起信論疏筆削記 16.10

16.10

三、結。疏　結情有者，亦是釋無色之所以，即前依轉相有現相義，然此且是正釋。論　一切境界者，即色空俱攝也。疏　結理無者，亦是轉釋，或名反釋，即前心無起，故境界隨滅，乃至得涅槃等，是知虛空但是真性之中一分妄相，故《楞嚴》云：空生大覺中，如海一漚發。辨法同喻等者，即因便取喻，非論正意。若據論意，但約為遮情執之有，故以為喻，非謂表於真如體遍。故前云：寂莫如空。次云：廣大性智，非如虛空等。有智請詳。

3. Conclusion. The commentary: 'Concluding with existence in sentiment' also explains the reason why there is no form; that is, the preceding meaning that dependent on the transforming mark there is the manifesting mark, though this is only the direct explanation. The treatise: 'All realms': this subsumes both form and emptiness. The commentary: 'Concluding with non-existence in principle' is also an alternate explanation, or called an explanation by negation; that is, the preceding 'because the mind has no arising, objects accordingly cease,' up to 'attaining nirvāṇa, etc.' From this we know that empty space is merely a delusive mark within the true nature. Thus the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: 'Emptiness arises within great awakening like the bursting of a single bubble in the sea.' 'Distinguishing the dharma to be identical with the analogy, etc.': this means taking an analogy as a convenience, not the primary intent of the treatise. According to the intent of the treatise, it is used as an analogy merely to ward off the existence grasped by sentiment, not to signify that the essence of tathatā is all-pervading. Thus it was said earlier: 'Quiescent like space.' And next it says: 'Vast nature-wisdom is not like empty space,' and so forth. Let those with wisdom examine this carefully.