Vimalakīrti Sūtra Commentary (維摩經義疏)

There are two main gateways: first, to clarify the essential source; second, to explain that essential source. This source has six aspects: first, unifying the many into three; second, merging the three into two; third, combining the two into one; fourth, dissolving the one into nothing; fifth, distinguishing the greater and lesser; sixth, examining the sameness and difference.

The essential source of Vimalakīrti's inconceivable liberation is the gate of non-duality. Because the path of non-duality is realized, the wisdom of non-duality arises; because this wisdom exists, adaptation and transformation become boundless. Thus the sutra says, "Mañjuśrī's Dharma is ever thus, the Dharma King has only one Dharma. All unhindered beings, through one path, transcend birth and death." Therefore, non-duality is the source of all sages. To discuss the branches, one must first seek the root; hence this treatise begins with the Dharma of non-duality.

**Question:** Since the gate of non-duality is the fundamental principle, please explain its essentials.

**Answer:** The single path is pure, hence called "non-duality"; the ultimate truth is a reliable standard, hence called "Dharma"; it is supremely subtle and empty yet pervasive, hence called "gate." This is the final refuge of all teachings, the spiritual home of all sages—the original intent behind Vimalakīrti feigning illness and the reason for Mañjuśrī's inquiry about his health. Since you wish to hear it, I will now briefly explain.

The great clarity of non-duality has three stages: First, the assembly speaks of non-duality, but fails to understand that non-duality is beyond words—this is the lower stage. Mañjuśrī, though he understands that non-duality is beyond words, still speaks about wordlessness—this is the middle stage. Vimalakīrti realizes that non-duality is beyond words and can remain silent about non-duality—this is the higher stage. Truly, because the path transcends the four propositions, the supreme sage remains silent and still. Non-duality as the ultimate truth lies precisely in this.

**Question:** The Dharma body has no form, yet it manifests form in response to beings. The ultimate truth is wordless, yet profound teachings spread widely—this is "form in formlessness" and "words in wordlessness." It would then seem that Mañjuśrī's words are deep and Vimalakīrti's silence is shallow. The three-stage theory is unclear to me.

**Answer:** The three-stage explanation is meant to clarify the depth of the principle, not to discuss adapting to beings through teaching. To use the branches to challenge the root—how could this align with the profound teaching? Now I will clarify its meaning for you.

The principle of non-duality is the inconceivable source; responding to beings through teaching is the inconceivable trace. Without the source, there can be no trace; therefore, teachings are established based on the principle. Without the trace, the source cannot be revealed; therefore, teachings are used to access the principle. If so, one must realize the principle as wordless; only then can one respond to beings with words. When the assembly spoke of the principle, they did not understand that the ultimate principle is wordless—thus they did not reach the principle. When Mañjuśrī proclaimed the principle as wordless, yet still spoke about the ultimate principle, he too did not fully embody it. When Vimalakīrti realized the principle as wordless and could remain silent about the principle, only then did he truly reach it. Because he aligned with the wordless principle, he could speak without speaking; because he embodied the formless principle, he could manifest form without form. If the assembly could not align with the wordless principle, how could they speak without speaking? If they could not embody the formless principle, how could they manifest form without form? Hence Mañjuśrī's words are shallow, and Vimalakīrti's silence is deep. The three-stage theory clarifies this point.

**Objection:** If the three-stage theory holds, then the teaching of non-duality is undermined. Why? Since it is called "non-duality," how can there be three? If there are three, what is meant by "non-duality"? This contradicts itself, like a spear and shield.

**Answer:** This is confusing the teaching with the principle, hence the apparent contradiction. If you recognize that the principle is one and the teachings are three, they are like matching halves of a tally. Why? The assembly used words to eliminate concepts but did not let go of the word "elimination." Mañjuśrī, wanting to stop such words, used words to end words. Though different, both were not free from words—hence words become teaching. Vimalakīrti, wanting to stop Mañjuśrī's use of words, used silence to show wordlessness—using silence to express the principle. Hence teaching has three stages, but the principle has no second path.

**Question:** The ultimate principle is wordless, and Mañjuśrī spoke about wordlessness—this can be called teaching. Vimalakīrti realized the wordless principle and could be silent about it—why is this also called teaching?

