起信論疏筆削記 6

English (machine translation) 6

Language: English

6.1

Recorded by the Śramaṇa Zixuan of Changshui

Second, the section establishing the meaning; under the second part, posing the question, the commentary text has two parts: first, explaining the dharma. Regarding "the essence of the Mahāyāna dharma": the essence of the Mahāyāna is precisely the mind; the mind is called "dharma." Here it temporarily speaks of "dharma" as the essence of the Mahāyāna; only in the subsequent text does it speak of "mind" as the essence of the dharma; this is a step-by-step unfolding to reveal its essence. Now, when it says "revealing the essence of the Mahāyāna dharma," I suspect the word "dharma" may be redundant; let the wise examine this. The phrase "it means..." below explains the reason for naming it "dharma" through three meanings. In general, what is called "dharma" has two meanings: first, the meaning of holding its own essence; second, the meaning of serving as a model that gives rise to an understanding in beings. Now the first sentence is precisely the first meaning: it means that the inherently existing own-essence is real and unchanging, unlike the paratantra, which is conventionally established through conditions and lacks self-nature, because from beginningless time it has held it without loss. Therefore the treatise below says: "It is truly not empty, because it has an own-essence fully endowed with immeasurable qualities of its nature." The latter two [sentences] are precisely the meaning of serving as a model that gives rise to an understanding in beings. Furthermore, "dharma" is named in contrast to wisdom: because this One Mind is the principle of the dharmadhātu, it can serve as a model for wisdom, causing it to become anāsrava and free from conceptual differentiation. This is matching the wisdom free from conditions to the object free from marks; hence it says "in contrast to wisdom." The treatise below says: "Because it is realized only in corresponding [realization]." Furthermore, it can reveal the meaning of the three greatnesses; there is no meaning that is not revealed from the dharma. Hence the text below says: "Based on this mind, the meaning of the Mahāyāna is revealed." When the doctrine and principle are already manifest, beings then give rise to understanding; hence these two sentences are both the latter meaning. "The fundamental dharma of the school" means that it is the root of defilement and purity upon which the whole treatise is based. Or it may be that "school" is itself "root": that upon which the meaning relies is called "school"; that which can establish the ten thousand dharmas is called "root." Therefore the commentary below says: "The differentiated doctrines and principles revealed based on the school." Also the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says: "Based on the root of non-abiding, all dharmas are established." Also the *Śraddhotpāda* says: "Wishing to explain the fundamental meaning of the Tathāgata"—which is precisely this dharma. "Its general position lies in the cause" means that the essence of the dharma clarified in this treatise is mostly judged to belong to the stage of cause. For the text says: "What is called 'dharma' means the mind of sentient beings." Since it designates the words "sentient beings," we know that in general it properly corresponds to the stage of cause, unlike Buddha-nature, complete enlightenment, ultimate enlightenment, inconceivable liberation, and so on, whose general position lies in the fruition. Now it is designated in terms of the nature's virtues within the cause; hence it says "the mind of sentient beings." "Pervading defilement and purity": if one takes the meaning according to the name, then its position lies in the cause; if one precisely determines its essence and nature, then it pervades both cause and fruition, cause and fruition being defilement and purity. Thus the mind actually pervades cause and fruition, but because it carries the words "sentient beings," it is judged to be in the cause. However, there are also places where in the fruition it is called "mind," and in the cause it is called "enlightenment." As the *Yuanjue jing* says: "It is the pure ground of enlightenment of these sentient beings." And it also says: "The wondrous and completely enlightened mind of all Tathāgatas." Hence it is said to pervade defilement and purity. Therefore the text below says: "This mind then subsumes all mundane and supramundane dharmas." Subsuming mundane dharmas is pervading defilement; subsuming supramundane dharmas is pervading purity.

6.3

From "The meaning..." in the commentary downward is the second part, explaining the meaning, with three subdivisions: first, explaining the text. "The name and meaning of Mahāyāna": Mahāyāna is the name, and the name is established in reference to the meaning; therefore one must discern the meaning, for there has never been a name without meaning. "For what reason," and so on, doubly queries the name and the meaning, meaning: in reference to what meaning does it obtain the name "Mahāyāna"? We do not yet know what meaning the Mahāyāna has. Because it doubly queries, it does not say "For what reason is it named...?" but says "For what reason is it...?" The single character "is" doubly contains both forces—truly the skillfulness of the text! "It means this..." downward explains the three greatnesses, which can be understood. "Two conveyances" has two meanings: first, conveying oneself and conveying others; second, already conveyed and to be conveyed. Now, in this treatise, it specifically refers only to the latter meaning; hence the text below says: "Because it is what all Buddhas originally rode, and because all bodhisattvas ride this dharma to reach the Tathāgata ground." Within both of these, conveying oneself and conveying others are fully present. It is in reference to this meaning that it is named "Mahāyāna."

6.4

From "Therefore..." downward is the second part, concluding the intention. As the text says: "What is called 'dharma' means the mind of sentient beings"—this first reveals the essence of the dharma. Next it says: "What is called 'meaning' has three kinds," and so forth—this subsequently reveals the doctrine and principle. Within the Mahāyāna there are only these: the dharma and the meaning. Now, since both the dharma and the meaning are set forth together, nothing is omitted; hence it says "the meaning is complete."

