[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) › 88.6 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 88.6 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 88.6 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [88.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88.6) 「第五寂靜音海主夜神寄難勝地」者，謂真俗兩智行相互違，合令相應，極難勝故。疏「後答中即分為四者」下，疏文有三：初總科、二「問中」下料揀、三「今初」下釋文。二中，由答與問不次第故，於中有四：初正通不次之妨，初答第三、二答第一、三答第四、四答第二，故為不次。今釋意云：問中初二是所成故，三四兩問皆是能成，三成於初，四成於二。故今答中以第三能成，成第一所成，故先答第三、次答第一。以第四能成，成第二所成，故後答四二也。二「又由能起所」下，通伏難也。難云：隔句相對於理甚明，而其二對問中何以先明所成？答中何以先答能成？故今釋云：由能成所，故先答能。復應問言：問中何以不先問能？故應答言：問覩所成，求能成故。見果推因，猶如四諦。疏不明者，意易見故。三「又觀察中」下，三通雜亂難。謂有問言：若以觀為能成者，何故答中有所觀耶？所行之境是所成者，何以境中有能成行耶？故今答云：觀察之中雖有所觀，為成能觀，如般若中雖有實相，為成智慧。所行境中，若能若所皆是所行，如諸菩薩行深般若，能觀所觀皆所行矣。四「故四問全別」下結，引證兼結彈古人。古人以第一所起方便及第二事業，皆答第一事業之問；以其第三答觀察，雙答第二第四兩問，以觀察境界不相離故，以答第四行何境界，却答第三起方便問。若為此釋，非但四答相不分明，抑亦答不次第雜亂。故疏釋竟，今乃結云「四問全別」。「是以晉經中」下，引經正證所行境中有能行義。謂若所知境唯是所行，若分齊境即有能行，是故疏云非但所觀，以晉境界含能觀故。疏「二文影略」者，前有大劫之名，略無小劫之數，故應影取後文小劫。此中但明小劫之數，略無大劫之名，故應影取前文大劫。則共有二佛剎塵數劫。疏「若以普光明劫為剎塵之一」者，上以普光即是大劫，於中已有剎塵小劫。今為小劫之名，積普光等小劫之數經佛剎塵。言「闕二字」者，合云從此命終，還即於此世界中生，經二佛剎微塵數劫，故引晉經定有「二」字。言「佛彌多矣」者，向以普光為大，大中有剎塵之佛。今普光為小劫，一小劫中已有剎塵，經二剎塵小劫之佛。二剎塵小劫之佛，故佛彌多也。疏「良以前之四問皆業用」者，望於菩薩解脫門故，事業但是四中之一。疏「隨一深法有多品類」者，如一施度有九門等。「四一一類中有多事法」者，如一外施有多財寶等。「五如一施食有多支派」。 > "The fifth night-goddess, Praśānta-ruta-sāgaravatī (Ocean of Quiescent Sounds), corresponds to the Ground Hard to Conquer (Sudurjayā)": because the practice-aspects of the two cognitions of the ultimate and conventional oppose each other, and making them correspond is extremely hard to conquer. As for the Commentary's "in the following reply it is then divided into four", etc.: the Commentary text has three parts: first, a general outline; second, from "In the questions" downward, sorting and examining; third, from "Now the first" downward, explaining the text. In the second, because the replies and questions do not follow sequential order, within it there are four \[points\]: First, directly resolving the difficulty of non-sequence: the first replies to the third, the second replies to the first, the third replies to the fourth, and the fourth replies to the second; hence it is non-sequential. Now the intended explanation says: the first two in the questions are that which is accomplished, while the third and fourth questions are both that which can accomplish; the third accomplishes the first, and the fourth accomplishes the second. Therefore now in the replies, using the third that can accomplish to accomplish the first that is accomplished, it first replies to the third and next replies to the first. Using the fourth that can accomplish to accomplish the second that is accomplished, it subsequently replies to the fourth and second. Second, from "Again, because that which can give rise to..." downward resolves a latent objection. The objection says: Alternate matching between lines is very clear in principle; yet for the two pairs, why in the questions is that which is accomplished explained first, and in the replies why is that which can accomplish replied to first? Hence it is now explained: Because that which can accomplishes that which is, therefore that which can is replied to first. Again, one might ask: In the questions, why not first ask about that which can? Hence one should reply: In asking, one sees that which is accomplished and seeks that which can accomplish it; seeing the fruit, one infers the cause, just like the Four Noble Truths. The Commentary does not explain this because the meaning is readily apparent. Third, from "Again, within observation..." downward, the third resolves the difficulty of confusion. Some might ask: If observation is taken as that which can accomplish, why in the reply is there an object of observation? If the realm traversed is that which is accomplished, why within the realm is there practice that can accomplish? Hence it is now answered: Although within observation there is an object of observation, it