起信論疏筆削記 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

7.1

Recorded by Zixuan, Śramaṇa of Changshui

[On the Commentary's] "Explaining the above..." and so on: the text establishing the proposition says: "Why? This mind's mark of tathatā demonstrates the essence of Mahāyāna," and so forth. Now this directly explains it. The section headings [concerning] movement and stillness being neither one nor different correspond respectively to the preceding two gates and the meaning of being not separate; to speak of them simultaneously is indeed difficult, so they are presented sequentially. [On] "the realm of contemplative wisdom": because the essence is not a phenomenon of names and marks, it is beyond the reach of speech and thought. If it is beyond the reach of speech and thought, how could it fall into seeing and hearing? Only by long cultivating contemplative wisdom can one attain resonance with it. The reason it is spoken of is with the intent of causing one to apply the mind in this way. Thus the text below says: "Free from the mark of speech, free from the mark of names, free from the mark of mind-objects... up to: if one is free from thought, it is called attaining entry." It is also as the Laṅkāvatāra says: "The real is free from letters; / Cultivation demonstrates the real." Next, the subsequent section heading says "the realm that generates faith": because it has the two kinds of conceptual marks of emptiness and non-emptiness, since it permits speech, those who hear it can generate a mind of faith; the reason it is spoken of is also with the intent of generating faith. Thus the text below says: "Relying on verbal discrimination, there are two kinds of meanings," and so forth. It is also as the Laṅkāvatāra says: "Speech is set forth distinctively; / Discrimination corresponds to the beginner's practice."

7.3

[On the Commentary's] "Explaining the above meaning of tathatā": that [text] says: "This mind's mark of tathatā." Now he provisionally explains the two words "tathatā" (真如).

7.4

[On the Treatise's] "That is..." below: second, demonstrating the dharma. The Commentary has two [parts]: first, explaining the upper phrase, which has two: first, explaining the word "one" (一), which has two: first, explaining it according to its own essence. "The non-dual true mind": vertically exhausting [all time] and horizontally pervading [all space], it is the equal support of all dharmas; vessel and sentient beings, ordinary beings and sages, have only this as essence. Apart from the true mark, there are no other dharmas; hence it is called "non-dual." To eliminate what is false and delusive, its spiritual mirror is unobscured; hence it is called the "true mind." [On] "This is not..." below, it eliminates confusion. Now, when one speaks of "one", it is the beginning of visible numbers; here it is not such as this. [On] "That is to say, as..." below, it clarifies the mark of the "one": it means that the principle of tathatā is open, pervasive, and completely harmonious, utterly equal with respect to all dharmas, its essence not being distinct; hence it is called "one."

7.5

[On] "Also, in contrast..." below: second, explaining it in contrast to "two". This is merely named "one" in contrast to the two below—empty and non-empty. What follows only concerns marks; what is present here only reveals essence, and it is also not a counting number.

7.6

[On] "Based on the arising..." below: second, explaining "dharmadhātu" (法界). Because all noble dharmas arise based on this—namely bodhi, nirvāṇa, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and so forth—these are the dharmas realized and attained by noble ones, and are therefore named noble dharmas. Hence the Yuanjue jing says: "The unsurpassed Dharma King has a great dhāraṇī gate named Complete Enlightenment, from which flow forth all pure tathatā, bodhi, nirvāṇa, and pāramitās, instructing bodhisattvas." "The meaning of cause": "dharma" is the noble dharmas, and "dhātu" (界) is the cause; because it can generate noble dharmas, it is called dharmadhātu. Question: According to what was said earlier, the true nature is the common support of ordinary beings and sages, defilement and purity; why does this text solely speak of the meaning of being the cause of noble dharmas? Answer: Here it reveals the inferior by means of the superior, not that it excludes ordinary dharmas. If even noble dharmas depend on it, how much more so ordinary ones? This explanation is made according to the final teaching. If according to the perfect teaching, phenomena and principle are unobstructed, mutually identical and mutually interpenetrating, completely harmonious and all-subsuming, forming the one true dharmadhātu.