6.5

From "Based on the school..." in the commentary downward is the third part, manifesting the stage. Although the relied-upon dharma pervades defilement and purity, the revealed meaning is confined exclusively to purity. The three—essence, attributes, and function—are not identical to one another, and are therefore called "differentiations." Being revealed upon separation from hindrances, they obtain their name by reversing defilement; hence it is said to be "exclusively pure." Therefore the text on the greatness of attributes below says: "If the mind-nature is motionless, there is the manifestation of the meaning of attributes of pure qualities exceeding the sands of the Ganges." The greatness of function says: "Eradicating avidya, one sees the fundamental dharmakāya, and spontaneously has the manifold functions of inconceivable activity." According to what is said here, they properly belong only to the vehicle. As for saying "the general position," because the greatness of essence pervades defilement and purity, now, in terms of the majority, it is judged to be in the fruition. Furthermore, although the greatness of essence pervades defilement, its name is also obtained through manifestation. When in the causal stage, there is no name "greatness of essence"; only when the attributes and function are manifested is the name "essence" displayed in contrast to these two. Because of this, all three meanings belong to purity.

6.6

Regarding "giving rise to the essence of the dharma below," and so on: this refers to giving rise to the general section within the subsequent "Revealing the Correct Meaning." The text says: "Revealing the correct meaning: based on the dharma of the One Mind there are two gates," down to, "because these two gates are not separate from each other."

6.7

Treatise: "The mind of sentient beings": "sentient beings" is that which relies, and "mind" is that which is relied upon; the essence that is relied upon manifests its name from that which relies upon it, the former being inferior and the latter superior. "The mind of sentient beings" is a tatpuruṣa compound. Hence the text below says: "Sentient beings rely on the mind and manas because of the revolving of the manovijñāna."

6.8

The commentary has three parts: first, the direct explanation. Regarding "revealing the essence of the dharma": previously it revealed the essence of the Mahāyāna and named it "dharma." Here it reveals the essence of the dharma and names it "mind." Moving from the broader to the narrower, this is the ultimate. "The tathāgatagarbha mind": it means the intrinsically pure mind while in entanglement, which fully contains and subsumes the qualities of the Tathāgata, and is named "tathāgatagarbha," as explained below. From "endowed with harmonious combination..." downward clarifies the mental aspects of the mind. "Harmonious combination" is the gate of arising and ceasing, because it accords with conditions to form defilement and purity. "Non-harmonious combination" is the gate of tathatā, because in terms of the essence transcending marks, it reveals unchangingness. From "because..." downward explains the reason. This mind possesses the above two meanings because it is discerned within the stage of sentient beings; therefore the treatise speaks of "the mind of sentient beings."

6.9

From "If it is in..." downward is the second part, showing [it] by contrast. It means that when this mind accords with defilement, it is said to harmoniously combine with arising and ceasing. Now, in the stage of the Buddha, it is purely clean and without defilement, solely non-arising and non-ceasing; therefore it has no meaning of harmonious combination. From "Because the actualized..." downward provides the reason, revealing that there are no marks of arising and ceasing; hence it says "it is solely tathatā." Since those marks are absent and it is only the one reality, in reference to what could one speak of combination? Therefore the *Madhyamaka-śāstra* says: "How could one single dharma combine?" The text below clarifying the Buddha ground says: "Breaking the mark of the consciousness of harmonious combination and extinguishing the mark of the continuing mind, the dharmakāya is manifested because wisdom is purely clean." As for "the revealed meaning": the meaning of the three greatnesses only becomes manifest from this point onward; when the marks of arising and ceasing are absent, it is confined solely to purity, and therefore there is no harmonious combination.

6.10

From "Now, with respect to..." downward is the direct conclusion. It confirms the previous meaning: "sentient beings" are precisely the marks of defilement; because the true essence accords with conditions to arise as sentient beings, and marks are not separate from the essence, it is named "harmonious combination." Although the entirety of the essence gives rise to marks, the essence has never changed; therefore it is named "non-harmonious combination." It is due to this that while in entanglement, it is endowed with both gates.

6.11

Under the treatise's statement, "supramundane dharmas," the commentary text has two parts: first, a general account of the intention. The first sentence marks and points to it; the rest is the direct account. The essence is the gate of tathatā, and the marks are the gate of arising and ceasing; the two gates subsume each other and do not abandon or separate from each other, hence it is said to be "unhindered." "Defilement and purity relying upon the same": within the two gates each subsumes defilement and purity; the gate of tathatā is the common mark of defilement and purity, while the gate of arising and ceasing distinctively reveals defilement and purity; though the common and distinctive differ, they do not go beyond the One Mind, hence it is said that they "rely upon the same." "Following the flow" refers to non-enlightenment being deluded about the real, leading to creating karma and undergoing retribution. "Countering the flow" refers to actualized enlightenment reversing defilement, extending to bodhi and nirvāṇa. Although delusion and enlightenment differ, only this mind turns; hence the sūtra says: "The beginningless realm is the reliance of all dharmas; because of this, there are all destinies and the realization of the fruition of nirvāṇa." Therefore the ten thousand dharmas are mind-only, and the mind is precisely the master; hence delusion and enlightenment are both the workings of the mind.

