[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [起信論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844) › 1.22 # 起信論疏 1.22 起信論疏 1.22 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1.22) 「又心起者」以下，第三總明始覺不異本覺。此中有二：一者重明究竟覺相、二者正明不異本覺。初中有三：一者直顯究竟相、二者舉非覺顯是覺、三者對境廣顯智滿。初中言「又心起者」者，牒上覺心初起之言，非謂覺時知有初相，故言「無有初相可知」。而說覺心初起相者，如覺方時知西是東，如是如來覺心之時，知初動相即本來靜，是故說言「即謂無念」也。「是故」以下，舉非顯是，如前所說無念是覺，是故有念不得名覺；是即金剛心以還，一切眾生未離無始無明之念，依是義故，不得名覺。然前對四相之夢差別，故說漸覺；今約無明之眠無異，故說「不覺」。如《仁王經》言「始從伏忍至頂三昧，照第一義諦，不名為見。所謂見者，是薩婆若故。」「若得」以下，對境顯智。若至心原得於無念，即能遍知一切眾生一心動轉四相差別，故言「即知心相生住異滅」。次言「以無念等故」者，釋成上義，此中有疑云：佛得無念，眾生有念，有無隔別，云何無念能知有念？作如是疑，故遣之云：眾生有念，本來無念，得無念與彼平等，故言以無念等故。是明既得平等無念，故能遍知諸念四相也。此下第二正明無異。雖曰始得無念之覺，而覺四相本來無起，待何不覺而有始覺？故言「實無始覺之異」。下釋此義，四相俱有為心所成，離一心外無別自體，故言「俱時而有皆無自立。」皆無自立故，「本來平等」，同一本覺也。 > From "Moreover, as for the mind arising..." onward is the third \[part\], generally clarifying that initial enlightenment is not different from original enlightenment. Within this, there are two parts: first, reiterating the characteristics of ultimate enlightenment; second, directly clarifying that it is not different from original enlightenment. Within the first, there are three parts: first, directly revealing the ultimate characteristics; second, adducing non-realization to reveal true realization; third, broadly revealing the fullness of wisdom with respect to objects. In the first part, the phrase "moreover, as for the mind arising" takes up the previous statement about realizing the initial arising of the mind; it does not mean that at the time of realization one knows that there is an initial mark, and so it says: "there is no initial mark that can be known." And as for speaking of the mark of the initial arising of the mind, it is like knowing that west is east when one realizes direction; in this way, when the Tathāgata realizes the mind, he knows that the initial mark of stirring is originally tranquil, and therefore it is said: "it is just called non-thought." From "for this reason" onward, it adduces non-realization to reveal true realization. As previously explained, non-thought is realization; therefore, having thought cannot be called realization. That is to say, backward from the diamond mind, all sentient beings have not separated from the thoughts of beginningless avidyā; based on this meaning, they cannot be called realized. However, previously, in contrast to the differences among the dreams of the four marks, gradual realization was spoken of; now, based on the non-difference in the sleep of avidyā, it is called "non-enlightenment." As the Renwang jing says: "Beginning from the forbearance of subduing up to the summit samādhi, illuminating the ultimate truth is not called seeing. What is called seeing is sarvajñatā." From "if one attains..." onward reveals wisdom with respect to objects. If one reaches the source of the mind and attains non-thought, one can then ubiquitously know the differences among the four marks of arising, abiding, difference, and cessation in the stirring and turning of the One Mind of all sentient beings. Therefore, it says: "one then knows the marks of the mind: arising, abiding, difference, and cessation." Next, the phrase "because of the equality of non-thought" explains and confirms the above meaning. Here there is a doubt: "The Buddha attains non-thought, while sentient beings have thoughts; presence and absence are separated and distinct, so how can non-thought know what has thought?" Generating such a doubt, it is therefore dispelled, saying: sentient beings have thought, yet originally it is non-thought; attaining non-thought is equal with them, and therefore it says: "because of the equality of non-thought." This clarifies that having attained equal non-thought, one can therefore ubiquitously know the four marks of all thoughts. From this point onward is the second \[part\], directly clarifying non-difference. Although one is said to newly attain the realization of non-thought, one realizes that the four marks originally never arose; relative to what non-enlightenment could there be initial enlightenment? Therefore, it says: "in reality there is no difference of initial enlightenment." Below, this meaning is explained: the four marks all exist as things formed by the mind; apart from the One Mind, they have no separate essence of their own. Therefore, it says: "existing simultaneously, none has an independent existence." Because none has an independent existence, "they are originally equal," sharing the identical single original enlightenment. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1.21) - [Next: 1.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1.23) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844~en-mt.1.22) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [大乘起信論義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1846.2.129) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1844.1.22) · Pramāṇa