7.7

[On the Commentary's] "Between the two gates..." below: second, explaining the lower phrase, which has three [parts]: first, explaining the "great general mark" (大總相). The distinctive marks are the gate of arising and ceasing. The general mark is the gate of tathatā. [On] "However, also..." below, it explains and establishes the meaning of "great": it means that among the distinctive marks, all defiled and pure dharmas are included completely in this gate, leaving nothing out whatsoever; hence it is called "great." Thus the next text says: "All dharmas are free from the mark of speech," and so forth. Here, then, it is called "general" to eliminate what is distinct, and it is called "great" because it gathers all distinct [dharmas] completely. However, discussing general marks, there are four kinds: namely lower, intermediate, superior, and supreme. The lower is: all contaminated [dharmas] are suffering; the principle pervades both suffering and pleasure, so it is named a general mark, but it does not pervade the uncontaminated, so it is named lower. The intermediate is: all conditioned things are impermanent; the principle covers the three truths, so it is named a general mark; although it pervades the uncontaminated, it does not encompass the unconditioned, so it is named intermediate. The superior is: all dharmas are without self; the principle pervades the four truths, so it is named a general mark; but it is still the conventional expression of the truth (the truth of emptiness) and has not exhausted the true nature (the supreme truth), so it is only named superior. The supreme is: tathatā is the true nature of all dharmas, universally pervading ordinary beings and sages, encompassing both the sentient and the insentient without exception; hence it is called supreme. What the treatise clarifies corresponds to the fourth, surpassing the former three; hence it is called the "great general mark."

7.8

[On] "This one..." below: second, explaining the word "essence" (體). Completely functioning as arising and ceasing, it is the dharmadhātu of phenomena; completely functioning as tathatā, it is the dharmadhātu of principle. Since both are wrought of one essence, they cause the two to be without obstruction, which is the dharmadhātu of the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena. The reason both are said to "function as" (作) is that arising and ceasing change and function according to conditions, while tathatā transforms and changes its name, which is called "functioning"; both meanings lack subject and object, and are conceptually spoken of as "functioning."

7.9

[On] "Serving as a standard to generate..." below: third, explaining "dharma gate" (法門). "Standard" (軌) means rule; "things" (物) means sentient beings; "understanding" (解) means cognitive understanding. This means that sentient beings possess the power of internal perfuming, so that on the essence of this dharmadhātu they generate the wisdom of actualized enlightenment. When wisdom arises, it reflects back, constantly cultivating in accordance with the standard of the dharmadhātu—namely, being neither empty nor existent, without self and without person, and so on; these are the standards of the dharmadhātu, which the wisdom of actualized enlightenment relies upon to practice. Thus the text below says: "In accordance with the fundamental nature, one cultivates the dāna-pāramitā," and so on. The Yuanjue jing also says: "Flowing forth the pāramitās and so forth, instructing bodhisattvas." However, dharma also has the meaning of "maintaining"; now, to accord with the text, he takes only this [former] meaning. [On] "Noble wisdom..." and so on: it means that the essence of the dharma is open and unobstructed, and because it can accommodate the entering and exiting of that noble wisdom, it receives the designation "gate." "Roaming" (遊) means entering and exiting; entering means self-realization, and exiting means benefiting others; both Buddhas and bodhisattvas possess these two meanings. However, this is restricted exclusively to those who have ascended the bhūmis and above, up to the ultimate; it does not extend to the stages of ordinary beings, which is why it says "noble wisdom." Because those prior to the bhūmis have not yet generated the uncontaminated and are unable to directly realize it, the preceding section heading called it the "realm of contemplative wisdom."