is to accomplish that which can observe, just as in prajñā, although there is the true mark, it is to accomplish wisdom. In the realm traversed, both that which can and that which is are what is traversed, just as when bodhisattvas practice profound prajñā, both that which can observe and that which is observed are what is traversed. Fourth, from "Therefore the four questions are completely distinct" downward concludes, adducing proof while simultaneously censuring former masters. Former masters took the first arisen upāya and the second enterprises as both replying to the first question on enterprises; taking the third reply on observation as jointly replying to the second and fourth questions, because observation and realm are not separate from each other; and using the fourth reply on traversing what realm to conversely reply to the third question on arising upāya. If interpreted this way, not only are the aspects of the four replies unclear, but the replies are also non-sequential and chaotic. Therefore, having finished explaining, the Commentary now concludes, "The four questions are completely distinct." From "Therefore in the Jin sūtra" downward, it cites the sūtra to directly prove that within the realm traversed there is the meaning of that which can traverse. That is to say, if it is the realm of the knowable, it is purely what is traversed; if it is the realm of delimitation, then there is that which can traverse. Therefore the Commentary says it is not merely what is observed, because the realm in the Jin \[translation\] encompasses that which can observe. As for the Commentary's "the two texts mutually imply and omit": earlier there was the name of a great kalpa, but the number of small kalpas was omitted, so one should imply the small kalpas from the later text; here it only explains the number of small kalpas, omitting the name of the great kalpa, so one should imply the great kalpa from the earlier text. Then altogether there are kalpas numbering the dust motes of two Buddha realms. As for the Commentary's "if taking the Universal Radiance kalpa as one of the realm-dusts": above, Universal Radiance was taken as a great kalpa, within which there were already realm-dust small kalpas; now taking it as the name of a small kalpa, accumulating the number of small kalpas like Universal Radiance passes through the dust motes of a Buddha realm. The remark "two characters are missing" means it should properly say that dying from this place, he was immediately reborn again in this world, passing through kalpas numbering the fine dust motes of two Buddha realms; hence citing the Jin sūtra establishes that there is the character "two". The remark "the Buddhas are all the more numerous" means: formerly, Universal Radiance was taken as great, and within the great there were realm-dust Buddhas; now Universal Radiance is a small kalpa, and within one small kalpa there are already realm-dusts, passing through the Buddhas of two realm-dust small kalpas; the Buddhas of two realm-dust small kalpas, therefore the Buddhas are all the more numerous. As for the Commentary's "Indeed, because the former four questions are all activity and function": viewed in relation to the bodhisattva liberation gate, enterprises are merely one among the four. As for the Commentary's "any single profound dharma has many categories": such as the single giving pāramitā having nine gates, etc. "Fourth, within each category there are many active dharmas": such as a single external giving having many treasures, etc. "Fifth, as a single giving of food has many branches." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 88.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88.5) - [Next: 88.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88.7) - [Up: 88](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.88.6) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.88.6) · Pramāṇa