6.12

In the commentary, from "Therefore..." onward, second, to explain the marks separately, there are two [parts]: now first, explaining in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. "Non-enlightenment subsumes worldly dharmas": because non-enlightenment is the root of worldly dharmas, all defiled dharmas are brought about by it. Hence the defilements so brought about are all subsumed under non-enlightenment; that is, the three subtle marks, the six coarse marks, the five consciousnesses, the six defilements, and so on, are the dharmas subsumed. Therefore the text below says: "One should know that avidyā can produce all defiled dharmas, because all defiled dharmas are marks of non-enlightenment." "Subsumes supramundane dharmas": because the two enlightenments—original and actualized—are the root of supramundane dharmas, all pure dharmas are brought about by enlightenment; hence the purities so brought about all pertain to what is subsumed under enlightenment. What is subsumed under original enlightenment consists of the meaning of great wisdom and light, the meaning of illuminating the dharmadhātu everywhere, the meaning of true knowing, and so on. What is subsumed under actualized enlightenment consists of the three knowledges, the eight liberations, the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so on. However, this is provisionally dividing them into two distinct [aspects] according to differences in marks and functions; if considered in terms of identity of essence, there is no difference in what is subsumed. From "This is like..." onward concludes and indicates [the meaning], as can be understood.

6.13

In the commentary, from "If in terms of..." onward, second, explaining in terms of the gate of tathatā. "Melting, harmonizing, containing, and subsuming" means to dissolve, blend, embrace, and take in, so that those differentiated marks of defilement and purity are free of obstructions. "Defilement and purity are not distinct" sets forth the mark of melting and harmonizing; that is, by harmonizing them with the principle of the one tathatā, it makes defilement non-defilement and purity non-purity, so that being both defilement and purity, they blend into one single flavor; hence it is said that they are not distinct. Therefore the text below says: "All dharmas exist with differentiations only based on deluded thoughts; if one is free from thoughts of the mind, there are no marks of any objective realms whatsoever... up to... it is only the One Mind, and is therefore called tathatā." Thus, within the gate of arising and ceasing it is called "comprehending and subsuming," whereas within the gate of tathatā it is called "harmonizing and subsuming." Under "comprehending and subsuming," both defilement and purity are preserved; under "harmonizing and subsuming," both defilement and purity are obliterated. Because they are obliterated, they are of one flavor and undivided; because they are preserved, they are clearly differentiated. Therefore, although both gates speak of "subsuming," the meanings of subsumption are different. What is revealed below will be addressed in due sequence.

6.14

"Explaining the name of its dharma" points out this passage of the text. "Dharma" is precisely the name; now this text specifically explains why this mind obtains the name "dharma." From "Meaning that based on..." onward, it is called "dharma" in terms of the third [meaning] among the preceding three meanings, which manifests the meaning. The remaining two meanings each have their passages in the treatise, as already cited before.

6.15

Under the commentary's two points regarding raising the challenge against the general presentation: the first point says that since the mind pervades defilement, it is improper for it to reveal a meaning that is exclusively pure; this would be like gold in impure ore—how could one cast a statue of pure gold from it? The second point says that since the mind is one, being one means its essence is narrow, whereas the meanings of the Mahāyāna are many, and being many they are broad—how can what is narrow display what is broad?

6.16

Under opening the distinctions, the commentary has two [parts]: first, a general account of the intention of the explanation. "Although the Mahāyāna is pure" takes up and concedes what was asked. From "Marks and functions..." onward differentiates and directly answers. "In contrast to defilement": this means that the greatness of attributes transforms defilement into purity, as it says: "When the mind-nature is unmoved, there is the meaning of great wisdom and light, and so on." The greatness of function arises in accordance with conditions, as it says: "According to sentient beings seeing, hearing, and obtaining benefit, it is therefore spoken of as function, and so on." Both of these two meanings are established in contrast to defilement; therefore the text below says: "One should know that defiled dharmas and pure dharmas are all mutually dependent." From "Now [the gate of] arising and ceasing..." onward directly clarifies what is capable of revealing. Since it possesses the two meanings of enlightenment and non-enlightenment, it is said to fully contain defilement and purity; because there is defilement, it can only then reveal purity. Since purity is not pure of itself, but depends on defilement to become pure, what wonder is there that a mind pervasively connected with defilement can reveal an exclusively pure meaning? This concludes the answer. From "By discarding..." onward sets forth the reason for contrasting with defilement. Someone might ask: "Why must purity be established only in contrast to defilement?" Hence this is explained. Therefore the text below says: "If one is apart from the mind of non-enlightenment, there is no self-mark of true enlightenment that can be spoken of." Furthermore, in the gate of tathatā there is no defilement, nor is purity established. It also says: "If one is apart from the karmic consciousness, there is no mark of seeing, because the dharmakāyas of all Buddhas have no mutual forms of this and that by which to see one another." "Although the dharma of the mind is one" takes up and concedes what was asked. From "Yet there are..." onward differentiates and directly answers. "Displays the essence of the Mahāyāna": because tathatā is the gate that obliterates marks to reveal the real, by obliterating marks while marks are not preserved, it displays only the essence. "Completely displays the three greatnesses": because arising and ceasing is the gate that takes up principle to accomplish phenomena, by taking up principle while the principle is not lost, it is complete with all three. From "The meanings of the Mahāyāna..." onward concludes the complete display. This means that within the meaning of these three greatnesses are fully subsumed the wondrous functions and virtuous marks exceeding the sands of the Ganges of the Tathāgata's true and response bodies. In brief, all anāsrava merits without exception do not go beyond the meaning of the three greatnesses; the essence of the three greatnesses is only this One Mind, and therefore the One Mind can reveal manifold meanings.

