釋摩訶衍論 3.21

3.21

論曰：清淨虛空具足十德，亦無染相亦無淨相。而虛空性不守自性故，能受染熏隨緣流轉，是故名為染淨虛空。能熏所熏建立誹謗等種種門，至廣說分其理具顯。已說字事門，次說隨釋門。所言覺義者者，即是總句，從此自下皆是別句。總者通表一切覺故，別者各各差別說故。就別句中先說清淨本覺、清淨始覺，次說染淨本覺、染淨始覺。如其次第，說相可見。謂心體離念相者，即是清淨本覺。心謂即是自性清淨心，體謂即是本有法身體，如是心體即名本覺。離念相者，即是顯示清淨之義。所謂遠離大無明念，故言離念。遠離四種無常之相，故言離相。過於恒沙煩惱眷屬。此五有為以為根本，是故舉本無，示眷屬皆空。離念相者者，即唱清淨本覺。人辭者，即人故。等虛空界無所不遍者，如是覺者善證具足十種德義虛空理故。法界一相者，如是覺者於所證之真如法界而共和合，一味一相無差別故。即是如來平等法身者，善證二種勝妙之理。清淨覺者，即是法身如來自性自體故。依此法身說名本覺者，本有法身自性德中而作歸依，建立清淨本覺稱故。已說清淨本覺，次說清淨始覺。何以故者，即請問辭，謂欲建立清淨始覺，作如是請。問相云何？謂有眾生作如是難：本有法身從本已來具足無量性之功德，常恒明淨常恒自在。依此義故名本覺者，如是本覺於何時中、何因緣故，具足一切無量功德名本覺耶？若作是說：此本覺者有大智力，能善斷除一切過患，具足圓滿諸功德者，即此本覺前惑後覺，非本覺明。即此功德斷已前隱、斷已後顯，非自性明。豈惑覺隱顯，本有之義而得成立？若作是說，常斷更不斷，常具足更不具足，是故應有本斷本德者。此義亦不成立，無功德過故。謂一切障，從本斷訖更不待斷。一切功德，從本具足更不待具足覺者，即是始覺，非彼本覺。是故般若波羅蜜中作如是說：若覺者是始覺，若不覺者即是無明。若離此二者，即名為本覺。以何義故作如是說？本有法身自性德中而作歸依，說名本覺故。言何以故本覺義者對始覺說者？直決彼疑。謂馬鳴師自通而言，清淨本覺從本已來不生不滅，非建立有、非誹謗無，或非過患、或非功德，言語道絕、心行處滅，而有言說。具足圓滿過於恒沙無量性德名本覺者，當知從無始來而有清淨始覺，發大智力發大定力，於一切時於一切處，常恒對治過於恒沙無量無邊過患之海，具足圓滿過於恒沙無量無邊功德淨品。對此清淨始覺者故，立彼清淨本覺之稱。以始覺者即同本覺者，作其所由，謂以自然始覺與彼本覺同故，得對始覺示本覺故。如是二覺熏習差別其相云何？頌曰：

