[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) › 57.24 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 57.24 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 57.24 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [57.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57.24) 疏「問上論云」下，第二解妨。先問，即《刊定記》主難師；後「豈不」下答。答中，即今疏扶昔大義。於中二：一總呵。既冥同果海，豈非地攝有能所同，因果非一。既曰冥同，則因果非異，非一非異為真地智。二「故上論云」下引證。略引三文：一即示說分齊中釋成寂滅佛所行偈。二又上加分即加所為中自利總句，經云「欲令汝為一切菩薩說不思議諸佛法光明故。」論釋云「不思議諸佛法者，是出世間道品。」明知地智即是佛果法。三引地影像經證中，曲分為五：初正引；二「是知論主」下結示；三「有云」下《刊定》重難；四「大海十德」下疏引喻反質；五「明知」下結破。 > Regarding the Commentary's text from 'Question: The treatise above states' downwards, this is the second part: resolving an objection. First is the question, which is the master of the Kanding ji posing a difficulty to the teacher; afterward, from 'How could it not' downwards is the answer. In the answer, the present Commentary upholds the great meaning of old. Within it there are two: first, a general scolding. Since it is darkly identical to the ocean of fruition, how could it not be subsumed within the grounds? There are the identical aspects of capable and object, so cause and fruition are not one. Since it is said to be darkly identical, cause and fruition are not different; being neither one nor different constitutes the true ground-cognition. Second, from 'Hence the treatise above states' downwards, citing proofs. It briefly cites three passages: first, the verse on what is practiced by the extinguished Buddha, which explains the scope of the explanation. Second, the general line on self-benefit within the empowerment's purpose in the empowerment section above, where the sūtra states: 'Wishing to cause you to speak of the light of the inconceivable Buddha-dharmas for all bodhisattvas.' The treatise's commentary states: 'The inconceivable Buddha-dharmas are the supramundane limbs of the path.' From this it is clearly known that ground-cognition is itself the Dharma of Buddha-fruition. Third, in citing the proof of the Sūtra on the Reflections of the Grounds, it is intricately divided into five: first, directly citing; second, from 'Thus it is known that the author of the treatise' downwards, concluding and demonstrating; third, from 'Some say' downwards, the Kanding's repeated objection; fourth, from 'The ten virtues of the great ocean' downwards, the Commentary citing an analogy to counter-question; fifth, from 'It is clearly known' downwards, concluding the refutation. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 57.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57.23) - [Next: 57.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57.25) - [Up: 57](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.57.24) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.57.24) · Pramāṇa