[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) › 19.51 # 大方廣佛華嚴經疏 19.51 大方廣佛華嚴經疏 19.51 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [19.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19.51) 第五「此初發」下明大智現前。此文二意：一別是一段，謂以無著大智求菩提故；二通釋上四段，謂由於一切無所著故，稱性圓融，能成能攝一切功德。文中分二：初正明無著、後釋其所由。前中，初總、「所謂」下別。謂從三世門見佛法僧，非佛法僧同三世攝。於中三位：初八清淨、次四通染淨、後二唯染。後「唯求」下釋不著所由，文含多意。一云：唯為菩提故云求一切智，不餘趣向故，於法界佛等無著。此雖有理，不順今文，以佛及佛法豈非一切智耶？二云：求之於己，不求佛等。求之於己，尚未免求。今釋有二：一只為求一切智，故求而無著，以有所著非真求故。故《淨名》云「夫求法者，於一切法應無所求。」了法無求，順一切智。二者言求者，不壞相也。不著者，稱法性也。性相雙鑑，終日求而無所求。經云「無所求中吾故求之矣。」 > Fifth, from "This initial generation" downward clarifies that great wisdom becomes manifest. This passage has two meanings: 1. It is a distinct section, meaning that one seeks bodhi with unattached great wisdom; 2. It generally explains the above four sections, meaning that because of being unattached to anything, it accords with the nature in perfect interpenetration, able to accomplish and subsume all virtues. In the text, there are two: first, directly clarifying non-attachment; next, explaining its reason. In the former, the first is general, and from "namely" downward is specific. It means viewing the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha through the gateway of the three periods of time; it is not that Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha are subsumed within the three periods of time. Within this there are three categories: the first eight are pure, the next four pertain to both defiled and pure, and the last two are solely defiled. Next, from "solely seeking" downward explains the reason for non-attachment; the text contains multiple meanings. The first says: solely for bodhi, hence it says "seeking all-knowledge", not inclining toward other destinations, hence one is unattached to the dharmadhātu, Buddhas, and so forth. Although this has reason, it does not accord with the present text, for how could the Buddha and Buddha-dharmas not be all-knowledge? The second says: seeking it within oneself, not seeking it from the Buddhas and so forth. Seeking it within oneself still does not avoid seeking. Now, the explanation has two: First, solely to seek all-knowledge, hence seeking without attachment, because having attachment is not true seeking. Thus the \*Vimalakīrti\* says: "Those who seek the Dharma should have nothing to seek in all dharmas." Comprehending that dharmas are without seeking accords with all-knowledge. Second, speaking of seeking does not destroy the marks; non-attachment accords with dharmatā. Discerning both nature and marks, one seeks all day long yet has nothing to seek. The sūtra says: "It is within that which has nothing to seek that I therefore seek it." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 19.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19.50) - [Next: 19.52](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19.52) - [Up: 19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735~en-mt.19.51) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.19.51) · Pramāṇa