[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) › [止觀輔行傳弘決](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912) › 1.67 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 1.67 止觀輔行傳弘決 1.67 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.67](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.67) 從「雖有」去，勸誡也。一勸勿執三以為定有；二勸勿執三為定差別，雖三差別皆通實相，豈可定執而相是非。故下文云「知文非文」。疣者，肉之凸患。害者，肉之損患。《莊子》云「生為懸疣附贅，死為決肒殨癰。」肒字（戶貫反）。《釋名》云「疣者，丘也。出於皮上，如地有丘。」定三為損、定有為增，故引以為增減三謗。次引論者，《大論》二十讚般若偈云「若不見般若，是則為被縛。若人見般若，是亦為被縛。若人見般若，是亦得解脫。若不見般若，是亦得解脫。是事甚希有，甚深有大名。」用前兩行對今文意，於法起見名見被縛，迷於法相名不見縛；稱法起見名見得脫，見無見相名不見脫。謂定有三、謂三定別名為見縛，迷於三文及三文意名不見縛；知三無三同契一極名見得脫，亡於能契及以所契名不見脫。 > From 'Although there are...' onward is an admonition. First, it admonishes not to cling to the three as definitely existing; second, it admonishes not to cling to the three as definitely distinct. Although the three are distinct, all lead through to the true mark; how could one rigidly cling to them and set them against each other as right and wrong? Therefore the text below says: 'knowing that texts are non-texts'. A wart (you) is a protuberant blemish on the flesh. An injury (hai) is a damaging affliction on the flesh. Zhuangzi says: 'In life they are dangling warts and attached wens; in death they are burst ulcers and draining sores.' The character you (wart) is glossed in the Shiming: 'A wart is a hillock; it emerges upon the skin just as the earth has hillocks.' To fix the three as \[distinct\] is a reduction; to fix them as existent is an addition. Therefore they are cited as the three slanders of addition and reduction. Next, citing the treatise: the verse praising prajñā in fascicle twenty of the Dazhidulun says: 'If one does not see prajñā, / one is bound by this. / If one sees prajñā, / one is also bound by this. / If one sees prajñā, / one also attains liberation. / If one does not see prajñā, / one also attains liberation. / This matter is extremely rare, / extremely deep, and of great renown.' Applying the first two lines to the meaning of the present text: giving rise to views toward phenomena is called 'bound by seeing'; being deluded about phenomenal marks is called 'bound by not seeing'. Accordance with phenomena that gives rise to views is called 'attaining liberation by seeing'; seeing that there is no mark of seeing is called 'attaining liberation by not seeing'. Claiming that the three definitely exist and claiming that the three are definitely distinct is called 'the bondage of seeing'; being deluded about the three texts and the intentions of the three texts is called 'the bondage of not seeing'. Knowing that the three are without three and together accord with the one ultimate is called 'attaining liberation by seeing'; losing both that which accords and that which is accorded with is called 'attaining liberation by not seeing'. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.66](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.66) - [Next: 1.68](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.68) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.1.67) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.67](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.67) · Pramāṇa