仁王經疏 3.389

3.389

The explanation says: Fourth, the distinction between the permanent and the impermanent. Alternatively, it is the distinction between unimpeded [path] and liberation [path]. Relying upon this text, there are of themselves two explanations. First, the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha establishes this meaning: the merits of the buddha-fruit, bodhi and nirvāṇa, are both free of arising and ceasing, which therefore resolves an implicit objection. Relying on the tenets of the three treatises, this refers to an external objection stating: "At the time of the uninterrupted path, wisdom has arising and ceasing; how could it give rise to wisdom that is free of arising and ceasing?" Therefore, he makes this statement: Although wisdom at the vajra-[like path] has arising and ceasing, it is able to realize and know the principle that is free of arising and ceasing. Because this supreme wisdom realizes the principle deeply, if this mind ceases, it can then realize and attain nirvāṇa in which afflictions are exhausted, and it can also realize and attain eternally abiding bodhi that is free of arising and ceasing. Therefore, the earlier sūtra states: "Sarvajña-awakening is neither existent nor non-existent, serene and pure, eternally abiding and immutable, identical with the limit of reality, and equal to the nature of phenomena." Second, the Tripiṭaka Master of Ci'en makes this statement: Although wisdom at the vajra-[like path] has arising and ceasing, yet it is able to realize and understand the principle that is free of arising and ceasing; therefore, it can realize and attain nirvāṇa in which fruits [of defilement] are exhausted, and it can also realize and attain the great bodhi of eternally abiding phenomena. What the earlier sūtra spoke of as eternally abiding and immutable was stated in terms of the superior aspect, thus provisionally speaking of the true mark, and not contemplative illumination.