起信論疏筆削記 10.42

10.42

論　非覺照下，三、結名，疏二：初、正釋，二：初、約妄無真照之功。先法說違理者，理有覺照。妄既違理，即無覺照。既無照用，理中豈能容彼妄耶？由是前文云遠離也。如鏡下，喻顯也。如鏡本有照用，外物違鏡，則無照用。既無照用，鏡中豈能容彼物耶？以照與無照非和合故。亦猶仁人之家，豈容不人共往？以性相違故。

The Śāstra states: "Not being illumination of enlightenment..." is the third part, concluding the name, which in the Commentary has two parts: first, the direct explanation, which has two parts: first, in terms of delusion lacking the efficacy of true illumination. First, the explanation in terms of dharma: running contrary to principle; principle possesses the illumination of enlightenment. Since delusion runs contrary to principle, it lacks the illumination of enlightenment. Since it lacks the function of illumination, how could principle accommodate that delusion? For this reason, the earlier text said "far removed." "Like a mirror..." below illustrates this by simile. Just as a mirror fundamentally possesses the function of illumination, and external objects run contrary to the mirror, so they lack the function of illumination. Since they lack the function of illumination, how could the mirror accommodate those objects? Because illumination and non-illumination do not combine. It is also like the household of a benevolent person: how could it accommodate non-benevolent people living together with them? Because their natures run contrary to each other.