | 空室問答、魔外為侍、疾相與四大 | 0544b29–0544c17 |
| 五 | 慰喻有疾菩薩 | 0544c17–0544c26 |
| 六 | 調伏其心：離我法二想、斷攀緣、離愛見、明縛解與慧方便 | 0544c26–0545b23 |
| 七 | 不住調伏與不調伏，三十二句菩薩行，八千天子發心 | 0545b23–0546a02 |
本品沒有偈頌，也沒有呪文；全篇以敘事與散文對話推進。問疾不是一段獨立病理說明：空室之問、疾相之問、慰喻之問與調心之問，皆由同一場賓主問答次第展開。
二、異譯對勘
三譯品題分別為：支謙本「維摩詰所說經諸法言品第五」（T14n0474 0525b17）、羅什本「文殊師利問疾品第五」（T14n0475 0544a25）、玄奘本「問疾品第五」（T14n0476 0567b24）。品次同為第五，不據此抹平各本品名與品界。
一、人物、城名與眾生詞各守本欄
| 詞位 | T474 支謙本 | T475 羅什本 | T476 玄奘本 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 問疾者 | 文殊師利 | 文殊師利 | 妙吉祥 |
| 示疾者 | 維摩詰 | 維摩詰 | 無垢稱 |
| 城名 | 維耶離 | 毘耶離 | 廣嚴 |
| 所隨之病 | 一切人 | 一切眾生 | 有情 |
| 魔外 | 眾魔、諸轉者 | 眾魔、外道 | 魔怨、外道 |
玄奘本的無垢稱、妙吉祥、廣嚴與有情只屬玄奘欄；羅什本的維摩詰、文殊師利、毘耶離與眾生只屬羅什欄，不互相代換。
二、入室與問疾
| 節點 | T474 支謙本 | T475 羅什本 | T476 玄奘本 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 空室一床 | 「吾將立空室，合座為一座，以疾而臥。」（0525b29） | 「即以神力空其室內，除去所有及諸侍者；唯置一床，以疾而臥。」（0544b10） | 「令其室空除諸所有，唯置一床現疾而臥。」（0567c21） |
| 賓主相見 | 「勞乎，文殊師利！不面在昔，辱來相見。」（0525c02） | 「善來文殊師利！不來相而來，不見相而見。」（0544b13） | 「善來，不來而來、不見而見、不聞而聞。」（0567c25） |
| 來去續答 | 本品未見 | 「若來已，更不來；若去已，更不去。」（0544b15） | 「若已來者不可復來，若已去者不可復去。」（0567c26） |
| 疾之所起 | 「從癡、有愛，則我病生。」（0525c07） | 「從癡、有愛，則我病生。」（0544b20） | 「如諸有情無明有愛生來既久，我今此病生亦復爾。」（0568a06） |
| 大悲起疾 | 「菩薩病者，以大悲立。」（0525c14） | 「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」（0544b28） | 「菩薩疾者從大悲起。」（0568a15） |
三本都以一子得病、父母亦病為譬；措辭詳略不同。羅什本說「譬如長者唯有一子。其子得病，父母亦病；若子病愈，父母亦愈。」（0544b24），由此直說菩薩於眾生愛之若子。此處只錄三本相應，不把一本文字補入另一本。
三、空室、疾相與四大
| 節點 | T474 支謙本 | T475 羅什本 | T476 玄奘本 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 佛土皆空 | 「諸佛土與此舍，皆空如空。」（0525c15） | 「諸佛國土亦復皆空。」（0544b29） | 「一切佛土亦復皆空。」（0568a17） |
| 以空空 | 「空於空。」（0525c16） | 「以空空。」（0544c01） | 「以空空。」（0568a18） |
| 六十二見 | 「空者當於六十二見中求。」（0525c19） | 「當於六十二見中求。」（0544c04） | 「此空當於六十二見中求。」（0568a21） |
| 疾無形色 | 「我病不現不可見。」（0525c26） | 「我病無形不可見。」（0544c11） | 「我病都無色相，亦不可見。」（0568a29） |
| 身心相應 | 「我病身合者，身為地；意合者，意為幻法。」（0525c28） | 「非身合，身相離故；亦非心合，心如幻故。」（0544c12） | 「我病非身相應，身相離故；亦身相應，如影像故。非心相應，心相離故；亦心相應，如幻化故。」（0568b02） |
玄奘本於身、心各具非相應與相應兩面；羅什本此段只明非身合、非心合。兩本句式不同，不把玄奘本的相應面下移為羅什本直說。
四、慰喻說者方向與調心節點
三本在慰喻段的賓主方向不同：支謙本由維摩詰問、文殊師利答；玄奘本由無垢稱問、妙吉祥答；羅什本則由文殊師利問、維摩詰答。調心段三本皆由客問、主人答。此處只誌說者方向，不裁定譯本得失。
| 節點 | T474 支謙本 | T475 羅什本 | T476 玄奘本 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 四大假身 | 「如是病者，但倚四大。又此諸大，為都無主，是所倚亦無我。」（0526a12） | 「四大合故，假名為身；四大無主，身亦無我。」（0544c29） | 「四大和合假名為身，大中無主，身亦無我。」（0568b23） |
| 唯法生滅 | 「身為法數，法起則起，法滅則滅。」（0526a15） | 「起唯法起，滅唯法滅；」（0545a04） | 「生唯法生、滅唯法滅。」（0568b27） |
| 空病亦空 | 本品未見 | 「唯有空病；空病亦空。」（0545a13） | 「唯有空病。應觀如是，空病亦空。」（0568c10） |
| 病本 | 「何謂為本？謂始未然。」（0526a28） | 「何謂病本？謂有攀緣，從有攀緣，則為病本。」（0545a17） | 「何等名為疾之因緣？謂有緣慮。」（0568c18） |
| 慧方便四名 | 「菩薩無權執智縛，行權執智解，智不執權縛，智而執權解。」（0526b17） | 「又無方便慧縛，有方便慧解；無慧方便縛，有慧方便解。」（0545b06） | 「若無方便善攝妙慧是名繫縛，若有方便善攝妙慧是名解脫。」（0569a22） |
五、品末與品界
羅什本末記「其中八千天子，皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。」（0546a01）；支謙本記八千天人發無上正真道意，並記文殊師利歡喜；玄奘本記八億天子發心趣向。三本數目與末語各守本欄。
支謙本在此後仍於本品內續有舍利弗念床座及五百天人法眼生；羅什本與玄奘本各自本品未見，發心後即入下一品。『本品未見』只說該譯本本品界內未見，不等於全經無此文字。
三、經論宗依（眼）
本品自身立起四重經眼，已足以統攝全篇，不另以旁經名目覆蓋本品：
一、悲疾之眼。眾生之病從癡、有愛而起；菩薩因眾生而入生死，以眾生病為己病，故結為「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」（T14n0475 0544b28）。病在此既是所問，也是菩薩不捨眾生的現行處。
二、空不離見與心行之眼。空室問答不把空安置在室外另處，而由佛土皆空，進至分別亦空，再說「當於六十二見中求。」（0544c04），又由諸佛解脫推至一切眾生心行。經文把求空之處帶回眾生現前的見與心行。
三、病法次第俱遣之眼。調心先由四大假合除我想，再以唯法起滅起法想，又明法想亦是顛倒，終至「唯有空病；空病亦空。」（0545a13）。因此經中所示不是從我執轉住法執，也不是從法執轉住空執。
四、慧方便相資之眼。本品一面觀身無常、苦、空、非我，一面仍在生死饒益一切；一面觀身與病非新非故，一面不求永滅。最後三十二句皆依同一語勢：行一法而不住其偏，顯菩薩所行。
