[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) › [仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709) › 1.16 # 仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 1.16 仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 1.16 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.16) 問：准此所說，護法失宗。《唯識論》中護法菩薩言依圓有，何故於此釋勝義諦無相絕言而說為空？答：彼據《深密》研窮性相，言二性有；此據《般若》離言絕相，故此言空。理教顯然，斯有何失？ > Question: According to this explanation, Dharmapāla loses his doctrine. In the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra, Bodhisattva Dharmapāla states that paratantra and pariniṣpanna are existent; why does he here, in explaining paramārtha-satya as signless and cutting off words, describe it as empty? Answer: That text, relying on the Sandhinirmocana, investigates nature and characteristics to their depths, and says the two natures are existent; this text, relying on the Prajñā, transcends words and cuts off signs, and so here says it is empty. Principle and teaching are obvious; what fault is there in this? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.15) - [Next: 1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.17) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709~en-mt.1.16) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.16) · Pramāṇa