維摩經略疏 6.8

6.8

問：別同通教並緣為自，一往類通四句可知。圓以真為自，四句云何？答：智斷非自生、非真修成，亦非他生、非緣修成，亦非共生、非真緣合成，亦非無因生、非離真緣成，而有圓教之智斷也。若四句撿智斷叵得，則無受圓教一生之記。但淨名難意難圓自生真修智斷，是中窮覈非兩十番之所能。夫不深見此意，圓教真修義則難存。圓真尚爾，通別緣修豈易可存？因淨名一難成三難意，宛然不濫。

Question: The Distinct agrees with the Common Teaching in taking the conditioned as self; provisionally drawing an analogy to the Common [Teaching], the four propositions are understandable. The Perfect takes the true as self; what are its four propositions? Answer: Wisdom and severance are not self-produced—not accomplished by true cultivation; nor are they other-produced—not accomplished by conditioned cultivation; nor are they produced by both—not accomplished by the combination of the true and the conditioned; nor are they produced without cause—not accomplished apart from the true and the conditioned; and yet the wisdom and severance of the Perfect Teaching exist. If in examining wisdom and severance through the four propositions they cannot be found, then there is no receiving the prophecy of one life [to buddhahood] of the Perfect Teaching. However, Vimalakīrti's intent in refuting is to refute the self-produced true cultivation of wisdom and severance of the Perfect [Teaching]; an exhaustive examination within this cannot be accomplished even in twenty exchanges. If one does not deeply discern this meaning, the doctrine of true cultivation of the Perfect Teaching can hardly stand. If even the true [cultivation] of the Perfect is like this, how could the conditioned cultivation of the Common and Distinct easily stand? Because of Vimalakīrti's single refutation, the meanings of three refutations are established, distinctly and without confusion.