[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) › [註華嚴法界觀門](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884) › 1.128 # 註華嚴法界觀門 1.128 註華嚴法界觀門 1.128 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.128](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1.128) 已上正分解行也。此下反顯相須，如目足更資也。又初句會色歸空，無增益謗；二明空即色，無損減謗；三空色無礙，不是雙非，無戲論謗；四泯絕無寄，不是亦空亦色，無相違謗。四謗既無，百非斯絕，已當八部《般若》無相大乘之極致也，況後二觀展轉深玄。又初句當色即是空，次句當空即是色，第三當色不異空空不異色，第四即當不生不滅乃至無智亦無得也。又乍觀文相，似當初句空觀觀真諦，次句假觀觀俗諦，三四二句中道觀觀第一義諦，三即雙照明中、四即雙遮明中。細詳觀文所宗，即不然也。以雖有空色等言，但為成於真空觀也，名題昭然若此，即空假真俗三觀三諦已備，次理事無礙復是何觀？故知不然。次下反顯行解相資云。 > The above properly differentiates practice and understanding. Below, their mutual necessity is shown by contrast, just as eyes and feet mutually assist each other. Furthermore, the first phrase gathers rūpa into emptiness, being free from the slander of superimposition; the second clarifies that emptiness is rūpa, being free from the slander of deprecation; the third is the non-obstruction of emptiness and rūpa, not being a double negation, and is free from the slander of frivolous proliferation; the fourth is total cessation without resting on anything, not being both empty and rūpa, and is free from the slander of contradiction. With the four slanders eliminated, the hundred negations are completely extinguished, which already corresponds to the ultimate reach of the signless Mahāyāna in the eight Prajñā sections; how much more so with the subsequent two contemplations, which progressively deepen and become more profound. Furthermore, the first phrase corresponds to 'rūpa is precisely emptiness', the next phrase to 'emptiness is precisely rūpa', the third to 'rūpa is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not different from rūpa', and the fourth corresponds to 'neither arising nor ceasing' up to 'no wisdom and no attainment'. Moreover, viewing the text superficially, it might seem that the first phrase corresponds to the contemplation of emptiness contemplating the ultimate truth, the next phrase to the contemplation of provisionality contemplating the conventional truth, and the third and fourth phrases to the contemplation of the Middle Way contemplating the supreme truth—the third being illuminating both to clarify the Middle, and the fourth being negating both to clarify the Middle. But examining closely the thesis of the contemplative text, this is not so. Although there are words like 'emptiness' and 'rūpa', they are only to accomplish the contemplation of true emptiness; the title is clearly as such, and if the three contemplations and three truths of emptiness, provisionality, ultimate, and conventional were already complete, what contemplation would the subsequent non-obstruction of principle and phenomena be? Thus we know this is not so. Next, the mutual support of practice and understanding is shown by contrast: > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.127](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1.127) - [Next: 1.129](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1.129) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884~en-mt.1.128) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1.128](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1884.1.128) · Pramāṇa