本目只立本品可逐字坐實之經眼；未見本品與別經硬鏈者，不為湊數而列。
四、本品釋要
一、從承命問疾到空室相見
佛命文殊師利往問維摩詰之疾。文殊師利先陳維摩詰深達實相、善說法要、辯慧無礙與方便已度，仍承佛旨前往。大眾預期二大士共談法要，八千菩薩、五百聲聞、百千天人隨行入城。
維摩詰先空其室內，去除所有與侍者，只留一床示疾而臥。文殊師利入室後，賓主先就來與見相問答：維摩詰說「不來相而來，不見相而見。」（0544b13）；文殊師利則從已來不更來、已去不更去，答至來無所從、去無所至、所見不可再見，然後轉入佛所付囑的問疾。
二、眾生病、菩薩病與大悲
維摩詰答病因、病久與病滅，以癡、有愛為眾生病的起點；因一切眾生病而有菩薩病，眾生病滅則菩薩病滅。經以一子病而父母亦病作譬，並直說菩薩愛眾生如子。此後一句「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」（0544b28），把示疾與大悲明白相接。
三、空室七問與無侍者之答
由空室發問，問答依次為：佛土亦空；以空空；因無分別空故空；分別亦空；空於六十二見中求；六十二見於諸佛解脫中求；諸佛解脫於一切眾生心行中求。這七層不另立一處可執取的空。
維摩詰再答侍者之問：眾魔樂生死，而菩薩於生死不捨；外道樂諸見，而菩薩於諸見不動。魔與外道因此被說為侍者，並非移出菩薩所行的場域。
四、疾相與四大
病無形而不可見；既非與身相合，因身相離，也非與心相合，因心如幻。問四大中何大之病，答則於地、水、火、風一一說非即亦不離；眾生病從四大起，故維摩詰隨其有病而病。
五、九項慰喻
有疾菩薩慰喻另一位有疾菩薩時，經文所列九項不可縮為泛稱：
- 說身無常，而不勸厭離此身。
- 說身有苦，而不勸以涅槃為樂。
- 說身無我，而仍說教導眾生。
- 說身空寂，而不說畢竟寂滅。
- 說悔過去罪業，而不說退入過去。
- 由自己的病，憐愍其他病者。
- 知宿世無數劫苦，念念要饒益一切眾生。
- 憶所修福，念於淨命，不生憂惱，常起精進。
- 自作醫王，療治眾病。
這九項的收束是令有疾菩薩歡喜；說苦、無常、無我與空寂時，都不把有疾者推向棄身、棄眾生或畢竟滅。
六、調心：從我想到空病
調心先觀此病由前世妄想顛倒與煩惱而生，無實法可得為受病者；再觀四大假合，身無主、亦無我，因而不著於我。其次以眾法合成此身，見起唯法起、滅唯法滅，諸法各不相知。法想雖暫代我想，經隨即說法想也是顛倒，仍須離去。
離法想由離我與我所，進至不念內外、諸法平等；我與涅槃都只因名字而空，沒有決定性。到此尚有空病，故又說空病亦空。其後「以無所受而受諸受」（0545a14），與佛法未具便不滅受取證相連：有疾菩薩並未以空為停住處。
七、由自病念眾病，斷病本而不除法
身若有苦，即念惡趣眾生而起大悲；自既調伏，也要調伏一切眾生。所除的是病，不是法；所斷的是病本。經文循問答把病本說為攀緣，把所攀緣說為三界，把斷攀緣說為無所得，把無所得說為離內見、外見。這一段以勝怨為勇作譬，說能兼除老病死者才是菩薩。
八、離愛見大悲，明縛與解
經先觀自他之病非真非有，再說若於眾生起愛見大悲便應捨離；菩薩應斷客塵煩惱而起大悲，才不在生死中生疲厭。自有縛者不能解他縛，自無縛者才有解他縛之處。
縛解先以貪著禪味為縛、方便受生為解；再列兩雙：無方便的慧為縛，有方便的慧為解；無慧的方便為縛，有慧的方便為解。前一雙以是否夾帶愛見莊嚴佛土、成就眾生，以及在空、無相、無作中調伏而不疲厭為別；後一雙以是否住貪欲、瞋恚、邪見而植德本，及能否離煩惱、植德本並迴向無上菩提為別。
九、四項慧方便與三十二句菩薩行
本品再以四項交錯明慧與方便：觀身無常、苦、空、非我，是慧；有疾仍在生死饒益眾生而不厭倦，是方便；觀身不離病、病不離身，身病非新非故，是慧；有疾而不永滅，是方便。
其後先說不住調伏，也不住不調伏：住不調伏是愚人法，住調伏是聲聞法，離此二者才入菩薩行。接著三十二句從生死與涅槃展開，遍及魔行、一切智、不生、緣起、攝受眾生、遠離、三界、空、無相、無作、無起、六波羅蜜、六通、四無量心、禪定解脫三昧、四念處、四正勤、四如意足、五根、五力、七覺分、八聖道、止觀、諸法不生不滅、聲聞辟支佛威儀、諸法究竟淨相、佛土寂空與示現佛事。每句都明所行與不住，不宜刪成一個抽象口號。
末段只記說法之時，文殊師利所帶大眾中八千天子發無上正等正覺心；經以『時』並記法益，未另說一條因果推論。
五、諸家異釋（雙鏡並錄）
本目分錄什門 T1775 與慈恩 T1782。前者隨羅什本 T475，注語須分什曰、肇曰、生曰；後者隨玄奘本 T476，以無垢稱、妙吉祥及玄奘詞系立說。兩鏡並列，不把一鏡判釋下灌為另一經本文義。
一、空室與悲疾
什門中，鳩摩羅什釋空室曰：「什曰：將欲明宗，故現空相以發興也。盡敬致供必稱其所安，以文殊樂虛靜，故應之以空也。」（T38n1775 0371b03）；道生另由虛納與標宗說空室；僧肇則把去侍、置床分別連到後文言端與示疾。三說各有著眼，不合併為一說。
就悲疾，僧肇說：「肇曰：答久近也。菩薩何疾？悲彼而生疾耳。群生之疾，癡愛為本；菩薩之疾，大悲為源。夫高由下起、疾因悲生，所以悲疾之興出于癡愛，而癡愛無緒莫識其源，吾疾久近與之同根。此明悲疾之始，不必就己為言也。」（0372a15）；又於本品結句說「肇曰：菩薩之疾以大悲為根，因之而起。答初問也。」（0372b23）。道生於同處說「生曰：自非大悲，病不妄起也。」（0372b24）。
慈恩疏把無垢稱空室前後分為多重意趣，又把疾病問答分科為疾之因、疾之相與疾之滅；於有情病與無垢稱病相隨處，以父子相憂說大悲隨有情而起。這是窺基依玄奘本所作科釋，不移稱為羅什本注。
二、空、法想與空病
對「以空空。」（T14n0475 0544c01），鳩摩羅什說「什曰：無以無物故空，以國土性空即是畢竟空，故空也。」（T38n1775 0372c16）；僧肇從空智、法空互明；道生則分上空為空慧、下空為理空。至無分別空，三家又各就慧與法、任理與分別說明，故不宜只取一語覆蓋其餘。
到法想與空病，鳩摩羅什說「什曰：向以法遣我，自此以下以空遣法也。」（0376c06）；僧肇說法想於除我雖有用，於真仍是顛倒；道生提醒起法想並非著法。對空病亦空，鳩摩羅什說「什曰：上明無我無法而未遣空，未遣空則空為累，累則是病，故明空病亦空也。」（0377a13）；僧肇說由法除我、以空除法、再空於空；道生則說病在著空，不把空理自身判為病。
慈恩疏在玄奘本『空病亦空』處並列空理義與應理義：一面說勝義中執空之病畢竟空，一面說所執空境不真、能執空心也非實。窺基又把能受、所受分說，解玄奘本受諸所受為離有病而不落空病。這一路採用玄奘詞系，與什門的遣我、遣法、遣空次第並照而不混稱。
三、大悲、縛解與慧方便
於愛見大悲，鳩摩羅什說：「什曰：謂未能深入實相，見有眾生心生愛著，因此生悲，名為愛見大悲。愛見大悲虛妄不淨，有能令人起疲厭想，故應捨離也。」（0378a25）；僧肇說此悲雖善而雜以愛見，仍未免累；道生則就觀中仍有愛念與所見眾生立說。三家都被保留為各自署名之釋。
窺基依玄奘本把此段科為以大悲破著空，又把味著靜慮等持說為縛，把以巧方便攝諸有生而無貪著說為解；其後分疏妙慧與善巧，不以只有妙慧而無利生作用為具足。到觀身與疾，又依玄奘句說慧能觀身疾無常等，方便則是有疾仍耐於化生。此為慈恩鏡的分科與詞義，和什門的愛見、客塵、方便慧諸釋等權並列。
四、菩薩所行的句數與分科
羅什本由「離此二法，是菩薩行。」（T14n0475 0545b27）起，共見三十二次『是菩薩行』。窺基依玄奘本則計三十七句，先分不同凡夫、二乘之行，後分得勝而不捨劣之行；又明記舊譯句數與其本不同。句數差異屬各自所依經本，不以玄奘本三十七句改寫羅什本三十二句，也不以羅什本句法刪削玄奘本分科。
六、術語與譬喻
一、本品自有術語
| 本品詞 | 經中作用 |
|---|---|
| 癡、有愛 | 眾生病與菩薩隨病所由的起點 |
| 大悲 | 菩薩病之所起；也使有疾者由己苦念眾生苦 |
