[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) › [華嚴經明法品內立三寶章](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874) › 2.51 # 華嚴經明法品內立三寶章 2.51 華嚴經明法品內立三寶章 2.51 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2.51) 喻者，且如幻兔依巾，有二門：一兔、二巾。兔亦二義：一相差別義、二體空義。巾亦二義：一住自位義、二舉體成兔義。此巾與兔非一非異，且非異有四句：一、以巾上成兔義及兔上相差別義合為一際，故為不異，此是以本隨末，就末明不異；二、以巾上住自位義及兔上體空義合為一際，故為不異，此是以末歸本，就本明不異；三、以攝末所歸之本與攝本所從之末此二雙融，無礙俱存，故為不異，此是本末雙存，無礙不異；四、以所攝歸本之末亦與所攝隨末之本此一俱泯，故為不異，此是本末雙泯，平等不異。第二、非一義者，亦有四句：一、以巾上住自位義與兔上相差別此二相違，故為非，此是相背非一；　巾上成兔義兔上體空義此二相害，故為非一；三、以彼相背與此相害此二位異，故為非一，謂背即各相背捨，相去懸遠也，相害即與敵對，親相飱害，是故近遠非一也；四、以極相害泯而不泯，由極相匪存而不存，此不泯不存義為非一，此是成壞非一。又此四非一與上四不異而亦非一，以義不雜故。又上四不異與此四不一而亦不異，理遍通故。是故若以不異門取，諸門極相和會；若以非一門取，諸義極相違諍。極違而極和者，是無障礙法也。 > As for the metaphor: for instance, a phantom rabbit depends on a kerchief, which has two aspects: first, the rabbit; second, the kerchief. The rabbit also has two meanings: first, the meaning of distinction among characteristics; second, the meaning of emptiness of essence. The kerchief also has two meanings: first, the meaning of abiding in its own station; second, the meaning of the entire essence becoming the rabbit. This kerchief and rabbit are neither one nor different. Furthermore, "not different" has four propositions: (1) Because the meaning of becoming the rabbit on the part of the kerchief and the meaning of distinction among characteristics on the part of the rabbit unite into a single limit, they are therefore not different; this is to follow the branch from the root, clarifying non-difference with respect to the branch. (2) Because the meaning of abiding in its own station on the part of the kerchief and the meaning of emptiness of essence on the part of the rabbit unite into a single limit, they are therefore not different; this is to return the branch to the root, clarifying non-difference with respect to the root. (3) Because the root to which the gathered branch returns and the branch that proceeds from the gathered root—these two are harmonized in pair and both preserved unobstructed, they are therefore not different; this is the simultaneous preservation of root and branch, unobstructed non-difference. (4) Because the branch that is gathered to return to the root and the root that is gathered to follow the branch are both obliterated, they are therefore not different; this is the simultaneous obliteration of root and branch, equal non-difference. Second, the meaning of "not one" also has four propositions: (1) Because the meaning of abiding in its own station on the part of the kerchief and the distinction among characteristics on the part of the rabbit are contrary to each other, they are therefore not \[one\]; this is non-oneness through mutual opposition. \[(2)\] The meaning of becoming the rabbit on the part of the kerchief and the meaning of emptiness of essence on the part of the rabbit mutually impair each other, so they are not one. (3) Because the station of that mutual opposition and that of this mutual impairment are distinct, they are therefore not one: "opposition" means they turn away from and abandon each other, far removed from one another; "mutual impairment" means they directly confront each other and intimately consume and harm each other; therefore, they are not one in being near and far. (4) Because through extreme mutual impairment they are obliterated and yet not obliterated, and because through extreme mutual opposition they are preserved and yet not preserved, this meaning of neither being obliterated nor preserved is non-oneness; this is non-oneness through formation and destruction. Furthermore, these four \[propositions of\] non-oneness and the above four \[propositions of\] non-difference are also not one, because their meanings are not confused. Moreover, the above four \[propositions of\] non-difference and these four \[propositions of\] non-oneness are also not different, because principle is pervasive and unimpeded throughout. Therefore, if taken via the gate of non-difference, all gates extremely harmonize and converge; if taken via the gate of non-oneness, all meanings are in extreme conflict and dispute. That which is extremely conflicting and yet extremely harmonious is unobstructed phenomena. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2.50) - [Next: 2.52](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2.52) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874~en-mt.2.51) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (4) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.29) — Classical Chinese - [大方廣佛華嚴經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.46.31) — Classical Chinese - [華嚴經探玄記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.15.28) — Classical Chinese - [大乘起信論義記別記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1847.1.53) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1874.2.51) · Pramāṇa