維摩經略疏垂裕記 6.137

6.137

二、「故大」下，引證破執。荊溪云：故大論下，示悔初後。於此初後謂罪定有而生重憂罪定不滅，以此心起不順無生。應滅憂心已生無主，方名罪性本自無生。罪尚無生，豈計憂悔？捨悔憂想，相續永忘，了自性心本無生滅。如是悔者，名真無生。憂，亦悔之別名而已。故一切大教皆為眾生示滅罪相，如禮二十五佛、聞文殊等名，更云有罪即名謗佛。散心尚爾，況復無生。「又若」下，重釋罪心。罪體幾忘，不獨由執。世人作罪常謂罪無，可由此心令罪自滅？若如是者，豈不增於諸見計耶？今云不執，從悔心說。若設悔已信佛云無，尚執有愆公違佛教。故知觀罪本為滅心，若反執心與滅相反。

Second, from "Therefore the Great [Treatise]" onward, citation of proof to break attachments. Jingxi says: "From 'Therefore the Great Treatise' onward shows the beginning and end of repentance. If at this beginning and end one claims that transgressions definitely exist and gives rise to grave anxiety that transgressions definitely cannot be eradicated, the arousal of such a mind does not accord with the unproduced. One ought to extinguish the anxious mind; since what has arisen has no master, only then is it called the nature of transgressions being originally unproduced. When transgressions are inherently unproduced, how could one deliberate over anxiety and remorse? Renounce thoughts of remorse and anxiety, forever forget continuity, and thoroughly understand that the mind of self-nature is fundamentally without arising or ceasing. One who repents like this is called truly unproduced." 'Anxiety' is also merely an alternative term for remorse. Therefore, all the great teachings show the marks of the eradication of transgressions for sentient beings; for instance, when bowing to the twenty-five Buddhas or hearing the names of Mañjuśrī and others, to further claim that one has transgressions is called slandering the Buddhas. If this is so even for a distracted mind, how much more so for the unproduced? From "Furthermore, if" onward, re-explanation of the mind of transgression. The disappearance of the substance of transgression does not solely depend on grasping. When worldly people commit transgressions, they often claim that transgressions do not exist; could this mind cause transgressions to extinguish on their own? If that were so, would it not augment all views and reckonings? Here, when it says 'not grasping', it is spoken from the perspective of the mind of repentance. If, having already performed repentance and believing the Buddha's word that [transgressions] do not exist, one still grasps that faults exist, one openly violates the Buddha's teaching. Thus we know that contemplating transgressions was originally meant to extinguish the mind; if one conversely grasps at the mind, it is contrary to eradication.