起信論疏筆削記 6.36

6.36

疏　二隨下，生滅門，中三：今初、正解。隨緣等，標立也。謂隨下，釋。謂以無明熏真如，起妄心妄境，成一切染法。真如熏無明，滅妄心妄境，成諸淨法。廣如下釋。染淨雖成下，釋妨。或曰：「既隨熏動，云何復說眾生如耶？」故此釋之，正於動時、動處元來不動，明非相不動，故言性。顯非暫不動，故言恒也。或曰：「性既不動，如何能成染淨？」故云：正由不動能成染淨，斯則反成上義。謂若性自動，同生滅相，即當時滅，不能自立。尚不自立，將何成於染淨？實由不動故能成也。

[On the Commentary's] 'Second, in accordance with,' etc.: the aspect of arising and ceasing has three parts: now first, the correct explanation. 'In accordance with conditions,' etc., states and establishes [the point]. 'Meaning in accordance with,' etc., explains. It means that when avidyā perfuses tathatā, it gives rise to deluded mind and deluded objects, forming all defiled dharmas. When tathatā perfuses avidyā, it extinguishes deluded mind and deluded objects, forming all pure dharmas. This is broadly explained below. [On] 'Although defilement and purity are formed,' etc.: resolving an objection. Someone might say: 'Since it moves in accordance with perfusion, why say again that sentient beings are tathatā?' Therefore, this resolves it: precisely at the time of motion and in the place of motion, it is originally unmoved; to clarify that it is not that the marks do not move, it says 'nature.' To reveal that it is not merely temporarily unmoved, it says 'constantly.' Someone might say: 'Since the nature does not move, how can it form defilement and purity?' Hence it says: 'Precisely because it does not move, it can form defilement and purity.' This in turn establishes the above meaning: if the nature moved of itself, being identical with the marks of arising and ceasing, it would perish at that very moment and could not stand on its own. If it cannot even stand on its own, how could it form defilement and purity? It is truly because it does not move that it can form them.