起信論疏筆削記 16.31

16.31

First, the general explanation. The treatise says: "Defilement and purity have no self-characteristics." That which attains the name "defilement" is established in reliance on purity; one should know that the mark of defilement is not a self-characteristic. The mark of purity is also like this. The remaining [pairs]—root and branch, existence and emptiness, sentient beings and buddhas, up to mundane and supramundane—are to be understood by analogy with this. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "If one sees the true nature of defilement, there is then no mark of purity; according with the mark of cessation, this is entering the non-dual dharma-gate." The commentary says: "Conditioned reliance": if defiled dharmas are accomplished through conditioned reliance on purity, then pure dharmas in turn depend on defilement; proceeding in circles like this, one falls into the fault of infinite regress. "Without conditioned reliance, etc.": if there is originally no defilement to serve as cause or condition of reliance, then how could there be purity as the dharma accomplished? Under "Mutual reliance and non-mutual reliance," someone might ask: "Might it be that all these defilements and purities, while in delusion, have not yet been able to be detached from mutual reliance, and only after awakening does mutual reliance become non-mutual reliance?" Therefore this explains: the dharma-essence is originally so; it is not that it only comes to be like this through awakening. Because defiled and pure dharmas are originally detached from verbal explanation and conceptual differentiation, being completely equal, why would one need to await awakening for them to only then be non-existent? As explained below by itself.