[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) › 36.65 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 36.65 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 36.65 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [36.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36.65) 疏「謂現在陰滅」下，出中道相。即今因前五陰，故偈是中道義。其下所用《涅槃經》文，即前二十九答師子吼陰縛難文。上引難文則具，引答則略，今當具引佛答之文。經云「善男子！諦聽諦聽，我當為汝分別解說。善男子！如人捨命受大苦時，宗親圍繞號哭懊惱，其人惶怖莫知依救，雖有五情無所覺知，肢節戰動不能自持，身體虛冷暖氣欲盡，見先所修善惡報相。善男子！如日垂沒山陵塠阜，影現東移理無西逝。眾生業報亦復如是，此陰滅時彼陰續生，如燈生闇滅、燈滅闇生。善男子！如蠟印印埿，印與埿合印滅文成，而是蠟印不變在埿。文非埿出，不餘處來，以印因緣而生是文。現在陰滅中陰陰生，是現在陰終不變為中陰五陰，中陰五陰亦非自生不從餘來。因現陰故生中陰，中陰如印印埿，印壞文成。名雖無差，而時節各異。是故我說中陰五陰非肉眼見，天眼所見。」釋曰：此上具引，今疏用經便以義間，但觀經文自分主客。然《百論》、《唯識》皆說因緣相生，續故不斷、滅故不常，不斷約果續、不常約因滅。今疏以《中論》中義於因果中各有斷常，現陰為因。先明滅故不常，後雖不至芽而能生芽。「此現在陰雖不至後」下，以有功能，明現陰不斷。 > Regarding the Commentary's statement, "That is to say, the present aggregate perishes," and so on: this brings out the characteristic of the Middle Way. That is, here, because of the previous five aggregates, the verse carries the meaning of the Middle Way. The text of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra used below it is precisely the earlier passage from Fascicle 29 answering Siṃhanāda's objection concerning aggregate bondage. Above, the text of the objection was cited fully, while the citation of the answer was abbreviated; now the text of the Buddha's answer should be cited in full. The sūtra states: "Good son! Listen attentively, listen attentively, I shall discriminate and explain it for you. Good son! Just as when a person is giving up life and undergoing great suffering, their relatives surround them wailing and lamenting, and that person is terrified, not knowing what to rely upon for rescue; although having five sense faculties, they have no perception; their limbs and joints tremble so that they cannot hold themselves up; their body is empty and cold, the warmth about to expire; and they see signs of retribution for the good and bad they have previously cultivated. Good son! Just as when the sun is about to set behind hills and mounds, shadows appear moving east and by principle do not go west; the karmic retribution of sentient beings is also like this: when this aggregate perishes, that aggregate arises in continuity, just as when a lamp arises, darkness perishes, and when the lamp perishes, darkness arises. Good son! Just as when a wax seal is pressed into clay, the seal unites with the clay, the seal is destroyed and the impression is formed, yet this wax seal does not transform into the clay; the impression does not come out of the clay, nor does it come from elsewhere, but because of the seal as cause and condition this impression arises. When the present aggregates perish, the intermediate existence aggregates arise; these present aggregates never transform into the five aggregates of intermediate existence, nor do the five aggregates of intermediate existence arise of themselves or come from elsewhere. Dependent on the present aggregates, the intermediate existence arises; the intermediate existence is like the seal impressed into clay, where the seal is destroyed and the impression is formed. Although there is no difference in name, their periods of time are distinct. Therefore, I say that the five aggregates of intermediate existence are not seen by the fleshly eye, but are seen by the divine eye." Explanation: The above has cited it in full; now, the Commentary, in using the sūtra, interpolates it with the meaning, but by simply observing the sūtra text, the host and guest naturally distinguish themselves. Now, both the Śataśāstra and Vijñaptimātratā state that causes and conditions produce one another: because of continuity there is no annihilation, and because of perishing there is no permanence; non-annihilation is said regarding the continuity of the fruit, and non-permanence is said regarding the perishing of the cause. Now, the Commentary uses the meaning in the Madhyamakaśāstra: within both cause and fruit, there is respectively annihilation and permanence; the present aggregate is the cause. First, it clarifies that because of perishing it is not permanent; later, \[it shows that\] although it does not go on into the sprout, it can produce the sprout. From "Although this present aggregate does not go on to the subsequent" onward, because it possesses functional capability, it clarifies that the present aggregate is not annihilated. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 36.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36.64) - [Next: 36.66](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36.66) - [Up: 36](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.36.65) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.36.65) · Pramāṇa