7.10

[Treatise:] "What is called..." [Commentary:] Third, explaining and completing [the definition]. Explaining the essence of the dharma: the treatise says "the nature of the mind," and "nature" means essence. By counter-implication, this shows that the marks of the mind do not preclude arising and ceasing, which pertains to the latter gate. "Following delusion, it does not arise": following the delusion of the nine marks of fundamental ignorance, though delusion arises, the nature of the mind does not arise. "Relative to remedies, it does not cease": relative to the counter-flow through the four stages of actualized enlightenment remedying defilement, though delusion ceases, the nature of the mind does not cease. This reveals the non-arising and non-ceasing of the nature of the mind relative to the arising of delusion and the ceasing of delusion. "Produced through cultivation, it does not arise": through cultivation, the great light of wisdom and so forth are manifested and arise, and merits such as the ten powers arise, yet the nature of the mind does not arise. "Dwelling in defilement, it does not cease": dwelling amid the defilements of arising and ceasing, merits such as the ten powers cease, yet the nature of the mind does not cease. This reveals the non-arising and non-ceasing of the nature of the mind relative to pure arising and pure ceasing. "In the world, it is not broken": this clarifies that when tathatā transmigrates in the world, the world undergoes destruction, but tathatā is not broken; "not broken" means unchanging. Therefore the commentary below says: "Dwelling in defilement, it is not broken." "Transcending the world, it is not exhausted": this means that through cultivation, tathatā transcends the world and becomes manifest; the world is exhausted, but tathatā is not exhausted. Therefore the commentary below says: "The path of remedies does not perish."

7.11

"Resolving delusion to reveal the true" means that one must realize delusion in its very essence as it is, without needing to wait for it to cease. As a sūtra says: "Form is emptiness; it is not that form is destroyed to make emptiness." The treatise has two parts: first, resolving delusion. [Commentary:] "Deluded attachments..." means: having heard in the previous section that tathatā is the essence of the dharma-gate of universal marks—that is, tathatā in its entirety constitutes all dharmas—if so, one would think that the arising and ceasing of all dharmas is the arising and ceasing of tathatā. Why then say that the nature of the mind neither arises nor ceases? The meaning of the explanation is: all dharmas are fundamentally non-existent; of what arising and ceasing could one speak? Just as seeing flowers in the sky is fundamentally without essence, of whose arising and ceasing could one speak?

7.12

[Treatise:] "If one is free from..." [Commentary:] Second, revealing the true. [Commentary:] "The doubter..." inquires into the reason for this. This is understandable. "The explanation says..." directly reveals the meaning of the text. "Again, if..." explains and completes it by counter-implication. Both can be understood. Who has the diseased eyes? One must know that the one who sees flowers in the sky has diseased eyes; if the eyes are clear and pure, one definitely does not see flowers. The Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: "If one without clouded eyes could see flowers, why would the clear sky be called clear and bright eyes?" One should know that those who see dharmas are called ordinary beings, while those who do not see dharmas are called noble ones. Since noble ones, according with reality, do not see dharmas, one should know that dharmas are falsely seen by ordinary beings, and truly have no arising and ceasing. Since dharmas have no arising and ceasing, how could the true nature ever be moved? Therefore it was said earlier that it neither arises nor ceases.

