[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) › 66.42 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 66.42 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 66.42 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [66.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66.42) 疏「謂離前支」下。第二廣釋，即下釋經，論文釋自因義。然具足論云「自因觀者，不相捨離觀故，離前支無後支觀故。不離無明則成行觀。若不離無明有行者，不應言無明緣行。若離無明有行成者，異則不成。是故偈言『眾因緣生法，是則不即因，亦復不異因，不斷亦不常。』」釋曰：今疏以言間論釋之，對文可見。今更委釋。此中疏取論意，但以不即不離成自因義，不即故因義成、不離故自義成。於中疏文有其三段：一順釋、二反釋、三結成正義。今初，明要具不即離義自因方成。然文但有不離之言，意則已有不即之義。於中，離前支無後支者，以義標次。如不離無明有行等，則指經釋成，並同論文，但初闕不相捨離之言，中間加一如字，即出彼論。從「則無明唯是行自因」，是疏釋論意，成其自義。從「以是自故」下結成二義，謂自及因義，即是論經。然今經文一時併舉不斷助成，若論經文亦各別歷十二因緣。云是中無明緣行者，無明因緣令行不斷助成故。行緣識者，行因緣故令識不斷助成故等。今初論意云：以無明令行不斷為自義，助成是因義；助成是不即，令不斷是不離故。上標云自生因觀是自義，緣事是因也。自生因觀即令行不斷，緣事即是助成。 > Regarding the commentary from "namely, free from the preceding link" downwards: this is the second, the extensive explanation, which is the subsequent explanation of the sūtra, the treatise text explaining the meaning of "one's own cause." In full, however, the treatise says: "The contemplation of one's own cause is due to contemplation of non-relinquishment, and due to contemplation that free from the preceding link there is no subsequent link. It is the contemplation that not being apart from avidyā, saṃskāras are formed. If, not apart from avidyā, there were saṃskāras, one should not say 'conditioned by avidyā are saṃskāras.' If, apart from avidyā, saṃskāras were formed, being different they would not be established. Therefore, the verse says: 'Dharmas arisen from various causes and conditions / are neither identical with the cause / nor different from the cause, / neither annihilated nor eternal.'" The explanation is: now the commentary explains this by interspersing commentary with the treatise; this is evident upon comparing the texts. Now I will explain it in further detail. Here, the commentary takes the treatise's intent, using only "neither identical nor separate" to establish the meaning of "one's own cause": because it is not identical, the meaning of "cause" is established; because it is not separate, the meaning of "one's own" is established. In this, the commentary text has three parts: first, the direct explanation; second, the indirect explanation by reductio; third, the conclusion establishing the correct meaning. Now, the first clarifies that only when the meanings of neither identical nor separate are complete is one's own cause established. Although the text only contains the words "not separate," the intent already includes the meaning of "not identical." Within this, "free from the preceding link there is no subsequent link" uses the meaning to indicate the sequence. Phrases such as "not being apart from avidyā, there are saṃskāras" point to the sūtra to explain and establish it, both being identical with the treatise text, except that the beginning omits the phrase "non-relinquishment" and adds the character "like" (ru) in the middle, thereby reproducing that treatise. From "then avidyā is solely the own-cause of saṃskāras," this is the commentary explaining the treatise's intent to establish its meaning of "one's own." From "because of being one's own" downwards, it concludes both meanings, namely "one's own" and "cause," which is the text of the sūtra as cited in the treatise (Daśabhūmikā-sūtra-śāstra). Now, the current sūtra text mentions "continuous assistance to completion" all at once, whereas the text of the treatise's sūtra individually traverses the twelve links of conditioned arising, saying: "Among these, 'conditioned by avidyā are saṃskāras' means that through the causes and conditions of avidyā, saṃskāras are continuously assisted to completion. 'Conditioned by saṃskāras is vijñāna' means that through the causes and conditions of saṃskāras, vijñāna is continuously assisted to completion," and so on. Now, the primary intent of the treatise is: that avidyā causes saṃskāras to be continuous is the meaning of "one's own"; "assisting to completion" is the meaning of "cause." "Assisting to completion" is non-identity; "causing to be continuous" is non-separation. As stated above in the premise, the contemplation of the self-generative cause is the meaning of "one's own," and the conditioned event is "cause." The contemplation of the self-generative cause is causing continuousness, and the conditioned event is assisting to completion. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 66.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66.41) - [Next: 66.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66.43) - [Up: 66](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.66.42) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [十地經論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.dasabhumika!vyakhyana*zh-bodhiruci.8.19) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.66.42) · Pramāṇa