大乘起信論義記別記 1.60

1.60

Thirty-fifth: Section on the four calumnies (the four calumnies arise because ordinary beings are confused about causes and conditions: 1. the calumny of superimposition; 2. the calumny of deprecation; 3. the calumny of contradiction; 4. the calumny of conceptual proliferation). As for the calumny of superimposition: generally speaking, all dharmas arise from causes and conditions because there is no creator; at the time of their creation they do not abide, because they have no self-nature, beyond the reach of conceptual discrimination. Such is the nature of all dharmas, which cannot be grasped. Yet ordinary beings and [practitioners of] the two vehicles, when all dharmas arise, grasp them as existent; but the dharmas of causes and conditions are by nature free from existence. To grasp and assert existence regarding dharmas that are free from existence does not accord with principle; hence it is called the calumny of superimposition. Since existence constitutes a calumny, non-existence should accord with principle. This meaning is also not so. Although the nature of dharmas of causes and conditions is [not] existent, yet pratītyasamutpāda is present right before us and cannot be called non-existent. To grasp and assert non-existence regarding dharmas that are not non-existent does not accord with principle; hence it is called the calumny of deprecation. Since existence and non-existence are both faults, both existence and non-existence should be the principle. The reply is: causes and conditions are a single dharma, whose nature is not contradictory; that which is not contradictory is called the dharma of causes and conditions. Dharmas that are both existent and non-existent are contradictory in nature and thus are not causes and conditions; because they are not causes and conditions, this is the calumny of contradiction. Since both existence and non-existence is a contradictory dharma and does not accord with the real view, neither existence nor non-existence should accord with principle. The reply is: principle is revealed in reference to causes and conditions; neither existence nor non-existence lies outside of causes and conditions, does not accord with principle, and trifles with all dharmas; hence it is called the calumny of conceptual proliferation. In general, that which involves conceptual discrimination and corresponds to acceptance and rejection is entirely affective reckoning and does not accord with the true principle; transcending thought and terminating marks is called the middle path. Therefore a sūtra states: 'The dharma of causes and conditions is free from existence and free from non-existence.'