大乘起信論義記別記 1.53

1.53

Thirty-first: The unobstructedness of the two truths is explained in two gates: first, in terms of a metaphor; second, with respect to the dharmas. First, in terms of a metaphor: for instance, an illusion-rabbit based upon a piece of cloth has two aspects: first, the rabbit; second, the cloth. The rabbit also has two meanings: first, the differentiated characteristics; second, the emptiness of its essence. The cloth also has two meanings: first, abiding in its own state; second, being the rabbit in its entire essence. This cloth and rabbit are neither one nor different. As for their being not different, there are four propositions: 1. The meaning of becoming the rabbit on the cloth and the meaning of differentiated characteristics on the rabbit merge into a single limit, and therefore they are not different; this is taking the root to conform to the branch, clarifying non-difference from the perspective of the branch. 2. The meaning of abiding in its own state on the cloth and the meaning of the emptiness of essence on the rabbit merge into a single limit, and therefore they are not different; this is returning the branch to the root, clarifying non-difference from the perspective of the root. 3. The root to which the branch is subsumed and returns, and the branch which conforms to the subsuming root—these two are doubly fused, coexisting unobstructed, and therefore they are not different; this is the dual preservation of root and branch, unobstructed non-difference. 4. The branch that is subsumed and returned to the root, and the root that is subsumed and conforms to the branch—these two are both obliterated, and therefore they are not different; this is the dual obliteration of root and branch, equal non-difference. Second, as for their being not one, there are also four propositions: 1. The meaning of abiding in its own state on the cloth and the meaning of differentiated characteristics on the rabbit—these two are diametrically opposed, and therefore they are not one. This is non-oneness due to opposition. 2. The meaning of becoming the rabbit on the cloth and the meaning of the emptiness of essence on the rabbit—these two mutually negate, and therefore they are not one. 3. Because that opposition and that mutual negation differ in status, they are not one. That is, in opposing, each abandons the other and they are far removed; in mutually negating, they directly confront each other and intimately destroy one another; therefore, being near and far, they are not one. 4. Because through ultimate mutual negation they are obliterated yet not obliterated, and through ultimate opposition they are preserved yet not preserved, this meaning of being neither obliterated nor preserved is non-one; this is non-oneness due to formation and destruction. Furthermore, these four aspects of non-oneness and the above four aspects of non-difference are also not one, because their meanings are not conflated. Moreover, the above four aspects of non-difference and these four aspects of non-oneness are also not different, because the principle universally pervades. Therefore, if taken through the gate of non-difference, all gates are in supreme harmony; if taken through the gate of non-oneness, all meanings are in supreme conflict; to be in supreme conflict and yet in supreme harmony is the unimpeded and unobstructed dharma. Second, explaining with respect to the dharmas: the cloth illustrates tathatā and the tathāgatagarbha; the rabbit illustrates sentient beings, saṃsāra, and so forth. Their being neither one nor different also has ten gates, which can be known by following the metaphor. Furthermore, the rabbit is immediately arising and immediately ceasing without obstruction, and the cloth is immediately hidden and immediately manifest without obstruction; this saṃsāra and cessation, hiding and manifesting, crisscrossing directly and inversely, with all gates harmoniously fused, may all be understood by pondering according to the above.