[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) › [十不二門指要鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928) › 2.61 # 十不二門指要鈔 2.61 十不二門指要鈔 2.61 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.61](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2.61) 答：「讀彼文者不看前後，但取一文成我局見。今為粗引彼文仍聊釋出，令欲據彼證唯濕無殊者聞之自誡。何者？彼文本釋世間相常，但相本流動，今欲說常須約位顯，全位為相位、常相亦常，故文數云，相位無二。仍自問云：位可一如，相云何等？答曰：位據理性決不可改，相約隨緣緣有染淨，緣雖染淨同名緣起，如清濁波濕性不異，同以濕性為波，故皆以如為相，同以波為濕性，故皆以如為位，所以相與常住其名雖同，染淨既分如位須辨。釋曰：彼問既云，相云何等？故知答文以位例相成乎等義，乃先法次諭，諭中以法參而合之，法中先舉位一，故云決不可改；次明相等，故云同名緣起。諭中亦先舉濕性不異顯上位一，次明以濕為波、以波為濕，正當顯上位相無二、位等相等，故知文中本答相等，但相兼染淨，等義難彰，故光以濕性諭位論等，仍顯全位為相、全濕為波，以位例相明其咸等。因何但將濕性不異一句為證，全不以濕而例於波，及拋相等之問，豈可得乎？況若論異義，豈獨相異、位無異義邪？故當科即云，染淨既分如位須辨，豈非染相必以在纏真如為位，豈可淨相不以出纏真如為位？若論等者，濁水清水既同一濕，豈不得言同一波邪？以水清後還是濁時動用故也。」 > Answer: "Those who read that text do not examine what comes before and after; they merely take a single line to establish their narrow view. Now I will briefly cite that text and offer a preliminary explanation, so that those who wish to rely on it to prove that only the wetness is without difference may hear it and take heed. Why? That text originally explains that 'the marks of the worldly realms are permanent.' But marks are originally flowing and shifting; now, wishing to explain permanence, it must be revealed in terms of their status. The entire status is the mark; the status is permanent, so the mark is also permanent. Therefore the text repeatedly says: 'The mark and status are not two.' It further asks itself: 'The status can be single and suchness-like, but how are the marks equal?' It answers: 'The status is based on principle and nature, which definitely cannot be altered. Marks are discussed in terms of according with conditions; conditions have defilement and purity. Although conditions are defiled or pure, they are equally called conditioned arising. Just as in clear and turbid waves the wet nature is not different: equally taking the wet nature as waves, they therefore all take suchness as their mark; equally taking waves as the wet nature, they therefore all take suchness as their status. Therefore, although the names > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.60](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2.60) - [Next: 2.62](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2.62) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928~en-mt.2.61) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2.61](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1928.2.61) · Pramāṇa