[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) › [維摩經疏卷第三．第六](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772) › 3.28 # 維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.28 維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.28 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.28) 若能不捨八邪已下。第三呵取邪正翻失顯得。遠云。聲聞獨善故捨八邪入八解脫。菩薩兼利隨物視同故不捨八邪入八解脫。諺云。言八解者翻八正道以為八邪。謂邪見邪思惟邪語邪業乃至邪定。入八解脫者遂翻八邪以為解脫。謂正見乃至正定。亦可是彼內有色相外觀色等八解脫也。邪正既異。云何不捨於邪而入正也。是大難解。有人云。謂諸佛菩薩雖自正證而以大悲應同於邪故云不捨。如此釋者大成猛狼。既云應同久已捨竟。云何不捨。又此文中呵彼凡小不達法空心有取捨。呵之欲令學於大乘平等真觀。何得乃就應同者釋。都不相應。今解云何。淨名妙契真如體非邪正。妄情分別謬見是非。如此惑與理相違。悲傷不已。今正教之觀。此邪倒從妄心起。心尚非有。妄依何生。達妄體空即真解脫。理既不居邪正。豈有縛脫之名。今已無邪可捨名入解脫也。又云。二乘捨八邪而入八正。大士識邪性空與正無異。所以不捨而入。以無可入對彼捨入故云不捨入也。以邪相入正法者。遠云。前就因此約果以教。邪相世間正法涅槃。聲聞獨善捨邪入正。菩薩兼利隨物現同。故不捨邪入正法也。又云。二乘捨邪入正。大士悟邪正俱空。解空不異故名為入。何為離邪而求正也。若欲除邪別覓正者。如第二頭第三手等。失之遠矣。故下經云。住正道者不分別邪正也。以一食施一切。 > "If one can not abandon the eight deviants" onward: third, reprimanding the grasping of the deviant and the correct, overturning the fault to reveal the gain. Yuan says: Śrāvakas cultivate only their own welfare, hence they abandon the eight deviants to enter the eight liberations; bodhisattvas benefit others as well, appearing identical according to beings, hence they do not abandon the eight deviants to enter the eight liberations. Yan says: As for the "eight liberations," reversing the eightfold correct path makes the eight deviants: namely, deviant views, deviant intentions, deviant speech, deviant action, up to deviant samādhi. "Entering the eight liberations" then reverses the eight deviants to make liberations: namely, correct view up to correct samādhi. It could also be those eight liberations of having internal form-perceptions and externally viewing forms, and so on. Since the deviant and correct are different, how can one not abandon the deviant yet enter the correct? This is exceedingly difficult to understand. Someone said: It means that although the Buddhas and bodhisattvas themselves have correctly realized it, through great compassion they manifest conformity with the deviant; hence it says "not abandon." Such an explanation is exceedingly rash. Since you say they manifest conformity, they have long since abandoned it; how could it be "not abandon"? Furthermore, in this text he reprimands those ordinary people and Lesser Vehicle followers for not grasping dharma-nairātmya and having minds of grasping and rejecting; reprimanding them, he wishes to cause them to learn the equal, true contemplation of the Mahāyāna. How could one explain it in terms of manifesting conformity? It does not correspond at all. How is it explained now? Vimalakīrti wondrously tallies with tathatā, whose essence is neither deviant nor correct; deluded sentiments discriminate and mistakenly see right and wrong. Such delusion conflicts with the principle, causing ceaseless grief. Now he directly teaches them to contemplate: these deviant inversions arise from the deluded mind. Mind itself does not exist; on what basis could delusion arise? Realizing the essence of delusion to be empty is true liberation. Since the principle resides neither in the deviant nor the correct, how could there be designations of bondage and liberation? Now that there is no deviant to be abandoned, it is called entering liberation. It is also said: The two vehicles abandon the eight deviants and enter the eight corrects; the Great Being recognizes that the nature of the deviant is empty and no different from the correct; therefore without abandoning it, he enters. Because there is nothing to enter, in contrast to their abandoning and entering, it is said that he enters without abandoning. "Entering the correct Dharma with deviant characteristics": Yuan says: The former was taught in terms of causes; this is taught in terms of fruits. Deviant characteristics are the mundane; the correct Dharma is nirvāṇa. The śrāvaka cultivates only his own welfare, abandoning the deviant to enter the correct; the bodhisattva benefits others as well, manifesting conformity according to beings, hence not abandoning the deviant to enter the correct Dharma. It is also said: The two vehicles abandon the deviant to enter the correct; the Great Being awakens to the fact that deviant and correct are both empty; understanding that emptiness is not different is called entering. Why depart from the deviant to seek the correct? If one wishes to eliminate the deviant and search separately for the correct, it is like a second head or a third hand: one has strayed far from it. Therefore a later sūtra says: "Those who abide in the correct path do not discriminate between the deviant and the correct." "Bestowing upon all with a single \[portion of\] food": > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.27) - [Next: 3.29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.29) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772~en-mt.3.28) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2772.3.28) · Pramāṇa