| 以空空 | 空室問答中由物空轉入法空的關鍵答語 |
| 六十二見 | 經指示求空之處，復由此追至諸佛解脫與眾生心行 |
| 法想 | 除我想後暫起，隨即仍被說為顛倒大患 |
| 空病 | 離我、法二想後仍可能停住之病；經又說空病亦空 |
| 攀緣 | 經直名病本，所攀緣為三界，以無所得而斷 |
| 愛見大悲 | 對眾生起愛著與所見而生之悲；經說應捨離 |
| 慧、方便 | 觀身疾與不捨眾生的兩面，並由四組縛解互明 |
二、三譯名相分欄
| 羅什本 T475 | 支謙本 T474 | 玄奘本 T476 |
|---|---|---|
| 維摩詰 | 維摩詰 | 無垢稱 |
| 文殊師利 | 文殊師利 | 妙吉祥 |
| 毘耶離 | 維耶離 | 廣嚴 |
| 眾生 | 人、眾人 | 有情 |
| 攀緣 | 始未然 | 緣慮 |
| 慧、方便 | 智、權 | 妙慧、善巧方便 |
名相對讀只顯各本措辭，不建立可任意互換的共同正文。
三、本品自有譬喻
一、一子病、父母亦病：用來顯菩薩愛眾生如子，眾生病則菩薩病，眾生病愈則菩薩亦愈。
二、醫王療治眾病：列在慰喻九項之末，要求有疾菩薩不只受安慰，也發起療治眾病之心。
三、勝怨乃可為勇：用來說不只調伏己病，也兼除眾生老病死苦，才稱菩薩之勇。
此外，身相離、心如幻與四大非即非離，是本品問疾的直接說法，不另添經中未有的物理場景。
七、徵引承衍
本品在什門注與慈恩疏中，都不是只釋一個『病』字。T1775 自 T38 0370c16 起逐句隨羅什本疏至品末，什、肇、生分署其說；T1782 自 T38 1068a07 起依玄奘本分科至 1077a25，從佛命問疾、空室、慰問、調心、縛解一路疏至發心。兩部古疏因所依譯本不同，保存了兩套可相照而不可混本的承衍。
什門所重者，可見於大悲為疾根、由我想至法想再至空病的遞遣、愛見大悲與客塵煩惱，以及方便慧互為縛解。慈恩所重者，可見於凡夫心、二乘心的分段調伏，空理義與應理義的並釋，妙慧與善巧的互攝，以及三十七句菩薩所行的科分。這些皆作本品後來義路的見證；本相只傳錄古疏所說，不裁成宗派勝負。
八、校本定位
一、底本與疏本座標
| 材料 | 本品座標 |
|---|---|
| T14n0475 羅什本 | 卷題 0544a22；品題 0544a25；正文 0544a26–0546a02 |
| T14n0474 支謙本 | 品題 0525b17；本品至次品題前 0527a14 |
| T14n0476 玄奘本 | 品題 0567b24；本品至發心 0570a27 |
| T38n1775 什門注 | 0370c15–0381a27（正文止 0381a21），隨 T475 詞系 |
| T38n1782 慈恩疏 | 1068a07–1077a25，隨 T476 詞系 |
二、本品十四條校勘記
| 序 | 位次 | 【大】本文 | 異讀見證 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0544a22 | 所說 | 【聖】無『所說』 |
| 2 | 0544a22 | 卷中 | 【宋】卷中不可思議解脫；【元】卷中不可思議解說；【聖】無『卷中』 |
| 3 | 0544b03 | 等 | 【宋】【元】【明】無『等』 |
| 4 | 0544b22 | 眾生 | 【宋】【元】【明】眾生得不 |
| 5 | 0544b22 | 滅 | 【明】者 |
| 6 | 0544b28 | 病 | 【宋】【元】【明】疾 |
| 7 | 0545a07 | 是即 | 【元】【明】即是 |
| 8 | 0545a10 | 謂【CB】【麗-CB】 | 【大】為；【聖】謂；並見 T38n1775 0376c29 |
| 9 | 0545a20 | 離 | 【宋】無『離』 |
| 10 | 0545b14 | 植 | 【宋】【元】【明】【聖】殖 |
| 11 | 0545c01 | 降 | 【宋】【元】【明】降伏 |
| 12 | 0545c15 | 而不 | 【元】【明】不畢竟；【聖】而不畢竟 |
| 13 | 0545c16 | 捨 | 【聖】捨離 |
| 14 | 0545c21 | 聖 | 【元】【明】正 |
校記只誌底本文字與見證，不以異讀改寫本層正文。三譯對讀與兩疏座標也只作各自文本的定位；凡異譯本品無相應段者，明記本品未見，不以他譯補入。
This chapter begins with the Buddha instructing Mañjuśrī to inquire about the illness. It proceeds through entry into the city, the empty room, the meeting of host and guest, inquiry about illness, inquiry into emptiness, consolation, and discipline of mind, and concludes with the thirty-two statements of bodhisattva conduct and the arousal of awakening by eight thousand sons of the gods. What follows takes the actual text of Kumārajīva's recension in this chapter as its ground. The Zhi Qian and Xuanzang recensions each remain within their own column, while the Kumārajīva-line notes and the Ci'en commentary each remain with the scriptural recension on which they depend. The three translations and two mirrors are recorded together without adjudicating among them.
1. Structural Location
In Kumārajīva's recension, this chapter stands in the Middle Scroll of The Vimalakīrti Sūtra. The scroll title occurs at T14n0475 0544a22, the translator's byline at 0544a24, and the chapter title 「文殊師利問疾品第五」 — “Mañjuśrī Inquires about the Illness, Chapter Five” at 0544a25. The chapter body begins with the Buddha's instruction to inquire about the illness at 0544a26 and ends with the arousal of awakening by eight thousand sons of the gods at 0546a02; 0546a03 has already entered Chapter 06, “Inconceivability.” Although the scroll title and translator's byline stand at the head of the scroll containing this chapter, they remain recorded separately from the first sentence of the chapter body.
