[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) › 6.112 # 維摩經略疏垂裕記 6.112 維摩經略疏垂裕記 6.112 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.112](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6.112) 二、答，二：初、明即枯是榮。荊溪云：答意者，破拙入巧，巧拙自殊。意顯破拙即入中也，借結此拙而成枯意。巧自成榮，故先入巧，入已見中。雙遊之義，枯即榮也，故引二鳥其義善成，故居士訶即名榮也。苦等一一皆云義故，故可結為非枯非榮，義字不間真中故也，故立不生不滅我與無我不二等言，況此通門元通妙理。「二鳥雙遊」者，〈鳥喻品〉云「一者迦隣提、二者鴛鴦，遊止共俱不相捨離。」古人多解，委如彼疏。今師以雄喻常、雌喻無常。生死有性善，故無常即常，如二鳥在下。涅槃有性惡，故常即無常，如二鳥飛高。是則在高在下雌雄共俱，雙遊並息其義皆成。故今雖結枯名，枯即榮也，以二鳥不相捨離故。「無我法中有真我」者，此示《大經》迦葉歎佛文也。亦應例云無常中有常、苦中有樂、空有不空，悉是二鳥雙遊、即枯是榮意也。 > Second, the answer, in two: first, clarifying that the withered is precisely the blooming. Jingxi says: "Regarding the intent of the answer: refuting the clumsy to enter the skillful, the skillful and the clumsy are naturally distinct. The intent is to show that refuting the clumsy is directly entering the middle; one borrows the conclusion of this clumsiness to complete the meaning of withering. The skillful naturally constitutes blooming; hence one first enters the skillful, and having entered, perceives the middle. Regarding the meaning of flying together: the withered is precisely the blooming; hence citing the two birds, its meaning is successfully established, and therefore the householder's reproach is itself called blooming. Because suffering and the rest are each described with 'meaning,' they can thus be concluded as neither withered nor blooming, for the character 'meaning' does not separate the true from the middle. Hence expressions such as 'unborn and unextinguished' and 'the non-duality of self and non-self' are established; how much more so since this Common gate originally connects to the wondrous principle!" Regarding "the two birds flying together": the "Parable of the Birds" chapter says, 'One is the kalaviṅka, the second is the mandarin duck; they roam and roost together, never abandoning one another.' Ancient scholars had many interpretations, detailed as in that commentary. Our master takes the male to symbolize permanence, and the female to symbolize impermanence. In birth-and-death there is inherent goodness, so impermanence is precisely permanence, like the two birds below. In nirvāṇa there is inherent evil, so permanence is precisely impermanence, like the two birds flying high. Thus, whether above or below, male and female are together; flying together or resting together, its meaning is fully established. Therefore, although a withered designation is now concluded, the withered is precisely the blooming, because the two birds do not separate from one another. Regarding "within the dharma of non-self there is the true self": this indicates the passage in the Great Sūtra where Kāśyapa praises the Buddha. By analogy one should also say: within impermanence there is permanence, within suffering there is bliss, within emptiness there is non-emptiness; all have the intent of the two birds flying together, and the withered being precisely the blooming. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.111](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6.111) - [Next: 6.113](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6.113) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779~en-mt.6.112) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6.112](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.6.112) · Pramāṇa