[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) › [大乘法界無差別論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838) › 1.60 # 大乘法界無差別論疏 1.60 大乘法界無差別論疏 1.60 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.60](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1.60) 第七、釋無染門中亦三，謂徵、頌、釋。頌中，上半喻、下半法。上半在纏、下半無染。問：此中將欲明在纏無染，何故乃云「煩惱雲若除，法身日明顯」？答：為在纏時即是眾生而實無染。此難辨故，約顯勝說。謂若在纏非性無染，後障盡時不應名本來無染，故云也。三、釋中二：先、問意云：前門既云法身即眾生，眾生既是染，未審此法身為染為不染？若其不染，如何說言即眾生界？若其是染，即失法身，後離染時何所顯現？故云「此復云何」等也。二、「譬如」下，答。於中二：先喻、後合。答意云：以法身隨緣義故即眾生界，又以隨緣時即有不變義，故性常清淨本來不染。是故舉體即染，性恒清淨，是此義也。又法身有二義：一、約隨緣義，舉海浪喻；二、約不變義，如雲日喻。煩惱為客者，客亦二義：一無體依主義、二為客不無義。今此文中，約法身不變義，及煩惱中為客不無義，以此二義本不相到，故云本來清淨也。又此為客不無義，即是法身隨緣義故，是故煩惱即是法身，而不染法身；法身中不變義，即是煩惱無體義，是故法身即是煩惱，而恒常清淨也。又常住不失是主義、不可久住必當離去即是客義，是故當知一切煩惱無有不可斷義。若不爾者，即非客也。又由依主無體故，方是為客不無義，是故常覆真如而恒清淨。釋無染竟。 > Seventh, the explanation of the gate of non-defilement also has three parts: the interrogation, the verse, and the explanation. In the verse, the first half is an analogy, and the second half is the doctrine. The first half concerns being amidst bonds, and the second half concerns being non-defiled. Question: Since here you intend to explain being non-defiled amidst bonds, why does it say, "If the clouds of affliction are removed, the sun of the dharmakāya will clearly appear"? Answer: Because when it is amidst bonds, it is precisely sentient beings yet truly non-defiled. Because this is difficult to discern, it is spoken of in terms of its superior manifestation. That is to say, if it were not intrinsically non-defiled while amidst bonds, then later when the hindrances are exhausted, it should not be called "originally non-defiled"; hence it says this. Third, in the explanation there are two parts. First, the question means: Since the preceding gate stated that the dharmakāya is sentient beings, and sentient beings are defiled, I wonder whether this dharmakāya is defiled or non-defiled. If it is non-defiled, how can one say that it is identical to the realm of sentient beings? If it is defiled, then the dharmakāya would be lost, and when defilement is separated from later, what would be revealed? Hence it asks: "What does this mean again?" and so forth. Second, from "Just as..." onward is the answer. Within it are two parts: first the analogy, then the application. The meaning of the answer is: through the dharmakāya's meaning of conforming to conditions, it is identical to the realm of sentient beings; furthermore, because at the very time it conforms to conditions it contains the meaning of being unchanging, its nature is constantly pure and originally non-defiled. Therefore, although its entire substance is defiled, its nature is perpetually pure; this is its meaning. Furthermore, the dharmakāya has two meanings: first, in terms of the meaning of conforming to conditions, the ocean waves are cited as an analogy; second, in terms of the meaning of being unchanging, it is like the analogy of the clouds and the sun. Regarding the afflictions being "guests": "guest" also has two meanings: first, the meaning of having no substance of their own and relying on the host; second, the meaning of not being non-existent as guests. In this present text, in terms of the dharmakāya's meaning of being unchanging and the afflictions' meaning of not being non-existent as guests, because these two meanings originally do not reach each other, it is said to be originally pure. Furthermore, this meaning of not being non-existent as guests is precisely the dharmakāya's meaning of conforming to conditions; therefore the afflictions are the dharmakāya, yet they do not defile the dharmakāya. The unchanging meaning in the dharmakāya is precisely the afflictions' meaning of having no substance; therefore the dharmakāya is the afflictions, yet it is perpetually pure. Moreover, remaining permanent and unfailing is the meaning of the "host"; being unable to stay long and necessarily departing is the meaning of the "guest". Therefore, one should know that among all afflictions, there are none that cannot be severed. If it were not so, they would not be guests. Furthermore, precisely because they rely on the host and lack intrinsic substance, they have the meaning of not being non-existent as guests; therefore, though they constantly veil tathatā, it remains perpetually pure. The explanation of the gate of non-defilement is finished. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.59](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1.59) - [Next: 1.61](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1.61) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838~en-mt.1.60) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1.60](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1838.1.60) · Pramāṇa