起信論疏 1.24

1.24

From "Furthermore" onward, the aspect of original enlightenment of pure nature is explained next. There are two parts to this: first, a general designation; second, a specific explanation. In the first part, where it says "equal to empty space," it is because there is nowhere it does not pervade; "just like a clear mirror" is because it is free from defilement and manifests reflections. Among the four meanings: the first and third compare it to a clear mirror based on the meaning of being free from defilement; the second and fourth also have the meaning of clarity based on the meaning of manifesting images. Within the specific explanation, four kinds are distinctly revealed: here, the first two pertain to the causal nature, while the latter two pertain to the stage of the fruit. The first two clarify emptiness and wisdom, as the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Buddha-nature is paramārtha-śūnyatā; paramārtha-śūnyatā is called wisdom. The wise see emptiness and non-emptiness; the foolish see neither emptiness nor non-emptiness"—and so on at length. Now, in the first part here, where it says "far removed from all aspects of objects of the mind," this reveals the paramārtha-śūnyatā of that sūtra. "No dharma can be manifested; it is not of the nature of illuminating awareness" explains not seeing emptiness and non-emptiness. In the second part, where it says "all mundane realms of objects appear within it," this explains the wise person's seeing emptiness and non-emptiness in that sūtra, as that sūtra states: "Emptiness refers to all saṃsāra, while non-emptiness refers to the great nirvāṇa." Here, it only manifests the realm of saṃsāra: since it appears in the mirror, it is said to "not go out"; yet it does not defile the mirror, so it is said to "not enter." Conforming to the images that appear, it matches the measure of original enlightenment, equals the realm of empty space, and pervades the limits of the three times; therefore there is no loss from moment to moment, nor is there destruction by cessation; hence it says "neither lost nor destroyed, permanently abiding in the One Mind," and so forth. The above clarifies the meaning of the clear mirror. From "Furthermore, all..." onward, it explains the meaning of "cause of perfuming." In the third part, where it says "emerging from the two hindrances, pure and bright," this explains that when the previously mentioned mirror of the cause of perfuming emerges from entanglement, it becomes the dharmakāya. In the fourth part, where it says "relying on the Dharma's emergence, it universally illuminates the minds of sentient beings," this means that when that original enlightenment becomes manifest, it illuminates the capacities of beings equally and displays myriad transformations; for this reason it says "manifesting in accordance with thought." What is the difference between this and the inconceivable activity explained earlier? That one clarified the activity of initial enlightenment in the nirmāṇakāya, while this reveals the function of the dharmakāya of original enlightenment: each time a transformation arises, it has both of these meanings. Although this is so in general, when distinguished: in terms of the gate of that which is initiated by initial enlightenment, sentient beings are benefited in accordance with specific causal connections, because the underlying original enlightenment conforming to defilement has always had varying degrees of affinity and distance; in terms of the gate of that which is manifested by original enlightenment, it universally benefits those whose capacities have matured without selecting specific connections, because the fundamentally pure nature of original enlightenment extends equally to all without affinity or distance. The broad explanation of enlightenment is concluded.