**Answer:** This doubt arises from not deeply investigating the meaning. If you examine it carefully, the previous explanation has already made it clear. Why? Vimalakīrti relied on the appearance of silence to express the wordless principle. What is expressed (wordlessness) is the principle; the appearance that expresses it is called teaching. Hence teaching has three gates, but the principle is one.

**Question:** The ultimate principle is wordless, and Mañjuśrī speaking about wordlessness is still not ultimate. Similarly, the ultimate principle is formless, and Vimalakīrti manifesting form in formlessness—does this reach the ultimate principle?

**Answer:** Mañjuśrī, by speaking about wordlessness, also manifested form in formlessness. Vimalakīrti, embodying the wordless principle, could be wordless about wordlessness; embodying the formless principle, he could be formless about formlessness. Thus both name and form are eliminated, and he subtly realizes non-duality.

**Question:** Since Vimalakīrti embodies the formless principle, why did he manifest form in formlessness?

**Answer:** If he had not manifested form in formlessness, how could words be stopped? To stop words, he manifested formlessness.

**Question:** If so, though words cease, form remains—like fleeing a peak only to fall into a valley, both are troubles.

**Answer:** Words are like names—being named is subtle; form is like shape—being in shape is coarse. Once you realize that the principle is beyond words and names, you understand that the path is beyond form and shape. Thus both peak and valley are fled, and all troubles are avoided.

**Question:** If so, the assembly's words were not ultimate, and Vimalakīrti's silence reached the goal. Why not directly reveal wordlessness, but take the winding path of three stages?

**Answer:** When Confucius met Bo Xue, they understood the path with a glance. When Mañjuśrī faced Vimalakīrti, they silently understood each other. But since profound realization is hidden, the teaching to guide beings must be clear. Hence these three gates are opened to lead into non-duality.

**Question:** Since profound realization is hidden, guiding beings requires countless teachings. Why only open three gates instead of a wider range of stages?

**Answer:** The first gate uses words to eliminate concepts; the second uses words to stop words; the third uses silence to stop the borrowing of words. Thus the principle is fully covered, and the teaching is complete—hence only three are explained.

**Question:** Since Vimalakīrti is the master of this sutra, and non-duality is the essence of all sutras, why did he not speak directly but called on others to speak?

**Answer:** This is to use the differences in people to show the depth of teachings. The assembly were merely attendants, showing that their spiritual roots were still shallow—they could only use words to eliminate concepts, but could not stop the word "elimination." Mañjuśrī, holding the high command and personally engaging in dialogue, had a sharper spiritual capacity—he could both use words to eliminate concepts and use words to stop words. Vimalakīrti, as the master of this teaching, had the deepest realization—hence he used silence to show that the principle is utterly beyond.

**Question:** Is this only about the teachers, or also about the conditions for realization?

**Answer:** The reason for manifesting through three people is to guide beings. Those of lower spiritual roots awaken shallowly and only reach the first gate. Those of middling capacity gradually reach the second gate. Those of superior ability thoroughly penetrate the principle and directly enter the profound hall.

[Chapter 2: Merging the Three into Two Doors]

There are three pairs in total. First: the pair of Speech and Silence encompasses the three doors. The Buddha instructed his disciples to constantly practice two things: sacred teaching and sacred silence. Teaching the nature of ultimate reality is sacred teaching; contemplating the nature of ultimate reality is sacred silence. From contemplating ultimate reality one teaches it, and from teaching ultimate reality one returns to contemplating it. Thus, whether moving or still, whether in the four postures or in answering or remaining silent, all actions align with ultimate reality and respond to perfect wisdom. These three doors now follow this sacred principle.

The assembly uses words to dissolve phenomena; Manjusri uses words to stop words. Together they use words to illuminate non-duality — this is called sacred teaching. Vimalakīrti’s silence illuminates non-duality — this is called sacred silence. If this is so, it is through the assembly’s speech that Vimalakīrti’s silence is revealed; and through Vimalakīrti’s silence, the assembly’s speech is illuminated. The purpose of having all discuss together lies precisely here.

