金剛三昧經論 2.49

2.49

論曰：此是第三領解。一切處者，一切真俗動寂等處。言無住者，於此一切無所得故。言無離者，於此一切無所不得故。所以然者？彼一切處悉皆非然非不然故。心無住處者，無所住處故。無處住心者，無能住心故。無住無心者，合前二句，以無有處有住之心故。心無生住者，不無無生無住之心故。如此住心者，結前於一切處無住乃至無離，無離之義假說住故。即無生住者，結前心無住處乃至心無生住，住即無住、無住即住故。心無生行不可思議者，離言絕慮故。不思議中可不可說者，以離言亦離離言故。以離言故言不可說，離離言故亦可得說。言可說者，非不然故；不可說者，非是然故。故總說言可不可說。如說言說有可不可，當知其思亦有可不可，但舉一邊影顯之耳。

The treatise states: This is the third [part], expressing understanding. "Anywhere" means all places of the ultimate, conventional, dynamic, quiescent, and so forth. "Does not abide" means that among all these, nothing is grasped. "Does not separate" means that among all these, nothing is not grasped. Why is this so? Because all those places are entirely neither so nor not so. "The mind has no place to abide" means there is no place to be abided in. "There is no place for the mind to abide" means there is no mind capable of abiding. "There is no abiding and no mind" combines the preceding two sentences, because there is no place and no abiding mind. "The mind is without arising or abiding" means that there is not an absence of the mind of non-arising and non-abiding. "A mind abiding like this" concludes the preceding "does not abide anywhere... does not separate from anywhere," because the sense of "not separating" is metaphorically spoken of as "abiding." "Is the non-arising abiding" concludes the preceding "the mind has no place to abide... the mind is without arising or abiding," because abiding is non-abiding, and non-abiding is abiding. "The mind's activity of non-arising is inconceivable" means it is beyond words and cuts off thought. "Within the inconceivable, it can and cannot be spoken of" is because it is free from words and also free from being free from words. Because it is free from words, it is said to be unspeakable; because it is free from being free from words, it can also be spoken of. It "can be spoken of" because it is not not so; it "cannot be spoken of" because it is not so. Therefore it is spoken of comprehensively as "it can and cannot be spoken of." Just as speech has what can and cannot be spoken of, one should know that thought also has what can and cannot be thought; it merely brings up one side to allude to the other.