大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 74.8

74.8

As for the commentary's "Through the sentient beings' mind that is identical to the Buddha's mind" and below, this is the second part, directly demonstrating the characteristics of others' minds in the dharmatā. This has two pairs: the former pair clarifies the grasped, and the latter pair clarifies the grasper. Now, for the first, the statement "The sentient beings' mind that is identical to the Buddha's mind" clarifies that the grasped sentient beings' mind is identical to the Buddha's mind; this clarifies non-difference. Next, the statement "Which is not identical to the Buddha's mind of the sentient beings' mind" clarifies that the sentient beings' mind and the Buddha's mind are not identical. Because they are not identical, the meaning of the grasped exists; because they are not different, the meaning of mind-only is not destroyed. The statement "acting as the grasped" concludes the grasped, distinguishing it from not being the grasper. Next, distinguishing the grasper, it says, "Through the Buddha's mind that is identical to the sentient beings' mind": this phrase clarifies that the grasping Buddha's mind is identical to the sentient beings' mind; this clarifies non-difference. Next, the statement "Which is not identical to the sentient beings' mind of the Buddha's mind" clarifies that the Buddha's mind and the sentient beings' mind have the meaning of not being one. Because they are not one, it acts as the grasper; because they are not different, it does not destroy the meaning of Consciousness-Only. The statement "acting as the grasper" concludes the grasper, distinguishing it from not being the grasped. Furthermore, illustrating this with an analogy, it is like mixing water and milk. The milk is what is mixed, analogising the sentient beings' mind as the grasped. The water is what mixes, analogising the Buddha's mind as the grasper. Because these two blend together as if of a single flavour, when the king of geese sips it, the milk is exhausted while the water remains, so one knows they are not one. Yet this water is called water identical to milk, and this milk is called milk identical to water; although the two are mutually identical, they have the meaning of not being one. Therefore it should be analogised thus: the milk identical to water, not being the water identical to milk, is what is mixed; the water identical to milk, not being the milk identical to water, is what mixes. The meaning can be known.