The entire chapter can be divided into seven movements according to the progress of the dialogue:
| Movement | Event in the Sūtra | Coordinate in Kumārajīva's Recension |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Buddha instructs Mañjuśrī to inquire about the illness; the assembly follows | T14n0475 0544a26–0544b08 |
| 2 | Vimalakīrti empties the room to await his guests; host and guest meet | 0544b09–0544b17 |
| 3 | The illness arises from delusion and craving, and from great compassion | 0544b18–0544b28 |
| 4 | Questions about the empty room, Māras and followers of other paths as attendants, the form of illness, and the four elements | 0544b29–0544c17 |
| 5 | Consoling a sick bodhisattva | 0544c17–0544c26 |
| 6 | Disciplining the mind: leaving the two conceptions of self and dharmas, cutting off engagement, leaving affectionate views, and clarifying bondage and liberation together with wisdom and skillful means | 0544c26–0545b23 |
| 7 | Abiding neither in discipline nor non-discipline, the thirty-two statements of bodhisattva conduct, and the arousal of awakening by eight thousand sons of the gods | 0545b23–0546a02 |
This chapter contains neither verse nor dhāraṇī; it advances throughout by narrative and prose dialogue. The inquiry about illness is not an independent pathological account. Questions about the empty room, the form of illness, consolation, and discipline of mind all unfold in sequence from the same exchange between host and guest.
2. Comparison of Alternative Translations
The chapter titles in the three translations are respectively 「維摩詰所說經諸法言品第五」 — “Chapter Five, Words concerning the Dharmas in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra” in Zhi Qian's recension (T14n0474 0525b17), 「文殊師利問疾品第五」 — “Mañjuśrī Inquires about the Illness, Chapter Five” in Kumārajīva's recension (T14n0475 0544a25), and 「問疾品第五」 — “Inquiring about the Illness, Chapter Five” in Xuanzang's recension (T14n0476 0567b24). All three are the fifth chapter, but that fact is not used to erase the chapter name or boundary of any recension.
1. Persons, City Names, and Terms for Sentient Beings Remain within Their Own Columns
| Position | T474 Zhi Qian Recension | T475 Kumārajīva Recension | T476 Xuanzang Recension |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inquirer about the illness | 文殊師利 — Mañjuśrī | 文殊師利 — Mañjuśrī | 妙吉祥 — Wondrous Auspiciousness |
| One manifesting illness | 維摩詰 — Vimalakīrti | 維摩詰 — Vimalakīrti | 無垢稱 — Stainless Renown |
| City name | 維耶離 — Vaiśālī | 毘耶離 — Vaiśālī | 廣嚴 — Vastly Adorned |
| Those whose illness is shared | 一切人 — all people | 一切眾生 — all sentient beings | 有情 — sentient beings |
| Māras and outsiders | 眾魔、諸轉者 — the many Māras and the various wanderers | 眾魔、外道 — the many Māras and followers of other paths | 魔怨、外道 — Māra enemies and followers of other paths |
Stainless Renown, Wondrous Auspiciousness, Vastly Adorned, and sentient beings in Xuanzang's diction belong only to the Xuanzang column. Vimalakīrti, Mañjuśrī, Vaiśālī, and sentient beings in Kumārajīva's diction belong only to the Kumārajīva column. They are not substituted for one another.
2. Entering the Room and Inquiring about the Illness
| Point | T474 Zhi Qian Recension | T475 Kumārajīva Recension | T476 Xuanzang Recension |
|---|---|---|---|
| An empty room and one bed | 「吾將立空室，合座為一座，以疾而臥。」 — “I shall establish an empty room, combine the seats into one seat, and lie down because of illness.” (0525b29) | 「即以神力空其室內，除去所有及諸侍者；唯置一床，以疾而臥。」 — “He immediately used spiritual power to empty the room, removing everything and all the attendants; he placed only one bed and lay upon it in illness.” (0544b10) | 「令其室空除諸所有，唯置一床現疾而臥。」 — “He made the room empty and removed everything, leaving only one bed upon which he lay while manifesting illness.” (0567c21) |
| Host and guest meet | 「勞乎，文殊師利！不面在昔，辱來相見。」 — “You have taken trouble, Mañjuśrī! We have not met for some time, and you honor me by coming to see me.” (0525c02) | 「善來文殊師利！不來相而來，不見相而見。」 — “Welcome, Mañjuśrī! You come with no mark of coming and see with no mark of seeing.” (0544b13) | 「善來，不來而來、不見而見、不聞而聞。」 — “Welcome! You come without coming, see without seeing, and hear without hearing.” (0567c25) |
| Continued reply on coming and going | Not found in this chapter | 「若來已，更不來；若去已，更不去。」 — “If one has already come, one does not come again; if one has already gone, one does not go again.” (0544b15) | 「若已來者不可復來，若已去者不可復去。」 — “One who has already come cannot come again; one who has already gone cannot go again.” (0567c26) |
| Source of the illness | 「從癡、有愛，則我病生。」 — “From delusion and craving for existence, my illness arises.” (0525c07) | 「從癡、有愛，則我病生。」 — “From delusion and craving for existence, my illness arises.” (0544b20) | 「如諸有情無明有愛生來既久，我今此病生亦復爾。」 — “Just as the ignorance and craving of sentient beings have arisen for a long time, so too has this present illness of mine arisen.” (0568a06) |
| Illness arising from great compassion | 「菩薩病者，以大悲立。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness is established through great compassion.” (0525c14) | 「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.” (0544b28) | 「菩薩疾者從大悲起。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.” (0568a15) |
All three recensions use the simile of an only child falling ill and the parents becoming ill as well, though their wording differs in detail. Kumārajīva's recension says, 「譬如長者唯有一子。其子得病，父母亦病；若子病愈，父母亦愈。」 — “It is like an elder who has only one child. When the child falls ill, the parents fall ill as well; if the child's illness is cured, the parents are cured as well.” (0544b24) From this, it directly says that the bodhisattva cherishes sentient beings as a child. This comparison records only the corresponding passages in the three recensions and does not fill the wording of one recension with that of another.
3. The Empty Room, the Form of Illness, and the Four Elements
| Point | T474 Zhi Qian Recension | T475 Kumārajīva Recension | T476 Xuanzang Recension |
|---|---|---|---|
| All buddha-lands are empty | 「諸佛土與此舍，皆空如空。」 — “The buddha-lands and this dwelling are all empty like space.” (0525c15) | 「諸佛國土亦復皆空。」 — “All buddha-lands are likewise entirely empty.” (0544b29) | 「一切佛土亦復皆空。」 — “All buddha-lands are likewise entirely empty.” (0568a17) |
| Empty by emptiness | 「空於空。」 — “Empty within emptiness.” (0525c16) | 「以空空。」 — “Empty by emptiness.” (0544c01) | 「以空空。」 — “Empty by emptiness.” (0568a18) |
| The sixty-two views | 「空者當於六十二見中求。」 — “Emptiness should be sought within the sixty-two views.” (0525c19) | 「當於六十二見中求。」 — “It should be sought within the sixty-two views.” (0544c04) | 「此空當於六十二見中求。」 — “This emptiness should be sought within the sixty-two views.” (0568a21) |
| Illness without visible form | 「我病不現不可見。」 — “My illness does not appear and cannot be seen.” (0525c26) | 「我病無形不可見。」 — “My illness has no form and cannot be seen.” (0544c11) | 「我病都無色相，亦不可見。」 — “My illness has no material mark at all and cannot be seen.” (0568a29) |
| Correspondence with body and mind | 「我病身合者，身為地；意合者，意為幻法。」 — “As for my illness corresponding with body, body is earth; as for its corresponding with mind, mind is an illusory dharma.” (0525c28) | 「非身合，身相離故；亦非心合，心如幻故。」 — “It is not conjoined with the body, because the mark of the body is separate; nor is it conjoined with the mind, because the mind is like an illusion.” (0544c12) | 「我病非身相應，身相離故；亦身相應，如影像故。非心相應，心相離故；亦心相應，如幻化故。」 — “My illness does not correspond with the body, because the mark of the body is separate; yet it also corresponds with the body, because it is like an image. It does not correspond with the mind, because the mark of the mind is separate; yet it also corresponds with the mind, because it is like an illusion.” (0568b02) |
For both body and mind, Xuanzang's recension presents the two sides of non-correspondence and correspondence; Kumārajīva's recension in this passage clarifies only that the illness is not conjoined with body and not conjoined with mind. The sentence patterns of the two differ, and the corresponding side in Xuanzang's recension is not moved down and presented as a direct statement of Kumārajīva's recension.
