[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) › 9.8 # 維摩經略疏 9.8 維摩經略疏 9.8 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [9.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9.8) 問：此經始終無佛性名，何得說言明佛性也？答：此品淨名說非道為道，文殊說非種為種，種性即是眼目異名，如天帝釋豈異憍尸？若謂不作佛性名說，不關佛性義者，有經不以二諦名說，亦應不關二諦，何得言諸佛常依二諦說法？ > Question: From beginning to end, this sūtra does not contain the term "buddha-nature"; how can you say that it clarifies buddha-nature? Answer: In this chapter, Vimalakīrti speaks of the non-path as the path, and Mañjuśrī speaks of non-seeds as seeds. "Seed-nature" is merely a different designation for the same referent; how could Śakra, Lord of the Gods, be different from Kauśika? If one claims that because it is not spoken using the name "buddha-nature" it is unrelated to the meaning of buddha-nature, then since there are sūtras that do not speak using the name "two truths," they would likewise be unrelated to the two truths—so how could it be said that all buddhas always preach the Dharma relying on the two truths? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 9.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9.7) - [Next: 9.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9.9) - [Up: 9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778~en-mt.9.8) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1778.9.8) · Pramāṇa