6.17

"Generally presenting... and so on" exhausts the meaning of this one gate. "One dharmadhātu... and so on" fully says: "tathatā of the mind is the essence of the dharma-gate of the great universal mark of the one dharmadhātu, namely, the mind-nature is unarisen and unceasing... up to... if one is apart from thought, this is called attaining entry." There are altogether thirteen lines of the treatise text which are initiated by this. "The mark of tathatā": "mark" means mark of meaning, as the text below says: "Furthermore, with respect to tathatā, based on verbal explanation and conceptual differentiation there are two kinds of meanings." "Meaning" is precisely "mark," unlike the marks of arising and ceasing that can be given a concrete shape. From "Furthermore..." down to the end of this gate, there are altogether twelve lines of the treatise text which are initiated by this. According to this allocation: if one says "the gate of tathatā," it is general; if one says "tathatā of the mind" and "mark of tathatā," it is specific.

6.18

In the treatise, from "This mind..." onward, the commentary has two [parts]: first, explaining the preceding two lines, which has two: first, explaining this specific text. "Changing and moving in accordance with perfuming": this means that perfumed by defiled and pure causes and conditions, it causes the mind to change and move, becoming arising and ceasing. "Generally presenting... and so on" summarizes the meaning of the whole gate below within these two words "arising and ceasing"; hence it is called "generally presenting." "Based on the tathāgatagarbha... and so on" fully says: "The arising and ceasing of the mind: based on the tathāgatagarbha there is the mind of arising and ceasing, namely, the non-arising and non-ceasing harmonizing with arising and ceasing... up to... because of the illusory differentiations of natural defilement." There are altogether seventy-five lines of treatise text which are initiated by this. "Causes and reasons" has the sense of "that whereby." From "Initiating the text below... and so on" fully says: "Furthermore, as for the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing, they are what sentient beings transform based on mind,意 [manas], and consciousness. What does this mean? Because based on the ālayavijñāna, avidyā is said to exist... up to... not being able to follow and conform with the manifold knowledge of all worldly objective realms." There are altogether forty-nine lines of treatise text which are initiated by this. "Shape" refers to physical form, which is the objective realm known by deluded consciousness. It is distinguished from the mark of tathatā, which is a mark of meaning; the mark is precisely the nature, not an objective realm of consciousness, because it is verified only by wisdom. From "Initiating the text below... and so on" fully says: "Furthermore, in conceptually differentiating the marks of arising and ceasing, there are two kinds. What are the two? The first is coarse, because it is associated with the mind; the second is subtle, because it is dissociated from the mind... up to... because only delusion ceases, the marks of the mind cease accordingly, not that the wisdom of the mind ceases." There are altogether fourteen lines which are initiated by this. Thus, the root meanings established in this section on setting forth the meaning consist of eight characters, namely: "the mark of tathatā" and "the marks of the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing." Below, in the section on explanation, there are roughly one hundred and sixty-three lines, which are explained section by section as allocated above. From "the four perfumings" onward generally clarifies the causes and reasons for the arising of defiled and pure arising and ceasing. If one further bundles these eight characters, they do not go beyond the single character "mind"; and if one expands the one hundred and sixty-three lines of treatise text, they constitute over a hundred Mahāyāna sūtras. This reveals the treatise master's unhindered function within his verified awakening.

6.19

From "Why..." onward, second, resolves the preceding inquiry. First, it takes up the external challenge: "Why is it that of the two gates, one is capable [of showing] and the other is identical?" Hence it is cited. From "Because the true..." onward explains it. "Does not arise": because tathatā has two meanings: first, the meaning of not changing; second, the meaning of according with conditions. Now in this gate, it is only in terms of not changing that its essence is revealed, not in terms of according with conditions; hence it is said "does not arise." "That which is revealed" refers to the greatness of essence; "that which can reveal" is this gate. That which can reveal is the expresser, and that which is revealed is the intent. Tathatā and essence are simply one single meaning; hence it is said to be "identical." From "Therefore..." onward shows that it displays only the greatness of essence. "Arising and moving" is the meaning of according with conditions. Because it accords with conditions, it forms the gate of arising and ceasing; defilement and purity are the marks of arising and ceasing. These defilement and purity are the expresser capable of showing, and the three greatnesses are the intent shown; the two meanings are distinct, hence it is said "is further divided." From "Subject and object..." onward distinguishes it from the preceding gate. To clarify by metaphor: the One Mind is like water, tathatā is like wetness, and arising and ceasing is like waves. The wet mark of water is identical with displaying the essence of the water; the wave marks of water can display the water's own essence (the wet essence), attributes (the marks of the eight virtues), and functions (reflecting images and moistening things).

