[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) › 8.165 # 維摩經略疏垂裕記 8.165 維摩經略疏垂裕記 8.165 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [8.165](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8.165) 二、成立上下。荊溪云：文殊問云何慰等者，準下五品既從此生，下之五品復能成上，須以通相三觀釋之。若不爾者，國王長者亦樂佛身，諸大弟子用三教斥，菩薩亦用三教為訶，雖多用圓義歸於衍，故須通相別在其中。是故上文但云從別。故此文意用上為基，空既通已，豈有中假而不通耶？故準往復以論所表。次從空中生一切法，為存方等遍對諸土及以三惑因果不同，故須別辨觀眾生等及以別訶弟子菩薩，故至法華方純一味。文為二：初、成上。二、成下。「為入不二至作本」者，不二是雙遮，香積是雙流。三、「而不」下，四教用捨，二：初、對前明用捨意殊。荊溪云：未入室明四教等者，俗眾未斷見思之惑，須加三藏而對治之，以三藏教治欲勝故。若爾，俗眾豈無斷有為者？答：若依小斷已在小數，若依大斷已在大數，故且別引具惑為俗。二、「故知」下，顯經文與一家義合。 > Second, establishing the above and below. Jingxi says: "Regarding Mañjuśrī asking how to console, etc.: based on the fact that the subsequent five chapters arise from this, and the subsequent five chapters can in turn establish what is above, one must explain it using the threefold contemplation in its common aspect. If not so, the kings and elders also delight in the Buddha's body, the great disciples are reproached using the three teachings, and the bodhisattvas are also reproved using the three teachings; although they mostly use the perfect meaning to return to the Mahāyāna, the common aspect must have the distinct within it. Therefore the text above merely says 'from the distinct.' Hence the meaning of this text uses the above as its foundation: since emptiness is already common, how could the middle and the provisional not be common? Therefore, based on the back-and-forth, one discusses what is signified. Next, all dharmas arise from within emptiness: in order to preserve the Vaipulya's universal pairing against various lands as well as the difference of causes and effects of the three delusions, one must distinctively distinguish contemplating sentient beings, etc., and distinctively reproach the disciples and bodhisattvas; therefore, only when reaching the Lotus Sūtra is it purely of one flavor. The text has two parts: first, establishing the above; second, establishing the below. Regarding 'serving as the root for entering non-duality up to \[Gandhakūṭa\]': non-duality is double negation; Gandhakūṭa is double flowing." Third, from 'and not' onward, the application and rejection of the four teachings, which has two parts: first, contrasting with the preceding to clarify the differing intentions in application and rejection. Jingxi says: "Clarifying the four teachings before entering the room, etc.: since the lay assembly has not severed the delusions of views and thoughts, one must add the Tripiṭaka \[teaching\] to counteract them, because the Tripiṭaka teaching is superior in curing desire. If so, how could there be none among the lay assembly who have severed conditioned \[defilements\]? Answer: if severed according to the Hinayāna, they are already numbered among the Hinayāna; if severed according to the Mahāyāna, they are already numbered among the Mahāyāna; therefore, it specifically takes those fully endowed with delusions as the laity." Second, from 'therefore we know' onward, showing that the sūtra text accords with the doctrine of our lineage. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 8.164](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8.164) - [Next: 8.166](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8.166) - [Up: 8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779~en-mt.8.165) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8.165](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.8.165) · Pramāṇa