維摩經玄疏 2.97

2.97

Next, explaining the cultivation of the aimless samādhi: one contemplates the true mark of suchness, neither seeing cultivation through conditions as making one a buddha, nor seeing cultivation of the real as making one a buddha, nor seeing the union of both cultivations—of the real and through conditions—as making one a buddha, nor being apart from both cultivations—of the real and through conditions—as making one a buddha. The four propositions explaining cultivation are four kinds of meanings of 'making'; if there are no four cultivations, there are no four reliances, and this is the aimless samādhi. If so, how could it be identical to the doctrinal clarification of the Northern Branch of Xiangzhou that cultivation through conditions makes one a buddha—which masters of both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna in the south also mostly adopt as cultivation through conditions making one a buddha? Nor is it identical to the doctrinal clarification of the Southern Branch of Xiangzhou that cultivation of the real makes one a buddha.