起信論疏筆削記 6.22

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]."