4. Direction of the Speaker in Consolation and Nodes in Disciplining the Mind
The direction between host and guest in the consolation passage differs across the three recensions. In Zhi Qian's recension, Vimalakīrti asks and Mañjuśrī answers; in Xuanzang's recension, Stainless Renown asks and Wondrous Auspiciousness answers; in Kumārajīva's recension, Mañjuśrī asks and Vimalakīrti answers. In the discipline-of-mind passage, the guest asks and the host answers in all three. This records only the direction of the speakers and does not adjudicate the merits of the translations.
| Point | T474 Zhi Qian Recension | T475 Kumārajīva Recension | T476 Xuanzang Recension |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provisional body of the four elements | 「如是病者，但倚四大。又此諸大，為都無主，是所倚亦無我。」 — “Such illness depends only upon the four elements. These elements have no ruler at all, and what depends upon them likewise has no self.” (0526a12) | 「四大合故，假名為身；四大無主，身亦無我。」 — “Because the four elements combine, the provisional name body is given; the four elements have no ruler, and the body likewise has no self.” (0544c29) | 「四大和合假名為身，大中無主，身亦無我。」 — “The four elements combine and are provisionally called the body. There is no ruler among the elements, and the body likewise has no self.” (0568b23) |
| Only dharmas arise and cease | 「身為法數，法起則起，法滅則滅。」 — “The body is a collection of dharmas; when dharmas arise it arises, and when dharmas cease it ceases.” (0526a15) | 「起唯法起，滅唯法滅；」 — “In arising, only dharmas arise; in ceasing, only dharmas cease.” (0545a04) | 「生唯法生、滅唯法滅。」 — “In arising, only dharmas arise; in ceasing, only dharmas cease.” (0568b27) |
| The illness of emptiness is also empty | Not found in this chapter | 「唯有空病；空病亦空。」 — “Only the illness of emptiness remains; the illness of emptiness is also empty.” (0545a13) | 「唯有空病。應觀如是，空病亦空。」 — “Only the illness of emptiness remains. One should contemplate in this way: the illness of emptiness is also empty.” (0568c10) |
| Root of illness | 「何謂為本？謂始未然。」 — “What is called the root? It is what has not yet begun to be so.” (0526a28) | 「何謂病本？謂有攀緣，從有攀緣，則為病本。」 — “What is called the root of illness? It is engagement with objects. From engagement with objects comes the root of illness.” (0545a17) | 「何等名為疾之因緣？謂有緣慮。」 — “What is called the condition for illness? It is object-directed concern.” (0568c18) |
| Four names for wisdom and skillful means | 「菩薩無權執智縛，行權執智解，智不執權縛，智而執權解。」 — “For a bodhisattva, wisdom held without skillful means is bondage; wisdom held while practicing skillful means is liberation; skillful means held without wisdom is bondage; skillful means held with wisdom is liberation.” (0526b17) | 「又無方便慧縛，有方便慧解；無慧方便縛，有慧方便解。」 — “Furthermore, wisdom without skillful means is bondage, and wisdom with skillful means is liberation; skillful means without wisdom is bondage, and skillful means with wisdom is liberation.” (0545b06) | 「若無方便善攝妙慧是名繫縛，若有方便善攝妙慧是名解脫。」 — “If wondrous wisdom is not well gathered by skillful means, this is called bondage; if wondrous wisdom is well gathered by skillful means, this is called liberation.” (0569a22) |
5. The End and Boundary of the Chapter
Kumārajīva's recension ends by recording, 「其中八千天子，皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。」 — “Among them, eight thousand sons of the gods all aroused the mind of unsurpassed perfect awakening.” (0546a01) Zhi Qian's recension records that eight thousand heavenly beings aroused the intention for the unsurpassed true and right Way and also records Mañjuśrī's rejoicing. Xuanzang's recension records that eight hundred million sons of the gods aroused the mind and set out toward awakening. Each recension's number and final statement remain within its own column.
After this point, Zhi Qian's recension continues within the same chapter with Śāriputra thinking about beds and seats and with the Dharma eye arising in five hundred heavenly beings. These passages are not found within the chapter boundaries of the Kumārajīva and Xuanzang recensions, each of which enters the next chapter after the arousal of awakening. “Not found in this chapter” means only that the passage is absent from the chapter boundary of that translation; it does not mean that no such words occur anywhere in the entire sūtra.
3. Canonical and Treatise Foundations (The Eye)
This chapter itself establishes four layers of the sūtra's eye, sufficient to encompass the whole chapter without covering it over with the names of collateral scriptures:
1. The eye of compassionate illness. The illness of sentient beings arises from delusion and craving for existence. The bodhisattva enters saṃsāra because of sentient beings and takes their illness as his own, so the passage concludes, 「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.” (T14n0475 0544b28) Here illness is both what is inquired about and the place in which the bodhisattva presently does not abandon sentient beings.
2. The eye of emptiness not apart from views and activities of mind. The dialogue in the empty room does not place emptiness somewhere else outside the room. It moves from all buddha-lands being empty to discrimination itself being empty, then says 「當於六十二見中求。」 — “It should be sought within the sixty-two views.” (0544c04) From there, the inquiry proceeds through the liberation of the buddhas to the activities of mind of all sentient beings. The sūtra brings the place in which emptiness is sought back to sentient beings' present views and mental activities.
3. The eye of successively dispelling illness and dharmas together. Discipline of mind first removes the conception of self through the provisional combination of the four elements, then uses the mere arising and ceasing of dharmas to establish a conception of dharmas, explains that the conception of dharmas is also inverted, and finally reaches 「唯有空病；空病亦空。」 — “Only the illness of emptiness remains; the illness of emptiness is also empty.” (0545a13) What the sūtra shows is therefore neither a shift from attachment to self into abiding in attachment to dharmas nor a shift from attachment to dharmas into abiding in attachment to emptiness.
4. The eye of wisdom and skillful means supporting one another. On one side, the chapter contemplates the body as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self; on the other, it remains within saṃsāra to benefit all. On one side, it contemplates body and illness as neither new nor old; on the other, it does not seek eternal cessation. The final thirty-two statements all follow the same cadence: practicing a dharma without abiding in its one-sided extreme, thereby revealing bodhisattva conduct.
This section establishes only the eye of the sūtra that can be grounded verbatim in this chapter. Since no hard link between this chapter and another scripture has been found, none is listed merely to fill a quota.
4. Explanation of This Chapter
1. From Accepting the Charge to Inquire about the Illness to the Meeting in the Empty Room
The Buddha instructs Mañjuśrī to inquire about Vimalakīrti's illness. Mañjuśrī first states that Vimalakīrti has profoundly comprehended the true mark, skillfully teaches the essentials of the Dharma, possesses unobstructed eloquence and wisdom, knows the rules of all bodhisattva practices, can enter the secret treasuries of the buddhas, and has mastered skillful means, yet he still accepts the Buddha's command and goes. The assembly expects the two great beings to speak together on the essentials of the Dharma, and eight thousand bodhisattvas, five hundred śrāvakas, and a hundred thousand heavenly beings accompany them into the city.
Vimalakīrti first empties the room, removes every object and attendant, and leaves only one bed upon which he lies while manifesting illness. After Mañjuśrī enters, host and guest first converse about the marks of coming and seeing. Vimalakīrti says 「不來相而來，不見相而見。」 — “You come with no mark of coming and see with no mark of seeing.” (0544b13) Mañjuśrī responds by proceeding from one who has come not coming again and one who has gone not going again to coming without a source, going without a destination, and what is seen being seen no further. He then turns to the inquiry about illness entrusted to him by the Buddha.
