維摩經玄疏 5.59

5.59

Seventh, the Sanlun masters say: 'If others clarify bondage and liberation, bondage is self-bondage and liberation is self-liberation; this is bondage and liberation of self-nature, not nominal bondage and liberation. Failing to realize the bondage and liberation of non-bondage and non-liberation, this is not inconceivable liberation.' Now we clarify: 'Bondage is not self-bondage; bondage is spoken of dependent on liberation. Liberation is not self-liberation; liberation is spoken of dependent on bondage.' Speaking of bondage dependent on liberation is nominal bondage; speaking of liberation dependent on bondage is nominal liberation. Nominal bondage is not bondage; nominal liberation is not liberation; this is non-bondage and non-liberation, fundamentally pure. Yet speaking of bondage and liberation is the inconceivable bondage and liberation of nominal designation. Inconceivable bondage is itself inconceivable liberation; therefore it is called inconceivable liberation. However, their conventional words of provisional designation shift and turn in many ways; how could they be fixedly described? This merely sets forth the initial chapter.