[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) › [起信論疏筆削記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848) › 11.72 # 起信論疏筆削記 11.72 起信論疏筆削記 11.72 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.72](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.72) 論　一切下，二、顯唯心。疏　境唯等者，如像唯鏡現故。分別像者，是分別鏡也。《楞嚴》云：自心取自心，非幻成幻法。無塵唯識者，如《唯識頌》云：唯識無境界，以無塵妄見，如人目有翳，見毛月等事。論心不見心者，意云：心是一心，不合自見，當知有所見者皆是妄也。故《楞伽》云：如刀不自割，如指不自觸。而心不見心，其事亦如是。既塵等者，意云：塵境若存，則可以心緣。境塵既不有，縱有心在，亦不自緣也。識不生者，意云：以有塵故，牽彼識生；既無塵境，識不生也。故經云：由法生故種種心生。今法既不生，心亦不生也。既無他可見，亦不能自見，所見無故，能見不成也。能所俱寂者，心無心相，是能緣寂；境無境相，即所緣寂。《楞伽》云：能見及所見，一切不可得。此中大意，欲顯一心本無能所，能所俱寂方是真心，亦非泯之令寂，本自寂也。《攝論》下，引證。具云：所說諸法，唯識所現，無有少法，能取少法。 > The Śāstra says: "All..." Below: second, revealing Mind-Only. In the Commentary, "objects are only..." and so forth: this is because they are like images that are manifested only by a mirror. To conceptually differentiate the images is to conceptually differentiate the mirror. The Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: "The mind itself grasps the mind itself; what is not an illusion becomes an illusory phenomenon." Regarding "vijñaptimātra without external objects": as the Vijñaptimātratā-kārikā says: "There is vijñaptimātra without an external sphere of objects; due to the absence of objects, there is erroneous seeing, just as a person whose eyes have cataracts sees hairs, moons, and the like." The Śāstra states: "The mind does not see the mind." The meaning is: the Mind is the One Mind; it is not fitting that it should see itself. One should know that whatever is seen is entirely false. Therefore, the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: "Just as a sword does not cut itself, / Just as a finger does not touch itself, / So too the mind does not see the mind; / Its situation is also like this." In "Since objects..." and so forth, the meaning is: if sensory objects existed, they could be cognized by the mind. Since sensory objects do not exist, even if there were a mind present, it would not cognize itself either. Regarding "consciousness does not arise": the meaning is that because there are objects, they draw forth that consciousness to arise; since there are no sensory objects, consciousness does not arise. Therefore, the sūtra says: "Due to the arising of dharmas, various minds arise." Now that dharmas do not arise, the mind also does not arise. Since there is no other to be seen, nor can it see itself, because the seen is absent, the seer is not established. Regarding "subject and object are both tranquil": the mind being without the marks of mind is the tranquility of the cognizing subject; the object being without the marks of object is the tranquility of the cognized object. The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: "The seeing subject and the seen object are both entirely unobtainable." The general meaning here is that it intends to reveal that the One Mind originally has neither subject nor object; only when subject and object are both tranquil is it the true mind. Nor is it that one obliterates them to make them tranquil; it is originally tranquil of itself. "The Mahāyānasaṃgraha..." below adduces proof. The full text says: "All spoken dharmas are manifestations of vijñaptimātra alone; there is no dharma whatsoever that can grasp any dharma." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.71](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.71) - [Next: 11.73](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.73) - [Up: 11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848~en-mt.11.72) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.72](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.72) · Pramāṇa