維摩義記 4.2

4.2

第十六中，初「電天曰」，標人別說。下彰所說。「明無明二」，返舉二相。分別有二：一、隨相說。闇惑之心緣而不了名曰無明，緣智顯了說之為明。二、約心說。妄心性闇，設有緣解亦是無明。如人夢中雖有分別性是昏睡，亦如樂受性是行苦。真心性照說之為明，乃至凡時性淨之心亦說為明。今依後門。下翻此二以明不二。於此門中，真妄同體以為不二。先辨、後結。言「無明即是明」者，會妄即真。妄心體實即是真心，故無明性即是明也，如昏睡體即是報心。此句正顯不二義竟。噵言「明亦不可取」者，簡真異妄。何故須簡？人聞是明，取同緣治。為遮此見，故說是明不可取同緣治之。「明亦不可取」，離一切數，釋前叵取緣治。之明是妄心邊，慧數所攝。今言明者，是真心體，真心平等性如虛空離一切數，是故不可取同緣治。亦可是中二相雙遣以為不二。言無明性即是明者，遣無明相。無明實性即明，故不可一向取。離一切數，遣其明相。二相俱泯，名為不二。此解不二。言「於其中等無二」者，釋其入義。「是為」下結。

In the sixteenth [section], first, "Diantian (Vidyuddeva) said" indicates the person to set up the individual statement. Below, what was said is made clear. "Luminosity and ignorance are two" contrarily brings up two characteristics. There are two distinctions: First, speaking according to characteristics: a mind of dark delusion that conditions without understanding is called ignorance; cognitive wisdom that is clearly manifest is called luminosity. Second, speaking in terms of mind: the nature of the deluded mind is dark; even if it has conditioned understanding, it is still ignorance. Just as when a person dreams, although there is discrimination, its nature is torpor, and just as pleasant feeling in its nature is the suffering of conditioning. The nature of the true mind is illumination, which is called luminosity; even the inherently pure mind during the stage of an ordinary person is also spoken of as luminosity. Here, we rely on the latter approach. Below, these two are reversed to clarify non-duality. In this approach, the true and the deluded sharing the same essence constitutes non-duality. First it explains, and then concludes. The statement "Ignorance is itself luminosity" integrates the deluded into the true. The essence of the deluded mind in reality is itself the true mind; therefore the nature of ignorance is itself luminosity, just as the essence of torpor is itself the retribution-mind. This sentence precisely displays the meaning of non-duality, bringing it to completion. The statement "Luminosity is also not to be grasped" distinguishes the true from the deluded. Why is it necessary to distinguish them? When people hear of this luminosity, they grasp it as identical to conditioned antidotes. To ward off this view, it is therefore said that this luminosity cannot be grasped as identical to conditioned antidotes. "Luminosity is also not to be grasped, transcending all reckonings" explains why the preceding cannot be grasped as a conditioned antidote. The luminosity of conditioned antidotes belongs to the side of the deluded mind and is subsumed under mental factors of wisdom. The luminosity spoken of here is the essence of the true mind; the true mind is equal in nature like empty space, transcending all reckonings, and therefore cannot be grasped as identical to conditioned antidotes. Alternatively, within this, both characteristics being eliminated constitutes non-duality: the statement that the nature of ignorance is itself luminosity eliminates the characteristic of ignorance; because the true nature of ignorance is itself luminosity, it cannot be grasped exclusively. Transcending all reckonings eliminates the characteristic of luminosity. With both characteristics completely extinguished, it is called non-duality. This explains non-duality. The statement "Being equal and without duality within them" explains the meaning of entry. "This is..." below concludes.