起信論疏筆削記 7.21

7.21

疏　一云下，克就真如自體釋，可知。妙智等者，既無名相，則非心識所緣，但唯微妙真智觀行所及。謂遍計所緣是假，假故可遣；妙智所證是實，實故不可遣。《圓覺》云：諸幻滅盡，覺心不動。前則能所皆妄，此則能所皆真也。二云下，會顯生滅無相釋，意明非謂以真如體遣生滅法也。何以下，徵起下文。以法下，釋有二意：初約唯真無法解，即約真如門釋，但有真如，更無餘法，性何可遣？又以下，二約有法無性解，即約生滅門釋，雖有染淨，自性本空，何用更遣？前如鏡體無像，後如影像即空也。外人下，約真如門釋。離妄情者，名相俱絕，情有理無。若使可立，焉能離妄？故下文云：以離念境界，唯證相應。故又生滅下，約生滅門釋。生滅無性，無性故即真，真本自立，故云不待。斯則真如本立，更不須待立生滅法以為真也。其猶於波本自是水，何須待立以為水耶？何以下，躡前徵起下文。真故下，約真如門釋。夫真者，非偽非妄。如者，不變不易。今若可遣，即成偽妄，可立即成變改，以先不立，今方立故。又生滅下，約生滅門釋。以真如從本以來舉體成生滅，生滅無性，常即真如。如是性相曾不捨離，以生滅顯時，即如體顯也。斯則本自顯然，何須更立？

Commentary: "One says..." onwards directly explains in terms of the self-essence of tathatā, which can be understood. "Wondrous wisdom..." and so forth: since it has no names and marks, it is not an object cognized by the mind-consciousness, but is reached only by the contemplative practice of wondrous, real wisdom. This means that the object cognized by parikalpita is provisional, and being provisional it can be discarded; what is realized by wondrous wisdom is real, and being real it cannot be discarded. The Yuanjue jing says: "When all illusions are thoroughly extinguished, the awakened mind does not move." The former means that both subject and object are false; this means that both subject and object are real. "Second, it says..." onwards explains by converging to reveal that arising and ceasing are without marks; the meaning clarifies that it does not mean discarding the dharmas of arising and ceasing by means of the essence of tathatā. "Why?" introduces the text below. "Because dharmas..." has two meanings in its explanation: First, it is explained in terms of "only the real, devoid of dharmas," which explains in terms of the gate of tathatā: there is only tathatā and no other dharma at all; how could its nature be discarded? "Furthermore..." provides the second explanation in terms of "having dharmas, devoid of nature," which explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing: although there are defilement and purity, their self-nature is fundamentally empty; what need is there to discard them further? The former is like the mirror's essence having no images; the latter is like the reflected images being immediately empty. "The outsider..." explains in terms of the gate of tathatā. "Free from deluded sentiments": names and marks are both cut off; they exist in sentiment but are absent in principle. If they could be established, how could they be free from delusion? Therefore the text below says: "Because the realm free from thought corresponds only to realization." "Furthermore, arising and ceasing..." explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. Arising and ceasing have no nature; having no nature, they are immediately the real. The real is fundamentally established of itself, hence it says "does not depend on." This means that tathatā is fundamentally established, and does not need to wait for the establishment of the dharmas of arising and ceasing to be real. Is it not like waves fundamentally being water of themselves—what need is there to wait to establish them as water? "Why?" takes up the preceding to introduce the text below. "Because it is real..." explains in terms of the gate of tathatā. "Real" means neither false nor deluded. "Tathā" (such) means unchanging and unaltering. Now if it could be discarded, it would become false and deluded; if it could be established, it would become changed and altered, because what was previously unestablished would only now be established. "Furthermore, arising and ceasing..." explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. Because tathatā from the beginning forms arising and ceasing in its entire essence, arising and ceasing have no nature and are constantly identical to tathatā. Nature and marks are never separated like this; when arising and ceasing are manifest, the essence of suchness is manifest. This being so, it is fundamentally evident of itself; what need is there to establish it further?