[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) › [注大乘入楞伽經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791) › 4.39 # 注大乘入楞伽經 4.39 注大乘入楞伽經 4.39 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4.39) 言未生子不得名父，此之一喻俱破二見。若因果同時頓生者，則如父子齊體，尊卑莫辨；若先因後果，則父先子後，子若定後父稱何從？以此責之，二見都喪，父喻因，子喻果。又云如無父故不得名子，前分已滅故，後分不得次第名。 > Saying that when a son is not yet born one cannot be called a father—this single analogy refutes both views. If cause and fruit arise suddenly at the same time, then like father and son sharing an identical body, superior and inferior could not be distinguished; if the cause comes first and the fruit later, then the father is earlier and the son is later, but if the son is definitely later, where does the designation 'father' come from? Rebuking them with this, both views are entirely destroyed. 'Father' is an analogy for the cause; 'son' is an analogy for the fruit. It is also said that just as without a father one cannot be called a son, because the prior part has already ceased, the subsequent part cannot receive the designation of sequential order. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4.38) - [Next: 4.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4.40) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791~en-mt.4.39) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.4.39) · Pramāṇa