[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) › [般若心經略疏連珠記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713) › 2.33 # 般若心經略疏連珠記 2.33 般若心經略疏連珠記 2.33 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2.33) 「答前」下，二、經旨圓通答。「不礙存」者，清涼曰：「即空之色為妙色，故不礙存也。即色之空為真空，未甞不盡矣。」今此都亡即色之空也，未甞不立即空之色也。鎮國曰：「般若不壞四句，豈無妙有？不礙存，未甞不立有句也。都亡，未甞不盡無句也。合二則兩亦形。」奪則俱非、有則妙有，豈非正詮一性哉。「大品」下，引證諸法無所有。即無妄法之有，是都亡無句也。如是有此乃則有妄法之無，是未甞不立有句也。「此就」等者，即所離中無定性實有也。前據如是有者，即空之有、不思議之有也。「又前」下，顯正義中三義也。一、法者一味，無差別法也；二義即空有二門。「隨說無違」者，互融相是，不同空宗，空即是真、有即為妄。清涼曰：「性空通於初頓終教，妙有即是實教。若通於空有、二互交徹，具德即是圓教。」 > From “Answer: Previous…” downwards is the second \[part\], answering with the perfect integration of the sūtra’s purport. Regarding “does not obstruct its preservation,” Qingliang stated: “Form that is identical to emptiness is wondrous form, and therefore it does not obstruct its preservation. Emptiness that is identical to form is true emptiness, and it never fails to exhaust it.” Here, this ‘utterly eliminated’ is the emptiness that is identical to form; ‘never failing to establish’ is the form that is identical to emptiness. Zhenguo stated: “Prajñā does not destroy the four propositions—how could it lack wondrous existence? ‘Not obstructing its preservation’ never fails to establish the proposition of existence. ‘Utterly eliminated’ never fails to exhaust the proposition of non-existence. Combining the two, the ‘both’ takes shape.” When negated, both are eliminated; when affirmed, it is wondrous existence—is this not precisely the direct exposition of the single nature? From “Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā” downwards, it cites proof that all dharmas have no existence. This is the non-existence of illusory dharmas, which is the proposition of non-existence through utter elimination. That it has existence in this way is the existence of the non-existence of illusory dharmas, which never fails to establish the proposition of existence. Regarding “This is in terms of…,” this refers to having no fixed, real existence within what is relinquished. The former, relying on ‘having existence in this way,’ is existence that is identical to emptiness, an inconceivable existence. From “Moreover, previous…” downwards, it reveals three meanings within the orthodox sense. First, the dharma is of a single taste, a dharma without differentiation. The two meanings are the two gateways of emptiness and existence. Regarding “stated in accordance with either without contradiction,” they mutually integrate and affirm each other, unlike the emptiness school where emptiness is real and existence is illusory. Qingliang stated: “The emptiness of nature pervades the initial, sudden, and final teachings; wondrous existence is the actual teaching. If it pervades both emptiness and existence, the two mutually penetrating and fully endowed with virtues, it is the perfect teaching.” > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2.32) - [Next: 2.34](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2.34) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713~en-mt.2.33) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1713.2.33) · Pramāṇa