起信論疏筆削記 5.4

5.4

[The text says,] "In the commentary: 'Next two [lines]...', this explains the middle two lines, with text in two parts: first, explaining the preceding line to clarify leaving errors behind, which has two parts: first, directly explaining this line. Stating 'leaving errors behind': errors are doubts and attachments. 'Due to doubt...', this explains the marks of doubts and attachments. 'Confused about the real': although it exists, it seems non-existent; this is termed 'confused'. Thus, the later text says: 'What is meant by the definition of non-enlightenment is that, because one does not truly know the oneness of the tathatā-dharma, the unenlightened mind arises, and there is its thought,' and so forth. Having become confused about the one reality, one casts away the two supreme joys of bodhi and nirvāṇa as if abandoned; thus it says 'losing joy'. 'Giving rise to the false': the false means the material and mental aggregates of the five skandhas. Taking the empty as real is termed 'attachment'. This is giving rise to appearances based on confusion and grasping appearances as real; proceeding from the subtle to the gross, these develop consecutively. Therefore, the *Yuanjue jing* says: 'Falsely grasping the four great elements as the marks of one's own body, and the conditioning reflections of the six dusts as the marks of one's own mind,' and so forth. Having given rise to the false, the three sufferings and eight sufferings are generated from this; hence it says 'planting suffering'. Therefore, the later text states: 'When there is movement, there is suffering, because the fruit does not depart from the cause.' The *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* was authored by Vasubandhu to explain the 'Chapter on the Ten Stages' of the *Avataṃsaka-sūtra*. 'Departing far from...', this is the earlier meaning of being confused about the real and losing joy. 'Fully possessing...', this is the earlier meaning of giving rise to the false and planting suffering. These two refer to losing real joy and being equipped with false suffering; being unaware and unawakened regarding this is termed inverted. Not knowing what is lost is like the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra* explaining: the poor son regards the storehouse of his own home as another's property; though entrusted with management, he has no aspiration to take even a single meal; this is using it daily without knowing. Not awakening to what is gained is also like the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra* explaining: the children in the burning house are attached to play, having no thought of escaping. Nor do they know what fire is or what loss is; they merely run back and forth, looking at their father. However, these three kinds do not go beyond two: because inversion has no substance, it is just formulated on the preceding two, designated as inversion by virtue of not knowing and not awakening, and combined into three. 'Therefore causing...', this concludes by returning to the sage's intention. Because the bodhisattva observes that sentient beings have such errors, he composed the treatise.