6.20

In the commentary, from "'Essence' means..." onward, second, explains the final line; the text has two [parts]: first, explaining the root text, which has two: first, specifically explaining this text. "Original enlightenment": this is the preceding tathatā; upon reaching this gate, its name shifts to original enlightenment. Because it is an antidote, it is called "original"; in contrast to non-enlightenment, it is called "enlightenment." This original enlightenment is the self-essence of arising and ceasing. This shows that arising and ceasing has no separate essence of its own, fully taking up original enlightenment as its self-essence. "The cause of arising and ceasing": someone might ask, "If this original enlightenment is the essence of arising and ceasing, and original enlightenment is precisely tathatā, why is it spoken of as the self-essence of arising and ceasing?" Hence this is explained. When the marks of arising and ceasing arise, they truly rely on tathatā as their cause. Because tathatā does not maintain its self-nature, it is perfumed by avidyā and forms all defiled marks; yet although it forms defiled marks, its essence does not change. Because it does not change, it perfumes that avidyā, causing it to loathe birth-and-death and joyfully seek nirvāṇa, gradually giving rise to actualized enlightenment and accomplishing its pure dharmas. Thus both defilement and purity stem from tathatā; therefore tathatā is the essence of arising and ceasing. Hence the text below says: "Based on the tathāgatagarbha there is the mind of arising and ceasing." It also says: "Namely, because the dharma of tathatā exists, it can perfume avidyā... up to... is called attaining nirvāṇa and accomplishing spontaneous action." "Also distinguishing the essence": this means that the preceding gate of tathatā is the essence in its very essence, while this gate of arising and ceasing takes tathatā as its essence. If there were no essence of tathatā, arising and ceasing could never be accomplished; hence in this gate one must distinguish the essence. From "Transforming defilement..." onward clarifies the display of attributes and functions. "Pure attributes" refers to the greatness of attributes, meaning great wisdom and light, and so on. "Action and function" refers to the greatness of function, meaning the reward and transformation bodies, and so on. From "Therefore..." onward points to the text and concludes the indication. Because the text in the gate of arising and ceasing is divided into two sections: first, explaining the dharma of the mind of arising and ceasing that is capable of showing, namely, the causes, conditions, and marks of arising and ceasing; second, distinguishing the meaning of the three greatnesses shown, namely, essence, attributes, and function. The text below makes this fully clear.

6.21

In the commentary, from "Why..." onward, second, resolves the preceding inquiry. Citing the external challenge is evident. From "Because that which..." onward explains it. Previously it said "capable of displaying," showing that expresser and intent are not one; now it says "its self-essence," showing that expresser and intent are not different. Although in this gate there is a distinction between subject and object, it does not mean that what is expressed lies outside that which expresses; now to show that it is not outside, it therefore says "its self-essence, and so on." Thus arising and ceasing is the mark of tathatā, and tathatā is the essence of arising and ceasing; though essence and marks differ, they are not separate from each other. Just as waves and water differ, how could water be outside the waves? Therefore one knows that water is the waves' own essence.

6.22

The Commentary states: "Asking: If tathatā..." down to..., second, resolving doubts and objections. The intent of the question is to raise an objection by setting the two gates in direct opposition; upon careful examination, this can be understood. In the answer, the two lines from "Tathatā..." down repeat the gates and establish the principle. "Does not necessarily depend on arising" means that tathatā stands independently of itself and does not rely on arising and ceasing; its intrinsic nature is fundamentally eternal, so how could it exist because of another? "Since without..." down directly explains: when there is arising, there must be attributes and function; when there is no arising, only the essence is preserved. Therefore, the preceding gate mentions only one. The two lines from "Arising and ceasing..." down repeat the preceding and establish the principle. "Arising must depend on non-arising" distinguishes this from the preceding gate. If there were no non-arising tathatā, how could there be activated arising and ceasing? Just as without water, how could there be waves? Therefore, it must rely on it. "Arising contains non-arising..." down directly explains. Tathatā in its entire essence becomes arising and ceasing; therefore, arising and ceasing now contains the true essence, just as when water rises to become waves, the waves contain the water. Because of this, this gate not only indicates the attributes and function, but also indicates the essence; hence it is said: "fully indicates [them]."

