[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) › 6.49 # 起信論疏筆削記 6.49 起信論疏筆削記 6.49 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.49](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6.49) 答中，前四句顯二門存泯之由，各初一句所以，後一句定義。生滅等者，事依理顯故，理為事本故，如波必賴於水。故下文云：依如來藏有生滅心。理不失者，理若已失，則無生滅也，如水失則無波。故論云：若無空義者，則無道無果。未必等者，真理本有，不假緣成，如水不藉於波，故真如門中直云：真如者，即是一法界大總相等，不言依生滅有泯相。相不存者，不泯則已，泯則不存，入理自亡，何存生滅？如水澄靜，豈存波在？下文云：以一切法皆同如故。相不存下四句，躡前正答。相不存者，相存則可示於三，不存但合示於體。理不失等者，生滅相起，理又不亡，不具示三，於理如何？是故下，結答雙示可知。 > In the answer, the first four lines reveal the reasons for persistence and extinguishment in the two gates: in each case, the first line is the cause, and the second line determines the definition. "Arising and ceasing..." and so on means that phenomena are revealed based on principle, and principle is the basis of phenomena, just as waves must depend on water. Thus the text below says: "Based on the tathāgatagarbha, there is the mind of arising and ceasing." "Principle is not lost": if principle were already lost, there would be no arising and ceasing, just as if water were lost, there would be no waves. Hence the treatise says: "If there were no meaning of emptiness, there would be no path and no fruition." "Not necessarily..." and so on means that the true principle is fundamentally existent and does not depend on conditions to be formed, just as water does not rely on waves; thus in the gate of tathatā, it simply says: "Tathatā is the great general mark of the one dharmadhātu," and so on, without saying that there are extinguished marks based on arising and ceasing. "Marks do not persist": if they are not extinguished, that is that; but if they are extinguished, they do not persist. When entering principle, they naturally vanish; how could arising and ceasing persist? Just as when water is clear and still, how could waves remain? The text below says: "Because all dharmas are equally tathatā." The four lines from "marks do not persist" downward pursue the preceding \[points\] to give the direct answer. "Marks do not persist": if marks persisted, they could demonstrate the three; since they do not persist, they are only fit to demonstrate essence. "Principle is not lost" and so forth: when the marks of arising and ceasing arise, principle also does not vanish; if it did not fully demonstrate the three, how would that accord with principle? "Therefore..." below concludes the answer by showing both, which can be understood. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.48](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6.48) - [Next: 6.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6.50) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848~en-mt.6.49) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6.49](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.6.49) · Pramāṇa