<!-- Pramāṇa, a library of Indian primary sources · https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.180 -->

[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) › [俱舍論記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821) › 5.180

# 俱舍論記 5.180

俱舍論記 5.180

- **Language:** Classical Chinese

### [5.180](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.180)

「如何大士相至有生等實物」者，經部反難，順成己義。如何世尊大士三十二相非異於大士？角等三難，准此可知。此有為相，理亦應然，非異所相別有能相。雖了有為色等自性，乃至未了先無今有生、有已後無滅、相續隨轉住，前後差別異，仍未知彼體是有為，故非彼色等性即是有為相。然非離彼色等性有生等實物，能相、所相解各別故，不得言即；離色等外無別性故，不得言離，此是不即不離義也。

> Regarding "How is it that the characteristics of a Great Person ... real entities such as arising?": The Sautrāntika counter-objects, advancing their own position. How is it that the thirty-two marks of a Great Person belonging to the World-Honoured One are not different from the Great Person? The three objections regarding horns and so forth can be understood by analogy with this. For these conditioned characteristics, the principle should also be like this: they are not distinct characterizing marks apart from that which is characterized. Although one cognizes the self-nature of conditioned form and so forth, as long as one has not yet cognized that "previously non-existent and now existing" is arising, "having existed and subsequently non-existent" is cessation, "continuing in succession along with transformation" is stationariness, and "prior and subsequent difference" is alteration, one still does not know that their substantial nature is conditioned. Therefore, that nature of form or the like is not itself the characteristic of the conditioned. However, distinct real entities such as arising do not exist apart from that nature of form or the like. Because the understanding of the characterizing mark and the phenomenon characterized are each distinct, one cannot say they are identical; because apart from form and so forth there is no distinct nature, one cannot say they are separate. This is the meaning of neither identical nor separate.  
> — English (machine translation) (machine translation)

- [Previous: 5.179](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.179)
- [Next: 5.181](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.181)
- [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5)

## Translations (1)

- [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821~en-mt.5.180) — English, machine translation

---
Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.180](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.5.180) · Pramāṇa
