[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) › [維摩經略疏垂裕記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779) › 5.76 # 維摩經略疏垂裕記 5.76 維摩經略疏垂裕記 5.76 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.76](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5.76) 二、別示真宴坐，二：初、分科。「三雙」等者，荊溪云：悉是圓訶，但體中名猶似濫小。何者？身子亦謂我入滅定，不是三界而現於意，後入無餘是不現身，何以訶云現身意耶？然淨名意，訶其現在。若云未來，凡夫亦滅，何獨身子。餘之二雙一隻，皆悉非其見聞之境。次定用中，正斥身子所入之定，不能如是。餘之二雙，即是訶其定中無慧。於第二雙，仍更兼前定用以斥下一隻一雙多皆屬慧。又因果雙，雖至第三方立其名，然前二雙並約果訶。下重云果者，以對因故，雖復立因並為成果，以訶身子時不對餘人故。但以大乘分證之果而訶小果，故除因已，餘之五法皆先直引菩薩，次重奉法身菩薩，以分證人對斥小果。至訶目連，緣對八百，則盡以三教因法訶之。下去八人，至文屬當。 > Second, specifically showing true quiet sitting, which has two parts: first, dividing into sections. Regarding "the three pairs" and so on: Jingxi says that these are all reproaches from the perfect \[teaching\], but the terms within the substance still seem to be confused with the Hinayāna. Why? Śāriputra also says, "I enter the concentration of cessation; this is not in the three realms yet manifests intention; later entering without remainder is not manifesting the body; why does \[Vimalakīrti\] reproach by saying 'manifesting body and intention'?" However, Jingming's intention is to reproach his present state. If one spoke of the future, ordinary beings also cease; why Śāriputra alone? The remaining two pairs and one single are all states not within his seeing and hearing. Next, in the function of concentration, it directly reproaches the concentration entered by Śāriputra as incapable of being like this. The remaining two pairs are precisely reproaching the absence of wisdom within his concentration. In the second pair, it further combines with the preceding function of concentration to reproach; the subsequent one single and one pair mostly belong to wisdom. Furthermore, regarding the pair of cause and effect, although its name is only established when reaching the third, nevertheless the preceding two pairs both reproach in terms of the effect. The reason "effect" is stated again below is that it is contrasted with the cause; although cause is established, all are for the sake of bringing the effect to completion; because when reproaching Śāriputra, he was not facing other people. It is merely reproaching the small effect by means of the partially realized effect of the Great Vehicle; therefore, excluding the cause, the remaining five dharmas all first directly cite the bodhisattva, and next repeatedly bring forward the dharmakāya bodhisattva, using a person of partial realization to reproach the small effect. When it comes to reproaching Maudgalyāyana, because he faced eight hundred \[listeners\], \[Vimalakīrti\] completely reproached him using the causal dharmas of the three teachings. The eight persons below will be matched when reaching their text. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.75](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5.75) - [Next: 5.77](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5.77) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779~en-mt.5.76) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5.76](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.5.76) · Pramāṇa