維摩經略疏垂裕記 1.66

English (machine translation) 1.66

Language: English

1.66

Second, raising the inquiry again in terms of name has two parts: first, the meaning of the question is: beneath the title of the Huayan there is no designation of "Inconceivable", whereas beneath the title of the present scripture that name is explicitly present; why on the contrary is it asserted that the Inconceivable Sūtra pointed to by the Commentary (Dazhidulun) is not the present scripture?

Previous: 1.65
Next: 1.67
Up: 1

Linked texts (1)

維摩經略疏垂裕記 — Classical Chinese