2. Sentient Beings' Illness, the Bodhisattva's Illness, and Great Compassion
In answering about the cause, duration, and removal of the illness, Vimalakīrti takes delusion and craving for existence as the starting point for the illness of sentient beings. Because all sentient beings are ill, the bodhisattva is ill; when their illnesses end, the bodhisattva's illness ends. The sūtra uses the simile of the only child whose illness makes the parents ill and directly says that the bodhisattva cherishes sentient beings as a child. The sentence 「菩薩病者，以大悲起。」 — “A bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion.” (0544b28) then explicitly connects the manifested illness with great compassion.
3. Seven Questions concerning the Empty Room and the Answer about Having No Attendants
Beginning from the question about the empty room, the dialogue proceeds in this order: the buddha-lands are also empty; they are empty by emptiness; they are empty because emptiness is without discrimination; discrimination is also empty; emptiness should be sought within the sixty-two views; the sixty-two views should be sought within the liberation of the buddhas; and the liberation of the buddhas should be sought within the activities of mind of all sentient beings. These seven levels establish no separate place in which an apprehensible emptiness can be held.
Vimalakīrti then answers the question about attendants. The many Māras delight in saṃsāra, while the bodhisattva does not abandon saṃsāra. Followers of other paths delight in the various views, while the bodhisattva remains unmoved within those views. Māras and followers of other paths are therefore called attendants and are not removed from the field of bodhisattva conduct.
4. The Form of Illness and the Four Elements
The illness has no form and cannot be seen. It is not conjoined with the body because the mark of the body is separate, and it is not conjoined with the mind because the mind is like an illusion. Asked which among the four elements is ill, Vimalakīrti answers for earth, water, fire, and wind one by one that the illness is neither identical with nor separate from them. Since the illnesses of sentient beings arise from the four elements, Vimalakīrti is ill in accordance with their illness.
5. Nine Counsels of Consolation
When one sick bodhisattva consoles another sick bodhisattva, the nine counsels listed by the sūtra cannot be reduced to a generic label:
- Explain that the body is impermanent without counseling that this body be detested and abandoned.
- Explain that the body is suffering without counseling that nirvāṇa be taken as delight.
- Explain that the body has no self while still speaking of teaching sentient beings.
- Explain that the body is empty and quiescent without speaking of ultimate quiescent cessation.
- Speak of repenting of past wrongdoings without speaking of entering into the past.
- Through one's own illness, have compassion for others who are ill.
- Know the suffering of countless past eons and think at every moment of benefiting all sentient beings.
- Recollect the merit cultivated, attend to a pure way of life, give rise to no sorrow or distress, and constantly arouse diligent effort.
- Make oneself a king of physicians who cures the many illnesses.
These nine counsels conclude by causing the sick bodhisattva to rejoice. When speaking of suffering, impermanence, absence of self, and empty quiescence, they do not drive the sick person toward abandoning the body, abandoning sentient beings, or ultimate cessation.
6. Disciplining the Mind: From the Conception of Self to the Illness of Emptiness
Discipline of mind first contemplates that the illness arises from false discrimination, inversion, and afflictions in past lives, and that no real dharma can be obtained as the recipient of illness. It then contemplates the four elements as provisionally combined, the body as having no ruler and no self, and thus refrains from attachment to self. Next, because many dharmas combine to constitute the body, it sees that in arising only dharmas arise, in ceasing only dharmas cease, and that the dharmas do not know one another. Although the conception of dharmas temporarily replaces the conception of self, the sūtra immediately says that the conception of dharmas is itself inverted and must still be left behind.
Leaving the conception of dharmas begins with leaving self and what belongs to self, then proceeds to not thinking in terms of inner and outer and to letting all dharmas move in equality. Self and nirvāṇa are both empty only by virtue of names and have no determinate nature. At this point the illness of emptiness still remains, so the text also says that the illness of emptiness is empty. The phrase 「以無所受而受諸受」 — “undergoing the various feelings while there is nothing received” (0545a14) then joins with not extinguishing feeling to seek realization before the Buddha-Dharma is fulfilled. The sick bodhisattva does not use emptiness as a place of rest.
7. Recollecting All Illness from One's Own Illness, Cutting Off the Root of Illness without Removing the Dharmas
If the body suffers, the bodhisattva recollects sentient beings in the evil destinies and arouses great compassion. Having disciplined himself, he must also discipline all sentient beings. What is removed is illness, not the dharmas; what is cut off is the root of illness. Through a sequence of questions and answers, the sūtra identifies the root of illness as engagement with objects, its object as the three realms, the cutting off of engagement as non-attainment, and non-attainment as leaving the inner and outer views. This passage uses victory over an enemy as a simile and says that only one who can remove aging, illness, and death together is a bodhisattva.
8. Leaving Great Compassion Entangled with Affectionate Views and Clarifying Bondage and Liberation
The sūtra first contemplates that one's own illness and the illnesses of others are neither real nor existent, then says that if great compassion entangled with affectionate views arises toward sentient beings, it should be abandoned. A bodhisattva should cut off the afflictions of adventitious dust and arouse great compassion, so that weariness does not arise within saṃsāra. One who is himself bound cannot release the bonds of others; only one who is unbound has a place from which to release them.
Bondage and liberation are first explained as craving the flavor of meditation on one side and taking birth through skillful means on the other. The chapter then gives two pairs: wisdom without skillful means is bondage and wisdom with skillful means is liberation; skillful means without wisdom is bondage and skillful means with wisdom is liberation. The first pair is distinguished by whether a bodhisattva adorns buddha-lands and brings sentient beings to maturity while carrying affectionate views, and whether he disciplines himself in emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness without weariness. The second is distinguished by whether he plants roots of virtue while abiding in desire, anger, and wrong views, and whether he can leave afflictions, plant roots of virtue, and dedicate them to unsurpassed awakening.
9. Four Interwoven Statements of Wisdom and Skillful Means and the Thirty-Two Statements of Bodhisattva Conduct
The chapter then uses four interwoven statements to clarify wisdom and skillful means. Contemplating the body as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self is wisdom; while ill, remaining in saṃsāra to benefit sentient beings without weariness is skillful means. Contemplating that the body is not apart from illness, illness is not apart from the body, and body and illness are neither new nor old is wisdom; while ill, not entering eternal cessation is skillful means.
It next says first that one abides neither in discipline nor in non-discipline. Abiding in non-discipline is the practice of fools; abiding in discipline is the practice of śrāvakas. Leaving both, one enters bodhisattva conduct. The thirty-two statements then unfold from saṃsāra and nirvāṇa through the conduct of Māra, omniscience, non-arising, dependent origination, gathering in sentient beings, seclusion, the three realms, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, non-activation, the six perfections, six higher knowledges, four immeasurables, meditations, liberations, samādhis, the four establishments of mindfulness, four right efforts, four bases of spiritual power, five faculties, five powers, seven factors of awakening, Noble Eightfold Path, calm and insight, the non-arising and non-ceasing of dharmas, the dignified conduct of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, the ultimately pure mark of dharmas, buddha-lands quiescent and empty, and the manifestation of the work of a buddha. Each statement clarifies both what is practiced and where one does not abide; they should not be reduced to a single abstract slogan.
The final passage records only that, while the Dharma was being taught, eight thousand sons of the gods within Mañjuśrī's assembly aroused the mind of unsurpassed perfect awakening. By marking the benefit of the Dharma with “at that time,” the sūtra does not add a separate causal inference.
5. Divergent Interpretations of the Ancient Masters (Two Mirrors Presented Side by Side)
This section records separately the Kumārajīva line in T1775 and the Ci'en line in T1782. The former follows Kumārajīva's T475, and every comment must be attributed separately as “Kumārajīva says,” “Sengzhao says,” or “Daosheng says.” The latter follows Xuanzang's T476 and develops its interpretation through the terminology of Stainless Renown, Wondrous Auspiciousness, and Xuanzang's recension. The two mirrors are presented together without moving the judgment of one mirror into the scriptural meaning of the other recension.