7.13

[Treatise:] "Therefore..." [Commentary:] Third, [in three parts]: first, indicating that which is capable of being free. [Commentary:] The two lines "That which is grasped is [empty]..." explain the two words "therefore." "Therefore" points to the preceding two sections as the reason. That which is grasped being empty points to the earlier absence of all marks of objects. The true mind being unmoved points to the earlier non-arising and non-ceasing of the nature of the mind. Because of this, it is attained that all dharmas are just tathatā. However, these two lines also mutually establish each other: it is because that which is grasped is fundamentally empty that the true mind is unmoved; and it is because the true mind is unmoved that that which is grasped is fundamentally empty. It is like the myriad images being fundamentally empty while the bright mirror is unmoved. "Due to this..." directly concludes with reality; the two words "due to this" point to the preceding reason. "All..." directly reveals tathatā, which explains the subsequent text in the treatise starting with "all dharmas." Here, in revealing the true, all dharmas are brought up because their nature is not separate from marks, because all marks are constituted by the nature, and because people all grasp at marks and are confused about the nature. Now, revealing the nature relative to marks causes one to know that marks are precisely markless, being solely the one tathatā; encountering objects and confronting conditions, one spontaneously accords with the Way; in movement or stillness, action or deed, there is nothing that is not a marvelous gate. However, the words "from the origin" in this treatise and the words "ultimately" below mutually complement and cast reflections on each other. The two words "from the origin" are stated looking back to the past to reveal the meaning of the true, meaning that it is not that it previously was not free from marks such as words and only now becomes free, but that from the origin it has spontaneously been free from marks, casting a reflection that encompasses the future as ultimately being like this. The two words "ultimately" below are stated looking forward to the future to clarify the meaning of "suchness" (tathā), meaning that it is not only today that it is equal, unchanging, and unbroken, but that to the end of the future limit it is ultimately equal, unchanging, and unbroken, also casting a reflection that encompasses the past as having spontaneously been like this from the origin. Furthermore, these two meanings each apply to and unfold through the three lines below, and the phrase "all dharmas" also applies to and unfolds through the "ultimately" below. By reflecting on this, it can be understood.

7.14

[Treatise:] "Free from words..." [Commentary:] Directly revealing that which is to be freed from, in two parts: first, freeing from false marks to reveal the true. [Commentary:] "The path of speech is cut off": the preceding line means sounds do not reach it, and the following line means names, phrases, and syllables do not reach it. Since sounds, names, phrases, and syllables do not reach it, it corresponds to the path of speech being cut off. "Not the domain of wisdom arisen from hearing": because sounds, names, phrases, and syllables are what is heard. "Mental-speech conceptual differentiation": mental speech is just conceptual differentiation. What is expressed by the mouth is called speech; what is in the mind is called conceptual differentiation. Now, because what is conceptually differentiated is identical to what is spoken, it is called mental speech. Every spoken utterance of a person is an affair within the mind; therefore the Preface to the Classic of Poetry says: "Feelings are stirred within and take form in words." "The place of mental activities ceases": because marks are the place where the mind acts, and "acting" is like cognizing. Since one is free from marks, the mind has no cognized object; with the cognized object absent, the cognizing subject is also cut off; how could the markless true principle be reached by wisdom arisen from reflection? "Free from the counterfeit...": "counterfeit" refers to brass resembling true gold; "false" refers to a reflection being like the original substance. All dharmas possessed of names and marks are counterfeit and false. Therefore the Diamond Sūtra says: "All that has marks is empty and false." And the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: "Illusory falsehood is called marks." Because they are counterfeit and false, they are not true. Now, being free from names and marks, it is not counterfeit and false, hence it is called "true." "Free from difference...": this means having differentiation, having change, and being destructible. Now, being free from all these, it is called "suchness" (tathā). Furthermore, according to precise glossing, "suchness" (ru) means "resemblance." When dharmas differ, they do not resemble; not resembling, they are not "such." Now, since they do not differ, not differing means resemblance, and resemblance is the meaning of "suchness." Therefore Guishan said: "This real essence, in the future is always like the past, in form is always like sensation; truly resembling, it is not a false resemblance." "Explaining in succession": why is it ultimately equal? Because it has no change. Why has it no change? Because it cannot be broken or destroyed. Again, that which cannot be broken or destroyed is so because it has no change. That which has no change is so because it is ultimately equal. "Free from the worldly": "world" (shi) means遷流 flux; "in" (jian) means falling into its midst; for differentiation, change, and destruction are worldly dharmas. Now, all being the opposite of these, it is said to be free. "Not the domain of wisdom arisen from cultivation": cultivation refers to concentration; it is not a domain of concentration. For suffering, emptiness, impermanence, impurity, and the like are all the cognized objects of concentration. "Corresponding with correct wisdom": wisdom that is identical with suchness realizes suchness that is identical with wisdom; other than this, nothing can reach it. Therefore the text below says: "Because it is a realm free from thought, it is only realized in correspondence." "From above..." unifies and judges the two passages before and after, further distinguishing the intention of the subsequent section in contrast to not being the domain of the three wisdoms.

