起信論疏筆削記 2.26

2.26

小乘者，運小根至小果故，如羊鹿車，但能引輕，不能致遠，故名小也。但說下，釋相也，即正辨所詮之理。但，猶獨也、唯也。我空者，此教所明，凡有所為皆因緣力，中無主宰，故為我空。縱少說者，《阿含經》云：無是老死，無誰老死。既言無是老死，即是法空之義。雖有此說，以百無一分，故云少說。但標而已，更不解釋，故不明顯，以非教之正意故。今望大乘分明顯了義邊，故名為但。如河少水，亦名無水故。但依下，所依根本。六識者，即前六識。彼教三宗所說有異，謂經部無別心所；有部有別心所；覺天所說，唯一意識隨六根轉，無別六異。三毒建立者，貪瞋癡使害物最深，能損法身慧命，故受毒稱。若以此三為能熏，現在色心為所熏，造業受生，輪轉三界，此為染根本。若以無貪等三為能熏，現在色心為所熏，斷煩惱、出三界，此為淨根本。染之與淨由三有無，除此更無所依，故云但也。未盡下，結成不了。不達如來藏心本具無漏功德，故未盡淨法之源；不了根本不覺是有漏因，故未盡染法之源。此教尚不詮七八二識，豈況無明法性耶？故云未盡等。多諍論者，二十部分宗各不相與，如群盲摸象，紛然是非，故云諍論。苟盡其源，安見如此。

"The Hīnayāna" (Small Vehicle): because it conveys small faculties to a small fruit, like a goat-cart or a deer-cart, which can only pull light loads and cannot reach distant places, it is called "small." The phrase "only explains..." below explains its characteristics, directly distinguishing the principle it expresses. "Only" is like "solely" or "exclusively." As for "selflessness" (emptiness of the self): what this teaching clarifies is that all functioning depends on the power of causes and conditions with no master or controller within; hence it is the emptiness of the self. Even if it "slightly explains": the *Āgama-sūtras* say, "There is no this old age and death; there is no someone whose old age and death it is." Saying "there is no this old age and death" is precisely the meaning of the emptiness of dharmas. Although there is this statement, because it is not even one part in a hundred, it is called "slightly explained." It merely states it and does not explain it further; hence it is not distinct, because it is not the main intention of the teaching. Now, viewed in contrast with the clear and definitive meaning of the Mahāyāna, it is called "only [explaining selflessness]," just as a river with little water is also called waterless. The phrase "only relying on..." below indicates the fundamental basis relied upon. "The six consciousnesses" are the first six consciousnesses. The three schools of that teaching explain this differently: the Sautrāntikas hold that there are no distinct mental factors; the Sarvāstivādins hold that there are distinct mental factors; and according to Dharmatrāta (Gao Tian / Jue Tian), there is only one mental consciousness that operates according to the six sense organs, with no distinct six consciousnesses. As for "establishing through the three poisons": the afflictions of greed, anger, and delusion harm living beings most deeply and can damage the dharmakāya and the life of wisdom, hence receiving the designation of "poisons." If these three are taken as that which perfumes, and the present physical and mental states are what is perfumed, producing karma and receiving rebirth to transmigrate in the three realms, this is the root of defilement. If the three [wholesome roots] such as non-greed are taken as that which perfumes, and the present physical and mental states are what is perfumed, cutting off afflictions and escaping the three realms, this is the root of purity. Defilement and purity depend on the presence or absence of these three; beyond this, there is no other basis relied upon, hence it says "only." The phrase "not exhausting..." below concludes that it is non-definitive. Not understanding that the tathāgatagarbha-mind inherently possesses uncontaminated virtues, it does not exhaust the source of pure dharmas; not realizing that fundamental non-enlightenment is the cause of contaminated dharmas, it does not exhaust the source of defiled dharmas. This teaching does not even express the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, let alone avidyā and dharmatā. Therefore it says "not exhausting," and so forth. As for "having many disputes": the twenty sects formed their own lineages and did not agree with one another, like a group of blind men touching an elephant, disputing in confusion over right and wrong; hence it says "disputes." If they had exhausted the source, how could it be seen like this?