[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) › 27.17 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 27.17 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 27.17 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [27.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27.17) 疏「然滅雖不俱」下，釋成上義，結歸難思，即叡公意。一滅一存，故曰不俱。不離滅處有存，故曰起必同處，如人於餓鬼火處見水，餓鬼於人水處見火。「雖曰同處而恒相無」者，滅中無存、存中無滅，亦如羅剎宮殿與人宮殿，同在一處亙不相見。他受用土亦復如是，若自受用，故是遍周，不即三界、不離三界。故《法華》云「不如三界，見於三界。」若法性土，又起滅常如。疏「故難思」者，結釋經文劫燒不思議，謂不可作存滅染淨而思矣。疏「世相不同」等者，以法性土對他受用及變化土也。 > Regarding the Commentary's statement below: "However, although destruction \[and preservation\] are not simultaneous...", it explains and establishes the above meaning, concluding in the inconceivable; this is Master Rui's intent. One is destroyed and one is preserved, hence they are called "not simultaneous." Preservation is not apart from the place of destruction, hence it says "their arising must share the same place," just as a human sees water where a hungry ghost \[sees\] fire, and a hungry ghost sees fire where a human \[sees\] water. > > As for "although they are said to share the same place, they constantly lack each other": within destruction there is no preservation, and within preservation there is no destruction, just as the palaces of rākṣasas and the palaces of humans, being in the same place, never see each other. The other-enjoyment land is also like this. If it is the self-enjoyment land, it is completely pervasive, neither identical to the three realms nor separate from the three realms. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "It is not like the three realms seeing the three realms." If it is the dharmatā land, arising and destruction are constantly thus. > > Regarding the Commentary's statement: "Hence it is inconceivable": this concludes the explanation of the sūtra text's "the kalpa fire is inconceivable," meaning it cannot be conceived in terms of preservation or destruction, defilement or purity. > > Regarding the Commentary's statement: "Worldly characteristics are not identical...", it contrasts the dharmatā land with the other-enjoyment and transformation lands. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 27.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27.16) - [Next: 27.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27.18) - [Up: 27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.27.17) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.27.17) · Pramāṇa