7.15

[Treatise:] "Ultimately..." [Commentary:] Second, freeing from marks of difference to reveal suchness. [Commentary:] "Although pervading..." means: when in defilement, it is the same as when in purity. That is, the true nature of ordinary beings is precisely the same as the true nature of all buddhas, just as the space in a clean room is equal to the space in a filthy room; this is stated horizontally relative to the same time. "In conditions" means: within defiled and pure conditions, the past is like the present, and the present is like the future, just as yesterday's space is equal to today's space. Although defilement and purity change of themselves, tathatā undergoes no shift or difference in their midst. Furthermore, defiled conditions take the mark of arising as their beginning and the mark of suffering bound to karma as their end; pure conditions take the mark of realizing cessation as their beginning and the mark of realizing arising as their end. Tathatā undergoes no change whatsoever in their midst; this is stated vertically relative to different times. "Unlike saṃskṛta dharmas": because it is an unconditioned dharma, its essence is like empty space—how could one wish to break or destroy it? "Dwelling in defilement, it is not broken...": following the flow, deluded defilements arise, yet the true essence suffers no damage; reversing the flow, deluded defilements are destroyed, yet the true essence remains as of old. Therefore the Commentary on the Yuanjue jing says: "Dwelling in the flow of saṃsāra, the black dragon's pearl shines alone in the deep blue sea; perched upon the shore of nirvāṇa, the cassia-moon glows solitary in the azure sky."

7.16

[Treatise:] "It is only..." [Commentary:] Third, concluding the essence and establishing the name. The essence of the dharma: the One Mind is precisely the essence of the dharma. Therefore the earlier text says: "What is called the dharma is the mind of sentient beings." Since all dharmas are absent, only the mind remains, just as myriad images are fundamentally empty and there is only a single mirror. The Yuanjue jing says: "All illusions being completely extinguished, the enlightened mind is unmoved." Establishing the name based on the meaning: upon the One Mind, based on the meaning of being free from falsehood and change, the name "tathatā" (true suchness) is established.

7.17

[Commentary:] "Verbal teachings are not real...": because they are expediently set up and exist through causes and conditions, the intent is to rely provisionally on having words in order to tally with wordlessness. The principle of wordlessness can be realized and awakened to, but the teachings that have words must not be grasped; grasping them results in recognizing the finger and losing the moon. The Daśabhūmika-śāstra says that grasping meanings following sounds has five faults: 1. lack of correct faith: listening merely by chasing after sounds, one does not understand the profound meaning; 2. retreating from diligence: due to lack of correct faith, there is no superior understanding, and one cannot be decisive; 3. deceiving others: due to not understanding, one may take the profound as shallow or the shallow as profound; 4. slandering the Buddha: grasping expedients as real, or grasping phenomena while bewildered about the principle, one then claims the Tathāgata's words have become false; 5. disparaging the Dharma: taking mistaken understanding as one's nature, hearing the profound one does not value it. Explaining the reason why they are without reality: because all objects are produced from deluded thoughts; thoughts themselves are already without essence, how much more so could the dharmas produced by them be real? Therefore the earlier text says: "All objects have distinctions solely based on deluded thoughts; if one is free from thoughts of the mind, then there are no marks of any objects." From this, all verbal expressions are provisional designations, lacking real essence, and their nature cannot be attained.

