起信論疏筆削記 16.10

16.10

3. Conclusion. The commentary: 'Concluding with existence in sentiment' also explains the reason why there is no form; that is, the preceding meaning that dependent on the transforming mark there is the manifesting mark, though this is only the direct explanation. The treatise: 'All realms': this subsumes both form and emptiness. The commentary: 'Concluding with non-existence in principle' is also an alternate explanation, or called an explanation by negation; that is, the preceding 'because the mind has no arising, objects accordingly cease,' up to 'attaining nirvāṇa, etc.' From this we know that empty space is merely a delusive mark within the true nature. Thus the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: 'Emptiness arises within great awakening like the bursting of a single bubble in the sea.' 'Distinguishing the dharma to be identical with the analogy, etc.': this means taking an analogy as a convenience, not the primary intent of the treatise. According to the intent of the treatise, it is used as an analogy merely to ward off the existence grasped by sentiment, not to signify that the essence of tathatā is all-pervading. Thus it was said earlier: 'Quiescent like space.' And next it says: 'Vast nature-wisdom is not like empty space,' and so forth. Let those with wisdom examine this carefully.