<!-- Pramāṇa, a library of Indian primary sources · https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.43 -->

[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) › 79.43

# 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.43

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.43

- **Language:** Classical Chinese

### [79.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.43)

疏「是知或謂無聲」下，第三結彈古說。但結前二，以其第三可入正故。言「皆大地之一塵」者，約收以結，則此一塵不離地界，積多小塵可成大地，積其多義以為圓音。若約斥彈異說之微，豈同正解廣大智地？

> Regarding the Commentary's statement "From this we know that some say there is no voice" and so forth: this is the third \[section\], which concludes by criticizing the ancient explanations. It only concludes against the first two, because the third can enter into the correct \[interpretation\]. As for "they are all a single speck of dust on the great earth": in terms of subsuming them to conclude, this single speck of dust is not separate from the realm of earth; by accumulating many small specks of dust, the great earth can be formed, and by accumulating many meanings, the complete voice is constituted. But if we consider the triviality of criticizing deviant explanations, how could they compare to the vast ground of wisdom of the correct understanding?  
> — English (machine translation) (machine translation)

- [Previous: 79.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.42)
- [Next: 79.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.44)
- [Up: 79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79)

## Translations (1)

- [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.79.43) — English, machine translation

---
Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.43) · Pramāṇa
