[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) › 79.55 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.55 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.55 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [79.55](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.55) 疏「然此一文」下，第二別敘異釋。於中二：先標、後「一云」下別說。略有三說，不離一宗，即分為三：初二師即法相宗、二結前生後、三敘法性宗。就初師中有五：一正明、二解妨、三反成、四引證、五重解妨。今初。言「無彼有漏染心心所而有淨分」者，唯有八識心王及二十一心所，即遍行五、別境五、善十一也。疏「果位之中」，解妨。有徵問云：若爾，則王所俱有，何以王上言不可得？故此釋云：果位之中識劣，故云不可得；智強，故云智無量。言識劣者，以二分中但有淨故，不同眾生分別強故。言智強者，無惡慧故、決斷勝故。 > Regarding the Commentary's statement "However, in this single text" and so forth: this is the second \[section\], separately recounting divergent explanations. Within it are two parts: first, stating the premise; then, from "one says" downward, separately explaining. There are briefly three explanations, which do not depart from a single school, so they are divided into three: the first two masters belong to the Dharma-characteristic school; second, concluding the preceding to introduce the succeeding; third, recounting the Dharma-nature school. Within the first master's \[view\] there are five: first, directly clarifying; second, resolving an objection; third, establishing through the counter-argument; fourth, citing proof; fifth, resolving the objection again. Now for the first: As for "without those contaminated, defiled minds and mental factors, yet having the pure portion": there are only the eight consciousness-kings and twenty-one mental factors—namely, the five omnipresent, the five object-determining, and the eleven wholesome. Regarding the Commentary's statement "In the stage of fruition": this resolves an objection. Someone raises a question: If so, then both king and factors exist; why is it said regarding the king that it 'cannot be apprehended'? Therefore, this explanation says: In the stage of fruition, consciousness is inferior, hence it is said to be 'unapprehendable'; wisdom is strong, hence it says 'wisdom is immeasurable.' As for consciousness being inferior: because between the two portions it has only the pure, differing from the strong conceptual discrimination of sentient beings. As for wisdom being strong: because it lacks evil understanding and its decisive determination is supreme. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 79.54](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.54) - [Next: 79.56](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.56) - [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.79.55) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.55](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.55) · Pramāṇa