起信論疏筆削記 1.27

1.27

'Fei' means absence, or not. However, arising and ceasing versus non-arising and non-ceasing must be distinguished in terms of the three natures. If speaking tentatively in terms of the self-marks of the three natures: false parikalpita dharmas are exclusively arising and ceasing; the pariniṣpanna nature is exclusively non-arising and non-ceasing; the nominal dharmas of paratantra, identical in marks to parikalpita, seem to arise and seem to cease, but their nature is pariniṣpanna, non-arising and non-ceasing. If spoken of according to reality, then all three natures are free from arising and ceasing. Nevertheless, their meanings of non-existence are not the same. Why? Parikalpita is without any dharma that can arise and without any dharma that can cease, like the snake on the rope. Paratantra is unproduced in the very arising, and unceasing in the very ceasing, like the rope on the hemp. Pariniṣpanna is the core within, free from the previous two dharmas of arising and ceasing, like the absence of both rope and snake on the hemp. The *Triṃśikā* verse says: 'The first is the naturelessness of marks; the second is the naturelessness of spontaneous arising; the last is due to being far removed from the previously grasped nature of self and dharmas.' The pariniṣpanna nature is precisely tathatā; therefore it is said to be 'not arising and ceasing'. However, this merely clarifies that pariniṣpanna is in its own essence unproduced and unceasing, without harmonizing or obliterating the dharmas of arising and ceasing. Therefore the *Yuanjue jing* says: 'The serene and ceased nature of the Tathāgata has never had a beginning or an end.' Thus the text below says: 'Namely, that the mind-nature is unproduced and unceasing.' It also says: 'Not produced at the prior boundary, not ceased at the posterior boundary, ultimately eternal, etc.' This reveals the unchanging nature of the true mind.