The treatise states: Pure empty space is complete with the ten virtues, having neither the characteristic of defilement nor the characteristic of purity. Yet because the nature of empty space does not abide by its own nature, it can receive the perfuming of defilement and wander following conditions; for this reason, it is named "defiled and pure empty space." The various approaches, such as the establishing of what perfumes and what is perfumed, superimposition, and denial, will be fully illuminated when reaching the section of extensive explanation. Having already explained the approach of terms and entities, we next explain the approach of following commentaries. That which is termed "the meaning of awakening" is the summary clause; from here downward, all are specific clauses. The summary clause generally expresses all awakenings; the specific clauses state their individual distinctions. Within the specific clauses, pure original awakening and pure initial awakening are explained first, and defiled-and-pure original awakening and defiled-and-pure initial awakening are explained next. In their proper order, the characteristics explained can be observed. That which is called "the essence of the mind being free from the characteristics of thoughts" is pure original awakening. "Mind" refers to the intrinsically pure mind; "essence" refers to the intrinsically existent essence of the dharmakāya; such an essence of the mind is named "original awakening." "Being free from the characteristics of thoughts" shows the meaning of purity. That is to say, it is far removed from the thoughts of great fundamental ignorance; hence it is called "free from thoughts." It is far removed from the characteristics of the four kinds of impermanence; hence it is called "free from characteristics." It surpasses the retinue of afflictions numerous as the sands of the Ganges. Taking these five conditioned phenomena as the root, it therefore points out that the root is non-existent, demonstrating that the retinues are all empty. "One who is free from the characteristics of thoughts" designates the person of pure original awakening. As for the phrasing "one who", it refers to a person. That it "equals the realm of empty space, pervading everywhere" is because such an awakened one skillfully realizes the principle of empty space complete with the ten kinds of virtuous meanings. That "the dharmadhātu is of a single characteristic" is because such an awakened one is harmoniously united with the dharmadhātu of tathatā that is realized, being of one taste, one characteristic, and without distinction. That it "is the equal dharmakāya of the Tathāgatas" is because it skillfully realizes the two kinds of supremely wondrous principles. The pure awakened one is the intrinsic nature and own essence of the dharmakāya Tathāgata. That "it is named original awakening based on this dharmakāya" is because taking refuge in the intrinsic virtues of the intrinsically existent dharmakāya establishes the designation of pure original awakening. Having already explained pure original awakening, pure initial awakening is explained next. "Why is this so?" is an interrogative phrasing; that is, wishing to establish pure initial awakening, this question is posed. What is the nature of the question? Certain sentient beings pose this objection: "The intrinsically existent dharmakāya has from the beginning been complete with immeasurable virtues of its nature, constantly and eternally bright and pure, constantly and eternally autonomous. If it is named original awakening based on this meaning, at what time and through what causes and conditions is such an original awakening complete with all immeasurable virtues and named original awakening? If one says: 'This original awakening possesses great power of wisdom, being able to skillfully sever all faults and be complete and full with all virtues,' then this original awakening would have delusion before and awakening afterward, not being the brightness of original awakening. These virtues would then be hidden before severance and manifest after severance, not being the intrinsic brightness. How could the meaning of intrinsically existent be established through delusion, awakening, concealment, and manifestation? If one says that it is eternally severed without needing further severance, and eternally complete without needing further completion, and therefore there must be intrinsic severance and intrinsic virtue, then this meaning also cannot be established, as it would entail the fault of being devoid of virtue. That is, if all obstructions are severed from the beginning without waiting to be severed, and all virtues are complete from the beginning without waiting to be completed, that which awakens is initial awakening, not that original awakening. For this reason, it is said in the Prajñāpāramitā: 'If one awakens, it is initial awakening; if one does not awaken, it is fundamental ignorance. If one is free from these two, it is named original awakening.' For what reason is it stated thus? Because taking refuge in the intrinsic virtues of the intrinsically existent dharmakāya is spoken of as original awakening." The statement "Why is the meaning of original awakening spoken of in contrast to initial awakening?" directly resolves that doubt. That is, Master Aśvaghoṣa resolves it himself by saying: Pure original awakening from the beginning is unborn and unceasing, neither established as existent nor denied as non-existent, neither a fault nor a virtue; the path of language is cut off, and the place of mental activity is extinguished, yet there is verbal explanation. If being complete and full with immeasurable natural virtues surpassing the sands of the Ganges is named original awakening, one should know that from the beginningless past there has been pure initial awakening, which brings forth great power of wisdom and great power of samādhi, at all times and in all places constantly counteracting the ocean of immeasurable and boundless faults surpassing the sands of the Ganges, and fulfilling and perfecting the pure categories of immeasurable and boundless virtues surpassing the sands of the Ganges. In contrast to this pure initial awakening, that designation of pure original awakening is established. The statement "Because the one who has initial awakening is identical to original awakening" gives the reason, meaning that because spontaneous initial awakening is identical to that original awakening, one can demonstrate original awakening in contrast to initial awakening. What are the characteristics of the difference in perfuming between these two awakenings? A verse states: