[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) › 38.25 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 38.25 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 38.25 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [38.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38.25) 疏「無分別者念想無」下，上來四重但解前八，此下二句通遣能所。歷上四重皆用此二，如第一重不分別無常，無常無堅實也。第二重不分別常無常，常與無常俱無堅實。常無堅者，離常相故。第三重不分別無生無常，生滅常義無實例知。第四重亦不作雙非分別，未免戲論故。既離四句，雙非亦無堅實，亦同《淨名》「法本不生，今則無滅，是寂滅義。」上對四句且引前四，今具五矣。上來所說無常之義並已具足，特由此義常所聞故，更引古來一兩師釋。肇公云：「畢竟者，決定之辭也。小乘觀法以生滅為無常義，大乘之士以不生滅為無常義，無常名同而幽致殊絕矣。其道虛徹，故非常情之所能測。妙得其旨，其唯淨名乎。遣常故言無常，非謂有無常。無常常無，故云畢竟不生不滅是無常義。」釋曰：斯則美麗，理但一重，前已含有。大乘法師云：小乘以生滅為無常，謂不生滅為常。故今折彼：汝見有不生滅為常者，此常還是無常。故云不生不滅是無常義。釋曰：此則破其見常之心，而有二失：一者彼但說無常，曾不說常，何得以無常折彼常耶？二者彼未知常，何得言不生不滅是常義耶？故非經意。下四句大例同此。然疏上四重解釋，理無所遺，尚通實教。若華嚴宗，一切法趣無常無常，攝法無遺義理無盡方真無常。總收諸義以為一致，皆是此宗一義所收。無常既爾，餘句例然。疏「後勝進中是護小乘行」者，此皆《十地論》立，下當廣釋。大意云：觀無常等煩惱不生，名護煩惱行，不同凡夫觀察諸界。破邪顯正不墮小乘，名護小乘行。疏「次四界是起見處」者，總標也。「外道計大為諸法本」者，外道有計地為物本，依地生故；或事於水，水能淨故；或事於火，火成熟故；或事於風，風成壞故。廣如別說。 > Regarding the Commentary's statement "'Non-discriminating' means free from thoughts and notions" and what follows: The above four layers explained only the preceding eight \[points\]; the subsequent two lines universally eliminate both subject and object. Applying this through the above four layers, both of these are employed. For instance, in the first layer, one does not discriminate impermanence, for impermanence lacks solidity. In the second layer, one does not discriminate permanence and impermanence, for permanence and impermanence both lack solidity. That permanence lacks solidity is because it is free from the characteristic of permanence. In the third layer, one does not discriminate non-arising and impermanence; the fact that arising, cessation, and permanence lack substantial reality should be understood analogously. In the fourth layer, one also does not form the discrimination of the double negation, because one would not yet have avoided prapañca. Since one is free from the four propositions, the double negation also lacks solidity; this also accords with the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: "Dharmas originally do not arise, and now they do not cease; this is the meaning of quiescence." The above matching against the four propositions cited only the first four; now all five are complete. The meaning of impermanence explained above has already been fully articulated. Yet because this meaning is something constantly heard, I shall further cite the explanations of one or two ancient masters. Master Sengzhao said: "'Ultimate' is an expression of certainty. Śrāvakas, observing phenomena, take arising and cessation as the meaning of impermanence. Mahāyāna practitioners take non-arising and non-cessation as the meaning of impermanence. The name 'impermanence' is identical, yet their profound purports are vastly different. Its Path is empty and thoroughly penetrating, and thus cannot be measured by ordinary sentiments. Who else but Vimalakīrti could subtly grasp its purport? To banish permanence one speaks of impermanence, not meaning that there is an impermanence. Impermanence is ever non-existent, hence it is said that 'ultimately non-arising and non-ceasing' is the meaning of impermanence." Commentary: This is indeed elegant, but in principle it has only a single layer, which was already contained above. A Mahāyāna Dharma Master said: "The Śrāvakas take arising and cessation as impermanence, and deem non-arising and non-cessation to be permanence. Therefore, we now refute them: 'If you view non-arising and non-cessation to be permanence, this permanence is still impermanence.' Hence it is said that 'non-arising and non-ceasing' is the meaning of impermanence." Commentary: This refutes their mind that clings to permanence, but it incurs two faults: first, they only speak of impermanence and never spoke of permanence, so how could one use impermanence to refute their permanence? Second, they do not yet know permanence, so how could one say that non-arising and non-cessation is the meaning of permanence? Therefore, this is not the meaning of the sūtra. The following four lines are broadly analogous to this. Nevertheless, the Commentary's explanation across the four layers above leaves nothing lacking in principle, yet it still accords with the definitive teachings. If one considers the Avataṃsaka school, all dharmas tend towards impermanence-impermanence; only when phenomena are subsumed without remainder and the principles are inexhaustible is it true impermanence. Comprehensively gathering all meanings into a single consistency, all are subsumed under this school's single meaning. Impermanence being so, the remaining lines are understood analogously. Regarding the Commentary's statement "Later, within the superior progression, it protects the practice of the small vehicle": These are all established by the Daśabhūmika-śāstra, and will be explained broadly below. The general meaning is: observing impermanence and so forth, afflictions do not arise—this is called "the practice of protecting against afflictions," unlike ordinary beings who observe the realms; shattering heterodoxy and revealing the correct, not falling into the small vehicle—this is called "the practice of protecting \[against\] the small vehicle." Regarding the Commentary's statement "Next, the four realms are the locus where views arise": This is a general heading. "Heterodox traditions posit the great \[elements\] as the root of all dharmas": Some heterodox traditions posit earth as the root of things, because \[things\] arise dependent on earth; or they worship water, because water can purify; or they worship fire, because fire ripens \[things\]; or they worship wind, because wind accomplishes and destroys. This is explained extensively elsewhere. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 38.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38.24) - [Next: 38.26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38.26) - [Up: 38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.38.25) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.38.25) · Pramāṇa