6.23

In the Commentary, "From this is generated..." and so forth: as the treatise says, "Furthermore, as for the intrinsic essence and attributes of tathatā, in all ordinary beings, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and all Buddhas there is neither increase nor decrease..." up to "the meaning of the sovereign function of tathatā"; that is, there are sixty-four lines of treatise text, which is precisely what is generated here. Regarding the greatness of essence, the Commentary says "true nature": "true" sets aside what is false and delusive, exclusively revealing the pariniṣpanna; "nature" refers to the intrinsic essence being eternally abiding, neither changing nor differing, which excludes the empty nature of all dharmas. "Deep" means vertically exhausting the three periods of time, with neither going nor coming; "broad" means horizontally pervading the ten directions, being neither central nor external. "Ordinary" refers to the distinctions among the six destinies; "noble" refers to the differences among the three vehicles. "Defiled" refers to the defiled lands extending throughout the three realms; "pure" refers to the pure lands extending throughout the ten directions. However, ordinary, noble, defiled, and pure each apply to both the primary and environmental retributions; here, discussed specifically, ordinary and noble pertain to the primary, while defiled and pure correspond to the environmental. For although all dharmas are vast, they do not go beyond the two retributions of primary and environmental. Within the primary, they do not go beyond ordinary beings and noble persons; within the environmental, they do not go beyond pure lands and defiled lands. Therefore, these four are cited to subsume everything, leaving none out. "All take it as their reliance" means that the four dharmas above all take the essence of tathatā as that upon which they rely. Thus the Avataṃsaka[-sūtra] says: "Not a single dharma has ever been able to leave the dharmatā." Later text says: "Such various karmic illusions of the anāsrava and avidyā are all identical with the nature and marks of tathatā." The Śūraṅgama[-sūtra] says: "The causes, conditions, and subtle dust-motes of all worlds take the mind as their essence." Since it is that upon which all rely, the name "greatness of essence" is established from this. The treatise's "Tathatā is equal" means that the true nature serves as the equal essence among all dharmas, like a mirror amidst images; it is not like all dharmas being fundamentally empty and therefore equal because of emptiness, like images in a mirror.

6.24

In the Commentary, "Following the flow..." and so forth: this reveals non-increase and non-decrease in terms of the two meanings of defilement and purity, as can be seen in the text. This is because the nature is neither defiled nor pure, and because both defilement and purity are empty. "Truly because..." down concludes and establishes the above meaning. Defilement and purity are in terms of dharmas; beginning and end are in terms of time. That is, following the flow is the beginning, and reversing the flow is the end. What the Commentary below states takes sentient beings as the former and Buddhas as the latter; the former and the latter are beginning and end. Alternatively, this passage specifically speaks in terms of the horizontal and vertical to reveal the meaning of equality. "Neither deficient in defilement nor in purity" is spoken horizontally, because there is no deficiency in the present stages of sentient beings and Buddhas; "not changing from beginning to end" is spoken vertically, because there is no alteration across the past and the future. The former is spoken regarding many persons at the same time; this is spoken regarding one person at different times. Although one and many, identical and different, horizontal and vertical are discussed separately, all reveal the meaning of the equality of tathatā.

6.25

"Two kinds..." and so forth refers to the two: truly empty and truly not empty. "Empty" means not being associated with delusive defilement; "not empty" means being endowed with the virtues of the nature. Here it follows the latter meaning. Therefore, the later text says: "What is called not empty is because it reveals that the dharma essence is empty and devoid of delusion; that is, the true mind is eternally changeless and complete with pure dharmas, hence it is called not empty." "Not different..." and so forth means that each and every mark of virtue is precisely the essence of the nature, and thus they are not different. It does not mean that the garbha is that which possesses and the virtues are what is possessed; hence the word "nature" is used. Therefore, the later text says: "Endowed with such inconceivable Buddha-dharmas exceeding the sands of the Ganges, which are not separated, not severed, and not different, unlike the marks of arising and ceasing, which are definitely distinct, whose natures and marks differ, and which can be perceived and seen." "Like the eight virtues of water": that is, the water of Lake Anavatapta is endowed with eight virtues: first, sweet; second, cold; third, soft; fourth, light; fifth, clear; sixth, odorless; seventh, drinking it does not harm the throat; eighth, it does not harm the belly. The meaning of "not different" can be understood by applying this to the dharma.

6.26

Third, the greatness of function. The Commentary has two parts: first, explaining the text. "Karmic actions that accord with defilement" refers to giving rise to altruistic practices in accordance with various defiled, illusory sentient beings, which are precisely the inconceivable karmic actions of the Tathāgata; hence they are called "karmic actions." If one were to take the karmic actions of reversing defilement within the gate of according with defilement as this greatness of function, that would probably not be the intent of the text, because those are merely the pure dharmas that can reveal, and should not yet be taken as what is revealed; scholars should examine this carefully. The sambhogakāya is what is seen by those from the three stages of worthies and above. The nirmāṇakāya is what is seen by those of the two vehicles and the ten stages of faith and below. The "coarse" is the nirmāṇakāya, which responds individually according to type, seen differently by each, because it is not an attribute of experiencing bliss. The "subtle" is the sambhoga essence, the equal Buddha body, in which the body has immeasurable forms, each form has immeasurable marks and signs, and the environmental fruit in which it dwells is also immeasurable, because it is complete with various adornments and the mark of bliss. "Mundane wholesome" means that through the power of the anāsrava-vāsanā [cultivating] wholesome roots, one gives rise to the ten wholesome actions and so forth; this is merely sāsrava and does not transcend human and heavenly realms, so it is called mundane. "Supramundane" means causing one to weary of saṃsāra and joyfully seek nirvāṇa; these are all anāsrava and transcend the three realms, hence it is called supramundane. Although this extends throughout the three vehicles, ultimate extinction is attained solely through the One Vehicle. The greatness of function in the text below broadly reveals its characteristics.

