金光明經文句記 4.287

4.287

二、明十二因緣生法二空觀，二：初、分文立意，二：初、分文。此十二支而分生法者，順此經文。初支既名曰無明，名即假名，故屬生境。無明者，我執也。《起信論》云「計名字相」也。向下諸文但言行識等，既不云名，乃是直指色心也，以行至老死不出五陰色心故。義雖炳然，猶恐不信，故引《釋論》逐段證成。誰老死者，如問云誰，則答言我，故知誰我悉假名也。經云名曰，與論冥符；論號生空，經豈不爾？是老死者，則直指色心是老死法。經不云名，與論亦合。

Second, explaining the contemplation of the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas in the twelve links of conditioned origination, which has two parts: first, dividing the text and establishing the intention, which has two parts: first, dividing the text. Dividing these twelve links into persons and dharmas accords with this sūtra text. Since the first link is called "ignorance," and "called" is a provisional designation, it belongs to the objective realm of persons. Ignorance is attachment to self; the *Awakening of Faith* calls it "the characteristic of grasping at names." The texts below merely speak of volitional formations, consciousness, and so forth; since they do not say "called," they point directly to form and mind, because from volitional formations up to aging and death does not go beyond the form and mind of the five aggregates. Although the meaning is clear, still fearing that people will not believe it, he cites the *Explanatory Treatise* to corroborate section by section. As for "who undergoes aging and death": if asked "who," one replies "I"; thus one knows that "who" and "I" are both provisional designations. The sūtra says "called," which secretly tallies with the treatise; the treatise terms it the emptiness of persons, so how could the sūtra not be so? "What undergoes aging and death" directly points to form and mind as the dharmas of aging and death. The sūtra does not say "called," which also accords with the treatise.