[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) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 17.83 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 17.83 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 17.83 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [17.83](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17.83) 疏「常恒之說」下，第二遮伏難。總有四難：一云《華嚴》教旨時處圓融，要歷三時，豈通玄趣？故此釋云：常恒之說，說無息時。後時不談，豈名常說？二有難云：如來圓音頓演，何要三節方盡幽微？故此通云：雖能頓演，表法淺深，故須三節。三有難云：若表三節，三七日中一七一節，足得成表，何要後時？故此答云：三七未有聲聞，不得顯於不共之教，故須後時。故疏云「亦顯二乘絕見聞故」。四有難云：處歷穢土時不相融，豈順《華嚴》圓融之旨？故此答云：正為融於異時及與穢土，即一剎那即是淨故，故疏云「雖異處別時亦不相離」等。 > Beginning from the commentary's 'expounded constantly and eternally', the second part wards off implicit objections. There are four objections in all: First, one objects: 'The doctrinal purport of the Avataṃsaka is the perfect interpenetration of time and place; if it must pass through three time periods, how could it penetrate the profound import?' Therefore, this explains: 'Expounded constantly and eternally, its expounding has no cessation. If it were not spoken in a later time, how could it be called constant exposition?' Second, one objects: 'The Tathāgata's complete voice expounds suddenly; why must there be three periods before exhausting the subtle depths?' Therefore, this resolves it: 'Although he can expound suddenly, to signify the shallowness and depth of the teaching, three periods are necessary.' Third, one objects: 'If it signifies three periods, with one period per each seven-day phase within the three seven-day periods, that would suffice to establish the signification; why is a later time necessary?' Therefore, this answers: 'During the three seven-day periods, there were not yet śrāvakas, so the unshared teaching could not be displayed; hence a later time was necessary.' Thus the commentary says: 'It also reveals that the two vehicles are cut off from seeing and hearing.' Fourth, one objects: 'The places range through defiled lands and the times do not interpenetrate; how does this accord with the Avataṃsaka's purport of perfect interpenetration?' Therefore, this answers: 'It is precisely in order to interpenetrate different times and defiled lands, such that a single kṣaṇa is itself pure.' Thus the commentary says: 'Although there are different places and distinct times, they are also not separated from one another', and so forth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 17.82](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17.82) - [Next: 17.84](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17.84) - [Up: 17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.17.83) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17.83](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.17.83) · Pramāṇa