6.27

The Commentary states: "Why..." down to..., second, resolving doubts. Repeating the objection can be known. "Because not..." down directly explains. Wholesome causes and fruits inwardly accord with tathatā and outwardly eradicate various evils; when these dharmas arise, from cause to fruit they can induce superior states, and therefore can be named the pure function of tathatā. Because they are aroused by the two functions of sambhoga and nirmāṇa that arise from the inner perfuming of tathatā, the present greatness of function should arouse these dharmas. If unwholesome causes and fruits inwardly violate true principle and are outwardly eradicated by the wholesome, when these dharmas arise, from cause to fruit they can induce states of suffering; how could they be called pure function? Because they are produced from non-enlightenment and are manifestations of afflictions, unwholesomeness is not spoken of in this text. "If so..." down: the further objection can be known. "The explanation says..." down explains again. Although they are evil dharmas, because they are non-enlightenment, they are formed through delusion regarding the true. The dharmas that are formed are not separated from the true essence, just as when water gives rise to waves, they are not separated from the nature of wetness. Therefore, the later text says: "Because it relies on the dharma of tathatā, there is avidyā." It also says: "Relying on enlightenment, there is delusion; if separated from the nature of enlightenment, there is no non-enlightenment." "Because of violating..." down concludes and establishes the former meaning, as can be known. However, this greatness of function is precisely the two bodies at the stage of fruition, as fully explained below. Now, that the Commentary takes the wholesome as the function is a secondary meaning, and also reveals that which produces by means of that which is produced. Moreover, that the treatise does not speak of destroying evil is because when good arises, evil is necessarily destroyed.

6.28

"Indicating the fruit looking back to the cause": all Buddhas are the fruit, and "originally" is precisely the cause. Because at the time of the causal stage originally cultivated by all Tathāgatas, there was no other dharma that was ridden, and they used only this mind as that which was ridden, thereby reaching the ultimate.

6.29

"Adducing the cause looking toward the fruit" can be seen in the text. Here, the Tathāgatas and all Buddhas mentioned before are both explained in terms of the svasaṃbhogakāya, not meaning the nirmāṇakāya, as should be understood. "To accomplish conveyancing": conveyancing is precisely riding; the two meanings are not distinct, but merely a variation in phrasing. Or it may be that the two meanings differ: "riding" has the meaning of conveying; now, the preceding passage spoke in terms of what the Buddhas originally rode, so it only then had the meaning of carrying, which is why the Commentary says "to explain riding." The present text speaks in terms of going from cause to fruit, so the meaning of conveyancing is first manifested; hence the treatise says "arrive at the Tathāgata stage," and the Commentary says "to accomplish conveyancing." However, the Buddhas have already ridden it, while the bodhisattvas are to ride it and are presently riding it; both contain within them the meanings of conveying oneself and conveying others. "That is, actualized..." down reveals the essence of that which rides and that which is ridden. That actualized enlightenment is that which rides refers to the aforementioned Buddhas and bodhisattvas; although there is the difference between complete and partial, both belong to the cognizing wisdom that is actualized enlightenment, which is that which rides. That original enlightenment is that which is ridden: if taken according to the present text, it is the aforementioned dharma of the One Mind that serves as that which is ridden, called original enlightenment in contrast to actualized [enlightenment]. If spoken in terms of the three greatnesses, the greatness of function is that which rides, and the two greatnesses of essence and attributes are that which is ridden. However, function is actualized enlightenment, while essence and attributes are great enlightenment; "great" is precisely "vehicle," a karmadhāraya compound. "Riding the great nature": this only realizes that original enlightenment is the great nature of the vehicle, or it realizes both original and actualized [enlightenment]. Because of this, when previously setting out the overarching thesis, it spoke only of the dharma and its meanings, and did not separately speak of the vehicle. Now it speaks of it merely subsequent to the three greatnesses, without separately citing the title; the intent in the section on explanation is also like this.

6.30

"Section on explanation": although the overarching thesis of meanings was briefly established earlier, its principles and purports have not yet been examined in detail; if not explained with an expanded text, how could its profound purports be unlocked and explicated? To cause understanding to arise has already been seen in the preceding text; therefore, this section exists.

6.31

In the concise listing, the Commentary states: "That which is established..." and so forth: that is, the meanings of the One Mind dharma, two gates, and three greatnesses established in the preceding section are manifested and revealed to give rise to correct understanding. Since it is understanding of the correct meaning, this constitutes correct understanding. "Dispelling deviant attachments": those that are not the correct principle, giving rise falsely to attachments, are quite serious afflictions and certainly should be eliminated and cleansed. "Heading toward the correct..." and so forth: in generating the resolve to head toward the path, there are differences in the marks of practice, with variations in rising and falling; these must now be differentiated so that one's cultivation and realization are free of delusion and confusion. Thus, the correct meaning is revealed to cause understanding; false attachments are countered to cause dispelling; and the marks of the path are differentiated to cause practice. Furthermore, the correct meaning is that which counters, false attachments are what is countered, the correct meaning is that toward which one heads, and the marks of the path are that which heads toward it. It is entirely for the sake of the correct meaning that the latter two passages exist.

