[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) › 48.21 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 48.21 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 48.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [48.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48.21) 疏「故佛地論」下，第二引論成立二因之義。此中有三義：一唯立因緣，此已含二法：一如來淨識、二無漏善，合二為因，亦同多聞熏習與阿賴耶中解性合之為因也。然引論猶略，若具應云：謂大宮殿，用出世間無分別智後得智善根為因。而得生起，非是無因，非大自在等而為其因。乃至云：此用本來無分別智後得無漏善法種子，三無數劫修令增廣，為此淨土變現生因。此佛淨土，如來識中無漏善根為因而生。則具修生、本有二法合為因緣也。二云「有義但是增上緣生」下，出所以云以外法故。謂以識生識可是因緣，外生淨土那是因緣？外土即為增上果，故是增上緣。三云「有義亦是因緣」下，雙立。非謂但取因緣，亦取增上，亦取因緣，故云亦是親能生，故出因緣義。「若不爾」下，反難。成立一切外法，皆因內法熏習為因，明有因緣，故云「不爾，應無因緣。無則非理。」次云「外法相望非因緣故」者，正成上義。將第一師義難第二師。汝已外法故唯增上緣，外法則不得立於因緣。今謂外假內熏，明有因緣。若爾，內熏其外，既非自類，何名因緣？境全心變，即八識相分，亦離心，亦因緣矣。「意以後義為正」，四疏家斷取也，兼顯是通二義。 > Regarding the commentary's statement, "Therefore the \*Buddhabhūmi-śāstra\* says": this is the second part, citing the śāstra to establish the meaning of the two causes. Here there are three meanings. First, positing only the primary cause: this already contains two dharmas—first, the Tathāgata's pure consciousness, and second, uncontaminated goodness; combining these two constitutes the cause, just as the permeation from much hearing combines with the nature of understanding in the ālayavijñāna to form the cause. However, the citation of the śāstra is still brief; if given fully, it should say: "The great palace takes the supramundane non-conceptual wisdom and the subsequent wisdom's roots of goodness as its cause, thereby arising; it is not without cause, nor does it have Maheśvara or the like as its cause." And further: "This uses the seeds of uncontaminated wholesome dharmas of the originally present non-conceptual wisdom and subsequent wisdom, cultivated and expanded over three incalculable eons, as the generative cause for the manifestation of this pure land. This Buddha pure land is generated taking the uncontaminated roots of goodness within the Tathāgata's consciousness as its cause." Thus, the two dharmas—that generated through cultivation and that originally present—combine to constitute the primary cause. Second, it says: "Another opinion holds that it is produced solely by the sovereign condition": setting forth the reason, it says that it is due to external phenomena. That is, using consciousness to produce consciousness can be a primary cause, but how could an external pure land be produced by a primary cause? The external land is the sovereign fruit, and therefore it is a sovereign condition. Third, it says: "Another opinion holds that it is also a primary cause": this establishes both. It does not mean accepting only the primary cause; it accepts both the sovereign and the primary cause, which is why it says "it is also directly able to generate," thereby setting forth the meaning of the primary cause. Below, "If it were not so" raises an objection in reverse, establishing that all external phenomena invariably take internal permeation as their cause, thus clarifying that there is a primary cause; hence it says: "If not, there would be no primary cause. To have none would be illogical." Next, "Because external phenomena considered in relation to each other are not primary causes" precisely validates the above meaning, using the first master's position to challenge the second master: since you hold that because they are external phenomena they are solely sovereign conditions, external phenomena cannot be established as primary causes. Now it is asserted that the external relies on internal permeation, clearly showing that there is a primary cause. If so, since the internal permeates the external and they are not of the same category, how can it be called a primary cause? The objective realm is completely transformed by mind; that is, the objective division of the eight consciousnesses is not separate from mind, and thus is also a primary cause. "The intention is to take the latter meaning as correct": fourth, the commentator definitively adopts this, also showing that it encompasses both meanings. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 48.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48.20) - [Next: 48.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48.22) - [Up: 48](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.48.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.48.21) · Pramāṇa