[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) › 16.31 # 起信論疏筆削記 16.31 起信論疏筆削記 16.31 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [16.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16.31) 一、總顯。論　染淨無自相者，所以得名染者，以待淨立，當知染相非自相也；淨相亦爾。餘本末有空生佛，乃至世出世等，倣此而知。故《淨名》云：若見垢實性，即無淨相，順於滅相，是為入不二法門。疏　因待者，若染法因待淨成，即淨法還為染待，如是展轉，墮無窮過。無因待等者，若本無染，為因為待，則何有淨為所成法？相待無相待下，或問曰：「此諸染淨應可在迷之時，未得離於相待，悟後方得相待即無相待耶？」故此釋云：法體本爾，非謂由悟始得如是。以染淨法本離言說分別，畢竟平等，何須待悟方始無耶？如下自釋。 > First, the general explanation. The treatise says: "Defilement and purity have no self-characteristics." That which attains the name "defilement" is established in reliance on purity; one should know that the mark of defilement is not a self-characteristic. The mark of purity is also like this. The remaining \[pairs\]—root and branch, existence and emptiness, sentient beings and buddhas, up to mundane and supramundane—are to be understood by analogy with this. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "If one sees the true nature of defilement, there is then no mark of purity; according with the mark of cessation, this is entering the non-dual dharma-gate." The commentary says: "Conditioned reliance": if defiled dharmas are accomplished through conditioned reliance on purity, then pure dharmas in turn depend on defilement; proceeding in circles like this, one falls into the fault of infinite regress. "Without conditioned reliance, etc.": if there is originally no defilement to serve as cause or condition of reliance, then how could there be purity as the dharma accomplished? Under "Mutual reliance and non-mutual reliance," someone might ask: "Might it be that all these defilements and purities, while in delusion, have not yet been able to be detached from mutual reliance, and only after awakening does mutual reliance become non-mutual reliance?" Therefore this explains: the dharma-essence is originally so; it is not that it only comes to be like this through awakening. Because defiled and pure dharmas are originally detached from verbal explanation and conceptual differentiation, being completely equal, why would one need to await awakening for them to only then be non-existent? As explained below by itself. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 16.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16.30) - [Next: 16.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16.32) - [Up: 16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848~en-mt.16.31) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.16.31) · Pramāṇa