6.32

"Explaining the above..." and so forth means explaining that which was stated in the preceding section: "dharma" refers to the mind of sentient beings, and this mind subsumes all mundane and supramundane dharmas. In opening the gates, the treatise's "two gates" means that there are two meanings in the One Mind; since these meanings have the capacity to allow passing through in exiting and entering, they are termed "gates." "Capacity to allow passing through" means that tathatā and arising-and-ceasing mutually pass through one another; moreover, these two gates pass through to the One Mind. Passing through to the One Mind is precisely this passage, because each gate speaks of "mind." Mutually passing through: because the gate of tathatā has the aspect of according with conditions, it passes through to arising and ceasing; because the gate of arising and ceasing has the aspect of essential emptiness, it passes through to tathatā. As for the meaning of exiting and entering: when sentient beings are confused and wander in saṃsāra, they exit the gate of tathatā and enter the gate of arising and ceasing; when they awaken, cultivate, and realize, they exit the gate of arising and ceasing and enter the gate of tathatā. Having accomplished the path, they then exit the gate of tathatā and enter the gate of arising and ceasing to enlighten sentient beings; when this work is completed, they cease teaching and return to the true, thereby exiting the gate of arising and ceasing, entering the gate of tathatā, and abiding peacefully in the secret treasury.

6.33

The Commentary has two parts: first, explaining that the One Mind is endowed with two gates, which again has two parts: first, stating [the thesis]. "One tathāgatagarbha": because the two meanings are not divided, it is called "one." If spoken by analogy, defiled and pure, ordinary and noble, empty and existent, principle and phenomena, are all likewise one. This single meaning is provisionally called "one" to reveal non-duality; it is not a matter of numerical reckoning. Therefore, the sūtra says: "One is also not one, in order to be free of all numbers."

6.34

[On the Commentary's] 'First, in terms of essence,' etc.: the second [part], the explanation, has two parts: first, the tathatā aspect, which also has two parts: now first, the correct explanation. 'In terms of essence,' etc., states and establishes [the point]. 'Not defiled,' etc., explains the aforementioned transcendence of marks to reveal the single essence, meaning that defilement and purity, arising and ceasing, motion and turning, and so forth, all pertain to marks; to express that these are completely absent, it says 'not.' 'Equal,' etc., concludes in terms of essence. 'Equal' concludes in terms of the vertical, because there is no high or low; as a sūtra says: 'This Dharma is equal, with neither high nor low.' 'Of one flavor' concludes in terms of a metaphor: like the great ocean sharing a single salty flavor. 'The nature is without distinction' concludes in terms of the horizontal; the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra says: 'All sentient beings are as such; all dharmas are also as such; all noble ones and sages are also as such; even Maitreya is also as such.' Furthermore, 'equal and of one flavor' is the transcendence of marks. 'The nature is without distinction' is in terms of essence. Hence it says: 'In terms of essence, it transcends the marks of meaning.'

6.35

[On] 'Sentient beings,' etc.: the second [part], citing proof. This directly cites the text of the aforementioned Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra. After that passage, it goes on to say: 'All Buddhas know that all sentient beings are ultimately quiescent, which is the mark of nirvāṇa, and do not perish again,' and so forth. Here the Commentary takes the general sense, so the phrasing is slightly different; all below are like this.

6.36

[On the Commentary's] 'Second, in accordance with,' etc.: the aspect of arising and ceasing has three parts: now first, the correct explanation. 'In accordance with conditions,' etc., states and establishes [the point]. 'Meaning in accordance with,' etc., explains. It means that when avidyā perfuses tathatā, it gives rise to deluded mind and deluded objects, forming all defiled dharmas. When tathatā perfuses avidyā, it extinguishes deluded mind and deluded objects, forming all pure dharmas. This is broadly explained below. [On] 'Although defilement and purity are formed,' etc.: resolving an objection. Someone might say: 'Since it moves in accordance with perfusion, why say again that sentient beings are tathatā?' Therefore, this resolves it: precisely at the time of motion and in the place of motion, it is originally unmoved; to clarify that it is not that the marks do not move, it says 'nature.' To reveal that it is not merely temporarily unmoved, it says 'constantly.' Someone might say: 'Since the nature does not move, how can it form defilement and purity?' Hence it says: 'Precisely because it does not move, it can form defilement and purity.' This in turn establishes the above meaning: if the nature moved of itself, being identical with the marks of arising and ceasing, it would perish at that very moment and could not stand on its own. If it cannot even stand on its own, how could it form defilement and purity? It is truly because it does not move that it can form them.

First 36 of 54 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

起信論疏筆削記 — Classical Chinese