大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 62.45

62.45

Regarding the commentary's "If so…" and so on, this is the second [point], resolving an objection. The objection is that the sequences contradict each other, and the reply shows that the principles differ. This is based on severity, whereas the former was based on coarseness and subtlety. That is to say, the inversion of permanence is the most severe, because from conceptualizing the primary mind as permanent, wrong views and the like arise, asserting that there is neither cause nor effect, neither good nor evil; hence it is the most severe. Pleasure is lighter than the former: it merely conceptualizes false pleasure, and does not necessarily hold the wrong view of grasping pleasant feeling as permanent; since the faults it generates are shallow, it is secondary. Next, conceptualizing a controlling agent in perception and formations does not obstruct the existence of cultivation; hence this is lighter still. Conceptualizing the body as pure merely generates false attachment and causes no great fault; hence it is the lightest.