1. The Empty Room and Compassionate Illness
In the Kumārajīva line, Kumārajīva explains the empty room: 「什曰：將欲明宗，故現空相以發興也。盡敬致供必稱其所安，以文殊樂虛靜，故應之以空也。」 — “Kumārajīva says: Wishing to clarify the cardinal purport, Vimalakīrti manifests the mark of emptiness to arouse the teaching. Perfect reverence and the offering of hospitality must accord with what puts the guest at ease. Because Mañjuśrī delights in empty quiescence, he responds to him with emptiness.” (T38n1775 0371b03) Daosheng separately explains the empty room through its capacity to receive and through its secretly marking the cardinal purport; Sengzhao connects the removal of attendants and the placement of the bed respectively with the opening for the later discourse and the manifestation of illness. Each interpretation has its own focus and is not merged into one statement.
Regarding compassionate illness, Sengzhao says: 「肇曰：答久近也。菩薩何疾？悲彼而生疾耳。群生之疾，癡愛為本；菩薩之疾，大悲為源。夫高由下起、疾因悲生，所以悲疾之興出于癡愛，而癡愛無緒莫識其源，吾疾久近與之同根。此明悲疾之始，不必就己為言也。」 — “Sengzhao says: This answers how long the illness has lasted. What illness does a bodhisattva have? He becomes ill only through compassion for others. The illness of the multitude is rooted in delusion and craving; the bodhisattva's illness has great compassion as its source. What is high arises from what is below, and illness arises because of compassion. Thus compassionate illness arises from delusion and craving, yet delusion and craving have no beginning from which their source can be known. The duration of my illness shares the same root. This clarifies the beginning of compassionate illness and need not be spoken solely with reference to oneself.” (0372a15) At the concluding sentence in this chapter, he also says, 「肇曰：菩薩之疾以大悲為根，因之而起。答初問也。」 — “Sengzhao says: The bodhisattva's illness has great compassion as its root and arises because of it. This answers the first question.” (0372b23) At the same point, Daosheng says, 「生曰：自非大悲，病不妄起也。」 — “Daosheng says: Were it not for great compassion, the illness would not arise without cause.” (0372b24)
The Ci'en commentary divides Stainless Renown's actions before and after the empty room into several layers of intent, and divides the dialogue about illness into the cause, the form, and the removal of illness. Where the illnesses of sentient beings and of Stainless Renown accompany one another, it explains through the shared concern of parent and child how great compassion arises in response to sentient beings. This is Kuiji's analysis based on Xuanzang's recension and is not transferred into the notes on Kumārajīva's recension.
2. Emptiness, the Conception of Dharmas, and the Illness of Emptiness
On 「以空空。」 — “Empty by emptiness.” (T14n0475 0544c01), Kumārajīva says, 「什曰：無以無物故空，以國土性空即是畢竟空，故空也。」 — “Kumārajīva says: It is not empty because there are no objects. Because the own-nature of the land is empty, this itself is ultimate emptiness; therefore it is empty.” (T38n1775 0372c16) Sengzhao elucidates the wisdom of emptiness and the emptiness of dharmas through one another, while Daosheng distinguishes the first emptiness as the wisdom of emptiness and the second as the principle of emptiness. On emptiness without discrimination, the three again explain it differently through wisdom and dharmas, following principle and discrimination; one statement should therefore not be taken to cover the others.
When the discussion reaches the conception of dharmas and the illness of emptiness, Kumārajīva says, 「什曰：向以法遣我，自此以下以空遣法也。」 — “Kumārajīva says: Previously, dharmas were used to dispel self; from here onward, emptiness is used to dispel dharmas.” (0376c06) Sengzhao says that although the conception of dharmas is useful in removing self, it remains inverted in relation to truth. Daosheng warns that giving rise to the conception of dharmas does not mean attachment to dharmas. Regarding the illness of emptiness also being empty, Kumārajīva says, 「什曰：上明無我無法而未遣空，未遣空則空為累，累則是病，故明空病亦空也。」 — “Kumārajīva says: Above, the absence of self and dharmas was clarified, but emptiness had not yet been dispelled. If emptiness is not dispelled, emptiness becomes an encumbrance; an encumbrance is an illness. Therefore, the text clarifies that the illness of emptiness is also empty.” (0377a13) Sengzhao speaks of using dharmas to remove self, emptiness to remove dharmas, and then emptying emptiness. Daosheng says that the illness lies in attachment to emptiness and does not judge the principle of emptiness itself to be the illness.
In the Xuanzang-recension passage “the illness of emptiness is also empty,” the Ci'en commentary presents both an emptiness-principle interpretation and an accord-with-principle interpretation. On one side, it says that in ultimate truth the illness of attachment to emptiness is ultimately empty. On the other, it says that the imagined object of emptiness is not real and that the mind grasping emptiness is likewise not real. Kuiji also distinguishes receiver and received and explains the Xuanzang-recension phrase “undergoing the various things received” as leaving the illness of existence without falling into the illness of emptiness. This path uses the terminology of Xuanzang's recension and shines alongside, without being confused with, the Kumārajīva-line sequence of dispelling self, dharmas, and emptiness.
3. Great Compassion, Bondage and Liberation, and Wisdom and Skillful Means
On great compassion entangled with affectionate views, Kumārajīva says: 「什曰：謂未能深入實相，見有眾生心生愛著，因此生悲，名為愛見大悲。愛見大悲虛妄不淨，有能令人起疲厭想，故應捨離也。」 — “Kumārajīva says: It means that one has not yet been able to enter deeply into the true mark. Seeing sentient beings as existent, the mind gives rise to affectionate attachment, and from this compassion arises; this is called great compassion entangled with affectionate views. Such compassion is false and impure and can cause a person to give rise to weariness, so it should be abandoned.” (0378a25) Sengzhao says that although this compassion is wholesome, it remains mixed with affectionate views and has not escaped encumbrance. Daosheng explains it through affectionate thought and perceived sentient beings remaining within contemplation. All three interpretations are retained under their own attributions.
Following Xuanzang's recension, Kuiji divides this passage as using great compassion to break attachment to emptiness. He further explains craving the flavor of meditative concentration as bondage and gathering in the various births through skillful means without attachment as liberation. He then explains wondrous wisdom and skillfulness separately and does not regard wondrous wisdom alone, without activity that benefits sentient beings, as complete. In the contemplation of body and illness, he again follows Xuanzang's wording: the wisdom side contemplates the impermanence and other marks of body and illness, while skillful means consists in enduring the work of transforming sentient beings while ill. This is the Ci'en mirror's analysis and terminology, presented with equal weight beside the Kumārajīva-line explanations of affectionate views, adventitious dust, and wisdom with skillful means.
4. The Number and Division of the Statements of Bodhisattva Conduct
Beginning with 「離此二法，是菩薩行。」 — “Leaving these two dharmas is the conduct of the bodhisattva.” (T14n0475 0545b27), Kumārajīva's recension contains thirty-two occurrences of the phrase “this is the conduct of the bodhisattva.” Following Xuanzang's recension, Kuiji counts thirty-seven statements, first distinguishing conduct unlike that of ordinary people and the two vehicles and then conduct that attains the superior without abandoning the lesser. He also explicitly notes that the number in the older translation differs from that of his recension. The difference in number belongs to the scriptures on which the two depend. Xuanzang's thirty-seven statements are not used to rewrite Kumārajīva's thirty-two, nor is Kumārajīva's syntax used to cut down Xuanzang's divisions.
