[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) › [大方廣佛華嚴經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735) › 11.39 # 大方廣佛華嚴經疏 11.39 大方廣佛華嚴經疏 11.39 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11.39) 標二章者，謂種及剎。然剎種依剎海，諸剎依剎種，則寬陜可知。名從何得？欲明世界無邊方便顯多，故立此名。謂積多世界共在一處，攝諸流類，故名為種。如是種類復有眾多，深廣無邊，故名為海。如積多魚以成一種，魚龍龜鼈山泉島嶼乃有多種，並悉攝在一大海中。而言世界無邊者，海外有海，海海無窮也。若爾，種無別體，攬界以成，何以下文說有形體？雖依種類以立種名，何妨此種別有其體。如多蠭孔共成一窠，豈妨此窠別有其體？上舉魚龍，蓋分喻耳。即依後義，亦得名為種性。依於此種能生世界，如依一禾有多穀粒。舊經云性，多取此義。恐濫體性，故改為種。言有不可說者，若準下文香海及種，皆有十不可說。梵本亦有，今脫「十」字，多是傳寫之漏耳。 > Regarding the heading of the two chapters: that is, the seed and the world. Now, world-seeds rely on world-oceans, and worlds rely on world-seeds, so their relative extent and narrowness may be known. Whence are their names derived? Wishing to clarify that worlds are boundless, expedient means are used to reveal their multiplicity; hence this name is established. That is to say, an accumulation of many worlds dwelling together in one place, subsuming their various categories, is therefore called a 'seed' (gotra/clan). When such kinds are further numerous, profound, vast, and boundless, it is therefore called an 'ocean'. Just as an accumulation of many fish forms one kind, yet fish, dragons, turtles, tortoises, mountain springs, and islands comprise many kinds, all of which are subsumed within a single great ocean. As for saying that worlds are boundless, beyond the ocean there are oceans, ocean after ocean without end. If that is so, the seed has no separate essence, but is formed by gathering worlds together; why, then, does the text below state that it has form and essence? Although the name 'seed' is established on the basis of categories and types, what is to prevent this seed from having its own distinct essence? Just as many bee-cells together make up one hive, how does that prevent this hive from having its own distinct essence? The earlier reference to fish and dragons was merely a partial analogy. According to this latter meaning, it may also be named 'nature' (gotra). Relying on this seed, worlds can be produced, just as relying on a single stalk of grain there are many cereal grains. The old translation of the sūtra used 'nature', mostly adopting this meaning. Fearing it might be confused with essential nature (svabhāva), it was therefore changed to 'seed'. As for saying there are inexpressible numbers: if one accords with the text below on the fragrant oceans and seeds, each has ten inexpressibles. The Sanskrit manuscripts also have it; the character 'ten' is missing here, which is mostly an omission in scribal transmission. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11.38) - [Next: 11.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11.40) - [Up: 11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735~en-mt.11.39) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.11.39) · Pramāṇa