起信論疏筆削記 12.7

12.7

"Question: The above explanation..." below: second, resolving objections. The question intends to say: previously, after clarifying the arising and ceasing of the nine marks, it then concluded, "One should know that avidyā can produce all defiled dharmas, because all defiled dharmas are marks of non-enlightenment." Now the text again says: "Mind-only is false; when the mind arises, dharmas arise; when the mind ceases, dharmas cease." The two texts are not far apart; why are they suddenly so different? The answer below intends to say: the previous analysis of arising and ceasing spoke solely with respect to non-enlightenment; hence, the fault was attributed to avidyā, because the agency lay in non-enlightenment. "Now this..." below: clarifies the intent of the present text. It intends to clarify that this text fully explains tathatā as the cause and avidyā as the condition; through the harmonious integration of this principle of cause and condition, all dharmas of form and mind are accomplished. Since they pertain to causes and conditions, the meaning that all dharmas lack self-nature is made clearly visible, and the principle that tathatā conforms to conditions without abiding becomes brilliantly evident. "Zhang" means to clarify. "Therefore concluding..." below: having clarified that the harmonization is originally because tathatā conforms to conditions to bring about harmonization, now concluding by attributing it to the mind is truly appropriate. Just as when the water first moves, the agency lies with the wind, so in the previous text it was attributed to avidyā; but since the movement has no separate essence, it belongs entirely to the water, so in the present text it is attributed to the mind. Therefore, one cannot say that the waves have no separate essence and belong solely to the wind. The principle of the Dharma is also like this; it can be understood from the metaphor.