[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) › 79.9 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.9 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.9 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [79.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.9) 疏「以淨奪染性即起」者，第三明相奪門，亦是通妨。謂有問言：性起唯淨、緣起通染，云何緣起即是性起？故為此通。謂緣起有二：一染、二淨。淨謂如來大悲、菩薩萬行等，染者謂眾生惑業等。若以染奪淨，則屬眾生，故唯緣起。今以淨奪染，唯屬諸佛，故名性起。 > Regarding the Commentary's "With purity depriving defilement, the nature precisely arises": the third clarifies the portal of mutual deprivation, which also resolves an objection. That is, someone asks: nature-arising is solely pure, while conditioned arising encompasses defilement; how can conditioned arising be precisely nature-arising? Therefore, this resolution is made: conditioned arising has two kinds: first, pure; second, defiled. 'Pure' refers to the Tathāgata's great compassion, the bodhisattvas' myriad practices, and so forth; 'defiled' refers to sentient beings' afflictions and karma, and so forth. If defilement deprives purity, then it belongs to sentient beings, and is thus solely conditioned arising. Now, with purity depriving defilement, it belongs solely to all Buddhas, and is therefore called nature-arising. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 79.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.8) - [Next: 79.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.10) - [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.79.9) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.79.9) · Pramāṇa