[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) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › 2.18 # 宗鏡錄 2.18 宗鏡錄 2.18 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2.18) 又問。三界是有漏法。由屬三界愛結所繫。故名三界。其無為無漏法。不為三界愛結所繫。即不名三界法。經何故但言三界唯心。即不攝無為無漏等法。此豈非唯識。而但言三界耶。 > Question: The three realms are defiled phenomena (sāsrava-dharma); because they are bound by the bond of craving (tṛṣṇā-saṃyojana) pertaining to the three realms, they are called the "three realms". Unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) and undefiled (anāsrava) phenomena are not bound by the bond of craving of the three realms, and therefore are not called phenomena of the three realms. Why, then, do the sūtras merely state that "the three realms are only citta", thereby not including unconditioned and undefiled phenomena? Are these not also consciousness-only (vijñaptimātra), such that \[the scriptures\] speak only of the three realms? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2.17) - [Next: 2.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2.19) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.2.18) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.2.18) · Pramāṇa