Second: the pair of Name and Entity encompasses the three doors. All phenomena can be summarized into two kinds: entities and names. These two are the source of accumulation and the root of affliction. Therefore, Subhūti asked, “Where do living beings dwell?” The Buddha replied, “All living beings dwell within names and forms.” Names refer to labels; forms refer to the entities themselves. The assembly uses words to dissolve all dualities, showing there are no entities. Manjusri uses words to stop words. Vimalakīrti uses silence to suspend using words. Together they illuminate that there is no name and no form. Where there is no name and no form, all troubles cease. Thus, although there are three doors, they are all encompassed by these two.

Third: the pair of conventional name and form encompasses the three doors. Sutras say, “That which has no name or form is forcibly described with names and forms,” hoping thereby to lead people to realize the nameless and formless. This is the great purpose of teaching and the fundamental intention of all sages. If this is so, the assembly and Manjusri use names to discuss non-duality; Vimalakīrti’s silence uses form to illuminate the one path. Thus, although there are three doors, they are merely traces of name and form. Through the traces of name and form, the fundamental nameless and formless is revealed.

The Second and the First Merge into One, Part Three.

Question: First, you established three stages, then explained two approaches. Looking at the text and commentary, it seems quite elegant, but when we examine the core meaning, the non-duality remains incomplete. Why? If the principle of non-duality is wordless, and teachings that respond to beings use words, then the wordless principle cannot have words, and teachings with words cannot be wordless. Principle and teaching are then as separated as heaven and earth—how can this be called non-duality?

Answer: You understand that non-duality is wordless, but you have not yet realized that words themselves are non-duality. Therefore, the teaching fills the entire universe yet does not speak; its form pervades all directions yet has no image. Thus, speaking without speaking, though spoken, it is not spoken; having an image without an image, though it appears, it does not appear. This is the single truth—why call it a separation of heaven and earth?

Objection: If words are non-duality itself, then Manjushri's words are eternally silent. If non-duality is words themselves, then Vimalakirti's silence is eternally speaking. The three-stage discussion is then confused, and the two-path doctrine is lost.

Answer: The explanation of three stages temporarily illustrates the shallow and the deep; the teaching of two paths guides those who have not yet awakened. If you fully penetrate this, then non-duality is always speaking, and speaking is always non-duality. It has never not been non-duality, and it has never not spoken. Thus, the path of non-duality is realized, and the principle of oneness is established.

The Fourth Gate: Eliminating Words and Returning to the Absolute.

The Treatise says: "Existence and non-existence arise mutually; high and low lean on each other. Because there is existence, there is non-existence; without existence, there is no non-existence." Because of duality, there is non-duality; if there is no duality, there is no non-duality. Therefore, the Sutra says: "Do not cling to the teaching of non-duality, because there is neither one nor two." This means it is neither speech nor silence, neither worldly nor transcendental, cutting off all views and objects—how could there be duality or non-duality?

Question: If it is neither true nor worldly, neither dual nor non-dual, then on what basis can we explain non-duality?

Answer: The nameless, formless reality is spoken of using provisional names and forms. Not knowing what else to call it, we provisionally name it "non-duality."

Objection: Since it is neither dual nor non-dual, why not provisionally name it "duality"?

Answer: Those who have lost the Way often cling to dualistic views. To eliminate these two extremes, we provisionally name it "non-duality," not "duality."

Question: What dualistic views are being refuted by this provisional name of non-duality?

Answer: The sickness of duality takes many forms, briefly explained as three types: first, the attachments of ordinary beings; second, the afflictions of the Lesser Vehicle practitioners; third, the weariness of Bodhisattvas. This Sutra opens the vast gate of non-duality, revealing the great path of equality. No burden remains unleveled, no person remains untransformed. Thus, the "Skillful Means" chapter breaks through the attachments of ordinary beings; the "Disciple" chapter refutes the narrow views of the Lesser Vehicle; the "Bodhisattva" chapter rebukes attachments to the Great Vehicle. Then it gathers these three, guiding them to the single path, awakening them to the truth that they are neither ordinary nor holy, neither great nor small—equal to Shakyamuni's silent teaching, identical to Vimalakirti's silence. Adapting teachings without limit, they respond to conditions as great or small. Ultimately, that which can be great or small—how could it be limited to being great or small? Precisely because it is neither small nor great, it can be both great and small.