[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) › 53.16 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 53.16 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 53.16 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [53.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53.16) 疏「今當第四」者，第三結示兼遮妨難。恐有嫌繁，故以論文但云「復有阿含及證，如是次第，依初相應知。」謂令以阿含為始、以證為終，故云如是次第。依前始終，前始後終，云依初相應知。何用廣明？疏意恐人教證既多，對文生疑，故總併說，豈得為繁。 > Regarding the commentary’s “Now this is the fourth”: the third part concludes and reveals while preventing objections. Fearing that someone might dislike the complexity, \[one might note that\] the text of the treatise merely says: “There are further the teaching and realization; such order should be known according to the initial characteristics.” This means making the teaching the beginning and realization the end; hence it says “such order”. Relying on the previous beginning and end—the former being the beginning and the latter the end—it says “should be known according to the initial characteristics”. Why the need for an extensive clarification? The commentary’s intent is that, fearing people might become doubtful before the text given the multiplicity of teachings and realizations, it explains them together in full; how could this be considered excessive? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 53.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53.15) - [Next: 53.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53.17) - [Up: 53](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.53.16) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.53.16) · Pramāṇa