6. Terms and Similes
1. Terms Native to This Chapter
| Term in This Chapter | Function in the Sūtra |
|---|---|
| 癡、有愛 — delusion and craving for existence | The starting point for the illness of sentient beings and the bodhisattva's shared illness |
| 大悲 — great compassion | The source from which the bodhisattva's illness arises; it also causes the sick person to recollect the suffering of sentient beings from his own suffering |
| 以空空 — empty by emptiness | The key reply in the dialogue of the empty room, moving from the emptiness of things into the emptiness of dharmas |
| 六十二見 — the sixty-two views | The place where the sūtra directs emptiness to be sought, from which it proceeds to the liberation of the buddhas and the activities of sentient beings' minds |
| 法想 — the conception of dharmas | Temporarily raised after removing the conception of self, then immediately described as an inverted grave affliction |
| 空病 — the illness of emptiness | An illness in which one may still stop after leaving the conceptions of self and dharmas; the sūtra further says that the illness of emptiness is also empty |
| 攀緣 — engagement with objects | Directly named by the sūtra as the root of illness; its objects are the three realms, and it is cut off through non-attainment |
| 愛見大悲 — great compassion entangled with affectionate views | Compassion arising through attachment to and perception of sentient beings; the sūtra says it should be abandoned |
| 慧、方便 — wisdom and skillful means | The two sides of contemplating body and illness without abandoning sentient beings, further elucidated through four forms of bondage and liberation |
2. Terms in the Three Translations Kept in Separate Columns
| Kumārajīva T475 | Zhi Qian T474 | Xuanzang T476 |
|---|---|---|
| 維摩詰 — Vimalakīrti | 維摩詰 — Vimalakīrti | 無垢稱 — Stainless Renown |
| 文殊師利 — Mañjuśrī | 文殊師利 — Mañjuśrī | 妙吉祥 — Wondrous Auspiciousness |
| 毘耶離 — Vaiśālī | 維耶離 — Vaiśālī | 廣嚴 — Vastly Adorned |
| 眾生 — sentient beings | 人、眾人 — people and the multitude | 有情 — sentient beings |
| 攀緣 — engagement with objects | 始未然 — what has not yet begun to be so | 緣慮 — object-directed concern |
| 慧、方便 — wisdom and skillful means | 智、權 — wisdom and skillful means | 妙慧、善巧方便 — wondrous wisdom and skillful means |
Reading the terms in parallel displays the wording of each recension; it does not establish a common body text whose terms may be exchanged at will.
3. Similes Native to This Chapter
1. The only child falls ill, and the parents fall ill as well. This reveals how the bodhisattva cherishes sentient beings as a child: when sentient beings are ill, the bodhisattva is ill; when they recover, the bodhisattva recovers as well.
2. The king of physicians cures the many illnesses. This stands at the end of the nine counsels of consolation and requires the sick bodhisattva not merely to receive comfort, but also to arouse the mind that cures the many illnesses.
3. Only one who defeats an enemy can be called brave. This explains that only one who not merely disciplines his own illness but also removes the suffering of aging, illness, and death for sentient beings can be called a bodhisattva of courage.
In addition, the separation of the bodily mark, the mind being like an illusion, and the relation of neither identity nor separation from the four elements are direct statements in this chapter's inquiry about illness. No physical scene absent from the sūtra is added.
7. Citations and Transmission
In both the Kumārajīva-line notes and the Ci'en commentary, this chapter does not explain only the single word “illness.” T1775 follows Kumārajīva's recension sentence by sentence from T38 0370c16 to the end of the chapter, separately attributing the statements of Kumārajīva, Sengzhao, and Daosheng. T1782 follows Xuanzang's recension and divides the text from T38 1068a07 through 1077a25, commenting from the Buddha's instruction to inquire about the illness through the empty room, consolation, discipline of mind, and bondage and liberation, all the way to the arousal of awakening. Because the two ancient commentaries rely on different translations, they preserve two lines of transmission that can illuminate one another but cannot be mixed across recensions.
The emphases of the Kumārajīva line can be seen in great compassion as the root of illness; the successive dispelling from the conception of self to the conception of dharmas and then to the illness of emptiness; great compassion entangled with affectionate views and the afflictions of adventitious dust; and wisdom and skillful means becoming bondage and liberation in relation to each other. The emphases of the Ci'en line can be seen in its divisions for disciplining the minds of ordinary people and the two vehicles, its parallel emptiness-principle and accord-with-principle interpretations, the mutual inclusion of wondrous wisdom and skillfulness, and its divisions of the thirty-seven statements of bodhisattva conduct. These serve as witnesses to the paths of meaning that later unfold from this chapter. This presentation only transmits what the ancient commentaries say and does not adjudicate sectarian superiority.
8. Textual Positioning
1. Coordinates of the Base Texts and Commentaries
| Material | Coordinates for This Chapter |
|---|---|
| T14n0475 Kumārajīva recension | Scroll title 0544a22; chapter title 0544a25; body 0544a26–0546a02 |
| T14n0474 Zhi Qian recension | Chapter title 0525b17; chapter through the next chapter title at 0527a14 |
| T14n0476 Xuanzang recension | Chapter title 0567b24; chapter through the arousal of awakening at 0570a27 |
| T38n1775 Kumārajīva-line notes | 0370c15–0381a27, with the scriptural text ending at 0381a21; follows the terminology of T475 |
| T38n1782 Ci'en commentary | 1068a07–1077a25; follows the terminology of T476 |
2. Fourteen Textual Notes in This Chapter
| No. | Location | 【大】 Base Text | Variant Witnesses |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0544a22 | 所說 — “spoken” | 【聖】無『所說』 — Shōgozō omits “spoken” |
| 2 | 0544a22 | 卷中 — “Middle Scroll” | 【宋】卷中不可思議解脫；【元】卷中不可思議解說；【聖】無『卷中』 — Song reads “Middle Scroll, Inconceivable Liberation”; Yuan reads “Middle Scroll, Inconceivable Explanation”; Shōgozō does not contain “Middle Scroll” |
| 3 | 0544b03 | 等 — “and the others” | 【宋】【元】【明】無『等』 — Song, Yuan, and Ming omit “and the others” |
| 4 | 0544b22 | 眾生 — “sentient beings” | 【宋】【元】【明】眾生得不 — Song, Yuan, and Ming read “can sentient beings not” |
| 5 | 0544b22 | 滅 — “cease” | 【明】者 — Ming reads “one who” |
| 6 | 0544b28 | 病 — “illness” | 【宋】【元】【明】疾 — Song, Yuan, and Ming read “illness” with the alternate graph |
| 7 | 0545a07 | 是即 — “this then is” | 【元】【明】即是 — Yuan and Ming reverse the order to “then this is” |
| 8 | 0545a10 | 謂【CB】【麗-CB】 — “means,” in CBETA and the Korean-CBETA witness | 【大】為；【聖】謂；並見 T38n1775 0376c29 — Taishō reads “is”; Shōgozō reads “means”; compare the cited commentary locus |
| 9 | 0545a20 | 離 — “leave” | 【宋】無『離』 — Song omits “leave” |
| 10 | 0545b14 | 植 — “plant” | 【宋】【元】【明】【聖】殖 — Song, Yuan, Ming, and Shōgozō read the alternate graph for “plant” |
| 11 | 0545c01 | 降 — “subdue” | 【宋】【元】【明】降伏 — Song, Yuan, and Ming read “subjugate” |
| 12 | 0545c15 | 而不 — “and does not” | 【元】【明】不畢竟；【聖】而不畢竟 — Yuan and Ming read “not ultimately”; Shōgozō reads “and not ultimately” |
| 13 | 0545c16 | 捨 — “abandon” | 【聖】捨離 — Shōgozō reads “leave behind” |
| 14 | 0545c21 | 聖 — “noble” | 【元】【明】正 — Yuan and Ming read “right” |
The textual notes only record the wording of the base text and its witnesses; variant readings do not rewrite the body text of this layer. The comparison of the three translations and the coordinates of the two commentaries likewise position each text only within its own recension. Where an alternative translation has no corresponding passage in this chapter, the entry explicitly says “not found in this chapter” and does not fill the gap from another translation.