[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) › 8.21 # 起信論疏筆削記 8.21 起信論疏筆削記 8.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [8.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8.21) 此約下，四、通妨。或問曰：「義既不一，應不和合。」故此釋之。謂於二義之中偏舉此義而說，非謂壞彼和合以成不一。即知正說此不一義時，彼法元自和合。何以故者，徵意。云何以不壞和合，又能不一耶？此中下，釋也。如來藏等者，謂不生滅既是即生滅之不生滅，當知此不生滅與自七識生滅未曾不和合，於和合中而論不一也。七識等者，謂生滅既是即不生滅之生滅，當知此生滅與自如來藏不生滅未曾不和合，而於此中以論不一也。所言自者，顯非別外，本不相離。不相離者，即和合也。斯則只於非異處說非一義，誰言破此和合耶？ > Under 'this is in terms of', fourth, resolving an objection. Someone might ask: 'Since their meanings are not one, they should not be harmonious and united.' Therefore this explains it. That is, between the two meanings, it speaks by singling out this meaning; it does not mean that destroying their harmony and union establishes non-oneness. Thus one knows that at the very time of speaking of this meaning of non-oneness, that dharma is originally harmonious and united of itself. 'Why is this?': probing the meaning. How can it not destroy harmony and union, and yet be non-one? 'Herein' and below is the explanation. 'The tathāgatagarbha' and so forth means that since the unarising-and-unceasing is the unarising-and-unceasing that is identical with arising-and-ceasing, one should know that this unarising-and-unceasing has never not been harmonious and united with its own arising-and-ceasing of the seven consciousnesses, and it is within their harmony and union that one discusses non-oneness. 'The seven consciousnesses' and so forth means that since arising-and-ceasing is the arising-and-ceasing that is identical with the unarising-and-unceasing, one should know that this arising-and-ceasing has never not been harmonious and united with its own unarising-and-unceasing of the tathāgatagarbha, and it is within this that one discusses non-oneness. What is called 'own' shows that it is not separately external, but originally unseparated. Being unseparated is harmony and union. Thus it only speaks of the meaning of non-oneness at the locus of non-difference; who said this harmony and union is destroyed? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 8.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8.20) - [Next: 8.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8.22) - [Up: 8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848~en-mt.8.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.8.21) · Pramāṇa