[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [維摩經略疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778) › 5.65 # 維摩經略疏 5.65 維摩經略疏 5.65 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5.65) 「如佛至於如」，四、引佛成證釋波離疑。何者？波離自念毘尼是佛所制，依此制用有何失哉？是故大士亦引佛語，何得不受。但佛語有二：一了義、二不了義。豈執不了之言，不受了義之說？亦是令二比丘信心明淨，故引佛語破其疑執。若依此判違佛語者，毘尼中佛問汝何心作，若垢心作輕之與重悉皆是罪，不得言無。大士即引佛語「心垢故眾生垢」。當知罪從心生，若見有眾生即有垢罪。若知心空無眾生相，即是心淨，心淨即眾生淨，眾生淨故無罪垢也。此則能知所知之心皆不在內外中間，是則無心，無心何得有垢？故云「罪垢亦然，諸法亦然」。「不出於如」者，如《大品》云「菩薩行般若時，不見有法出法性外，法性即如之異名。」 > "As the Buddha said... up to... in suchness": fourth, citing the Buddha to provide proof and resolve Upāli's doubts. Why? Upāli thought to himself that the vinaya was laid down by the Buddha; what fault could there be in applying it according to these regulations? Therefore the Mahāsattva also cited the Buddha's own words—how could he not accept them? But the Buddha's words are of two kinds: first, the definitive meaning; second, the non-definitive meaning. How could one cling to the non-definitive words and not accept the definitive teaching? It was also to make the faith of the two monks clear and pure, and thus he cited the Buddha's words to break their doubts and attachments. If one were to follow this judgment and contravene the Buddha's words—in the vinaya, the Buddha asks with what mind one acted; if it was done with a defiled mind, whether light or heavy, it is entirely a transgression, and one cannot say it does not exist. The Mahāsattva then cited the Buddha's words: "Because the mind is defiled, sentient beings are defiled." One should know that transgressions arise from the mind; if one sees that sentient beings exist, there are defiled transgressions. If one knows that the mind is empty and without the characteristics of sentient beings, that is purity of mind; when the mind is pure, sentient beings are pure; and because sentient beings are pure, there are no defilements of transgression. Thus both the mind that knows and the mind that is known are neither within, without, nor in between; this is no-mind, and when there is no mind, how could there be defilement? Therefore it says: "Transgressions and defilements are also like this, and all phenomena are also like this." "Do not step outside of suchness": as the Dàpǐn says, "When a bodhisattva practices prajñā, they do not see any phenomenon that steps outside the dharma-nature; dharma-nature is simply another name for suchness." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5.64) - [Next: 5.66](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5.66) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778~en-mt.5.65) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.5.65) · Pramāṇa