成唯識論述記 1.32

1.32

Regarding that to which refuge and homage are paid, there are seven explanations in total. Three are as in the Shunyao. Now, inferring from principle, there are four different meanings: First, revering solely the Dharma and not persons. The Dharma has two kinds: first, teaching; second, principle. The Buddha, having realized vijñapti-mātra, spoke the sūtras of one mind to cause beings to practice in accordance with them. Once he entered nirvāṇa, the teachings were dispersed and lost. It was through the root master of the treatise composing the thirty verses to reveal the principle of vijñapti-mātra that the dispersed and lost Dharma was gathered and made manifest. Although the text of the treatise mentions two persons, the completely and partially [pure], the intent is to take the teaching and principle of the nature of consciousness realized and taught by these two persons. The completely pure is superior regarding teaching, because he is the original lord of the teaching. The partially pure is superior regarding principle, because he is superior in revealing principle. Because they are completely or partially pure regarding the nature of consciousness, the Tathāgata is able to expound the teaching, and the disciple is able to reveal the principle. Therefore, this homage is solely to the Dharma, not to persons. Why revere only the Dharma and not persons? Because that which all Buddhas take as teacher is what is called the Dharma, and the Buddha and disciples are born from this. Second, revering solely persons and not the Dharma. That is, the two masters of vijñapti-mātra: the root [master] and the commenting [master]. The root refers to the Tathāgata, who is completely pure regarding the nature of vijñapti-mātra. The commenting [master] refers to the author of the verses, who is partially pure regarding the nature of vijñapti-mātra. The sound-object “nature of vijñapti-mātra” is subsumed under the seventh case; it is that which qualifies.