[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) › 20.41 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 20.41 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 20.41 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [20.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.41) 五初禪中，疏「以一言說盡故」者，釋此一偈，疏文有二：一正釋、二解妨。前中自有二意：一佛法對說。前句一言說盡，顯佛勝德；後句劫說不窮；明法無盡。「約能包」下，總就佛說，是歎佛故。前二句能包，後一句能久。疏「然一言但說剎塵」下，通妨。謂有問云：前言說盡、後云不窮，豈不相違？答：有二意：一順文通、二約理通。今初，經云「佛剎微塵法門海，一言演說盡無餘。」剎塵法外更有無盡之法，何妨劫海演說不窮，故反成之。「設欲一言盡者」，則二三兩句相違。初明前違於後；後「更有所演」下，後違於前。從「若欲通者」下，約理會通。則前二句直是說盡一切諸法，後之一句不妨無窮。若一言不盡者，佛非不思議故，故總說則盡，成於前句；隱映無盡，成於後句。兼以喻顯，皆遺忘集意。 > Fifth, within the First Dhyāna: regarding the Commentary's statement, "Because with a single word it is fully explained": in explaining this single verse, the commentary text has two parts: 1. the direct explanation, 2. resolving objections. Within the former there are two ideas: 1. Buddhadharmas explained in contrast. The preceding phrase, "with a single word fully explained," reveals the Buddha's supreme virtue; the subsequent phrase, "explained for kalpas without being exhausted," clarifies the inexhaustibility of the Dharma. From "In terms of being able to contain" onward, it speaks collectively of the Buddha, praising the Buddha. The first two lines speak of the ability to contain, and the latter line speaks of the ability to endure. Regarding the Commentary's statement, "However, a single word only explains the dust motes of kṣetras" onward: this resolves an objection. That is, someone asks: having said earlier that it is fully explained, and later that it is inexhaustible, are they not contradictory? The answer has two meanings: 1. resolving it according to the literal text, 2. resolving it according to the principle. As for the first: the sūtra states, "The ocean of Dharma gates as numerous as the dust motes of Buddha lands / is fully expounded in a single word without remainder." Beyond the dharmas of dust motes of kṣetras, there are further inexhaustible dharmas; what prevents them from being expounded through oceans of kalpas without end? Hence it confirms it conversely. "If one intends for a single word to exhaust them," then lines two and three contradict each other. First it clarifies that the former contradicts the latter; later, from "further having something to expound" onward, the latter contradicts the former. From "If one wishes to harmonize them" onward, they are harmonized according to the principle. Then the first two lines directly mean fully explaining all dharmas, while the subsequent line does not obstruct inexhaustibility. If a single word could not exhaust them, the Buddha would not be inconceivable; therefore, explaining collectively exhausts them, establishing the former line; indistinctly reflecting inexhaustibility establishes the latter line. Together with illustrating it through metaphors, these are all the ideas of the \*Yiwang ji\*. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 20.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.40) - [Next: 20.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.42) - [Up: 20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.20.41) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.41) · Pramāṇa