[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) › 80.29 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 80.29 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 80.29 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [80.29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80.29) 疏「九離邊契中」下，釋經「遠離二邊住於中道」，即是下文「普遍諸心」。下釋云：廣大周遍無處不有，不離不斷無有休息，入不思議方便法門。疏文有二：先釋離邊、後釋住中。今初，經云「離邊」，未知何是，故舉晉經，及取下釋，略舉四種，以等一切。染淨約惑，縛脫通惑業，有無通事理，一異約心境。何以有此？謂成菩提既離細念，妄惑盡矣，顯現法身智慧純淨。若為此見，未免是邊。故上經云「若有見正覺，解脫離諸漏，不著一切世，彼非證道眼。」今了於惑體性本空，後無所淨，故離二邊。又染淨交徹，故無住著，是曰離邊。縛脫者，謂昔常被惑業繫縛流轉無窮，今得菩提釋然解脫。若為此見，即是住邊。菩提智了，本自無縛，於何有解？無縛無解則無樂厭，故得離耳。有無上言通事理者，若昔謂惑有，今了惑空；昔謂心空，今知妙有。又真樂本有，失而不知；妄苦本空，得而不覺。今日始知，空者妄苦，有者涅槃，若如是知，並未離邊。又煩惱業苦本有今無，菩提佛身本無今有等，皆三世有法。菩提之性不屬三世，故三世有無皆是邊攝。真智契理絕於三世，故離有無之二邊等。一異有二：一者心境不了則二、契合則一，亦成於邊。二者生佛有異、今了一性，亦名為邊。今正覺了此中無有二無二，亦復無大智善見者，如理巧安住故。離此邊而言等者，謂斷常來去、生滅依正，離是二法皆稱為邊。又二與不二亦名為邊。今一契菩提一切都寂，故云遠離。 > Regarding the commentary's "Ninth, leaving behind the extremes and according with the middle" and so forth: this explains the sūtra's phrase "leaving far behind the two extremes and abiding in the Middle Way," which corresponds to the subsequent text's "pervading all minds." The subsequent explanation states: "vast, all-pervading, nowhere absent, never separated, uninterrupted, without rest, entering the inconceivable gate of upāya teaching." The commentary has two parts: first, explaining leaving the extremes; second, explaining abiding in the middle. Now, as for the first: the sūtra says "leaving behind the extremes," yet it is not yet known what these are; therefore it adduces the Jin translation of the sūtra and draws upon the subsequent explanation, briefly citing four pairs to represent all \[extremes\]. Defilement and purity are stated in terms of afflictions; bondage and liberation encompass afflictions and karma; existence and non-existence encompass phenomena and principle; oneness and difference are stated in terms of mind and object. Why are there these \[pairs\]? That is to say, when bodhi is attained, fine thoughts have already been left behind, delusional afflictions are exhausted, and the dharmakāya manifests with wisdom purely clean. If one holds this view, one still cannot escape being at an extreme. Thus the preceding sūtra says: "If one sees the Rightly Awakened One / as liberated, free from all outflows, / unattached to any world, / his is not the eye that realizes the Path." Now, understanding that the essential nature of delusion is fundamentally empty and that subsequently there is nothing to be purified, one leaves behind the two extremes. Moreover, defilement and purity interpenetrate, and therefore there is no abiding attachment; this is called leaving behind the extremes. As for bondage and liberation: this refers to having formerly been bound by afflictions and karma, transmigrating endlessly, and now attaining bodhi, utterly liberated. If one holds this view, this is abiding in an extreme. The wisdom of bodhi understands that fundamentally there is no bondage; from what could there be release? Where there is neither bondage nor release, there is neither delight nor revulsion; hence one can leave \[the extremes\] behind. As for existence and non-existence, mentioned above as encompassing phenomena and principle: if formerly one considered afflictions to exist and now understands afflictions to be empty; or formerly considered the mind to be empty and now knows wondrous existence; or again, true bliss fundamentally exists yet was lost without one knowing, while delusional suffering is fundamentally empty yet was grasped without one being aware—if one now only begins to know that what is empty is delusional suffering and what exists is nirvāṇa, knowing in such a way still does not leave behind the extremes. Furthermore, that defilement, karma, and suffering fundamentally existed and now are not, while bodhi and the Buddha's body fundamentally did not exist and now exist, are all dharmas of the three times. The nature of bodhi does not belong to the three times; therefore, existence and non-existence in the three times are all subsumed under the extremes. True cognition accords with principle and transcends the three times; hence it leaves behind the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and so forth. Oneness and difference have two aspects: first, if mind and object are not understood, they are two; if they accord and unite, they are one—this too constitutes an extreme. Second, sentient beings and the Buddha are different, yet now one understands them to have a single nature—this is also called an extreme. Now, the Rightly Awakened One understands that herein there is neither duality nor non-duality, nor is there any possessor of great wisdom who sees well, because he skillfully abides in accordance with principle. In stating "and so forth" after leaving behind these extremes, it means that annihilation and permanence, coming and going, arising and ceasing, the dependent and the primary—leaving behind these dual dharmas are all called extremes. Furthermore, duality and non-duality are also called extremes. Now, once there is accord with bodhi, everything is completely tranquil; hence it says "leaving far behind." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 80.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80.28) - [Next: 80.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80.30) - [Up: 80](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.80.29) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80.29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.80.29) · Pramāṇa