7.18

[Commentary:] "Fearing that various..." relates the outside doubt, which is clear. "Therefore now..." explains the treatise. According to the commentary's intention, from "all verbal expressions" onward, all of it explains the preceding four characters, "hence it is named tathatā"; this is evident in the text. However, this text resolving doubt ought properly to be annotated under the text immediately preceding it for textual convenience, which students should know. "Not contradictory": provisional designations and freedom from names, though different in phrasing, are identical in meaning. "Because...": all that has a name is established based on marks. Tathatā is markless, so what is established is empty, for the cognized objects of parikalpita do not enter reality. Therefore the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra below is cited to prove that both names and marks are parikalpita. Marks arise from notions; names are established based on marks; not being separate from marks, they are said to follow each other. Cognizing these marks and names, deluded conceptualizations are again produced, which is precisely the parikalpita mind.

7.19

However, as I foolishly examine this section of the śāstra, the four lines beginning with "Because all [speech]..." properly belong to the explanation of the reason within the previous heading on the marks to be transcended. The commentary's division and sectional analysis are both not smooth and unobstructed, so I will now offer a brief supplementary explanation outside the commentary. Someone might ask: "Why is the essence of tathatā free from the aforesaid marks of speech and so forth?" Therefore the śāstra explains: "Because all speech consists of provisional names and lacks reality." These two lines explain the reason for the previous transcendence of the two marks of speech and names. That is to say, the nature of the mind is real and does not correspond with the illusory; speech and names are merely illusory and provisionally existent, lacking real essence, and do not unite with the real; therefore they are transcended. The two lines beginning with "merely following..." have a phrasing that admits two applications: First, they explain the reason for the previous transcendence of the mark of mental cognition. Because the mark of mental cognition merely arises following those deluded thoughts, and thoughts lack intrinsic nature, how could the cognized mark exist? Therefore it says: "Because it merely follows deluded thoughts and cannot be grasped." The word "because" carries through to the preceding passage. Because the real essence is devoid of thought, and thought contravenes the real, it is therefore transcended. Second, they explain the reason for the preceding "provisional names lack reality," which is as explained in the commentary. The translator strove for conciseness, using one explanation for both sections; this is the skillful brevity of this text. From "What is called tathatā" onwards, it only then resolves the doubt. The doubt states: "Previously you said that it is free from the marks of speech and so forth to reveal that tathatā has no marks. Now you conclude again: 'Therefore it is called tathatā.' Is this not the mark of speech and so forth?" Therefore, taking this up, it sets forth: "What is called tathatā also has no marks." The doubter says again: "Explicitly stating 'tathatā' is precisely a name and a mark; why do you call it without marks?" Therefore the śāstra explains: "It means the ultimate limit of speech, using words to discard words." The intended meaning is: it does not mean that establishing this single name 'tathatā' causes one to stagnate in marks; it is by resorting to this provisionally established ultimate name that the marks of words are discarded. Let those with wisdom who arrive here examine this carefully. The rest of the text is as in the commentary.

7.20

"The scope of establishing names" onwards narrates the doubt and answers with an explanation; the text can be understood throughout. "The limit of all names" is like the paramāṇu being the limit of form and so forth. Here tathatā is the limit of names; therefore after this name there are no further names. As for the "ten kinds of names": first, names of dharmas, namely the three categories of aggregates, sense bases, and elements. Second, names of persons, namely the fifty-two stages of faith and so on. Third, names of teachings, namely the twelve divisions of sūtras and so forth. Fourth, names of meanings, namely the principles revealed by the aggregates, sense bases, and so forth. Fifth, names of nature, namely meaningless characters that have nothing expressed or indicated, not giving rise to understanding of meaning. Sixth, abbreviated names, namely "sentient beings" and so forth. Seventh, extensive names, namely the names of the distinctive meanings possessed by sentient beings and so forth. Eighth, impure names, namely "ordinary beings" and so forth. Ninth, pure names, namely arising and ceasing being immediately the real. Tenth, ultimate names, namely tathatā. Therefore the verse says: / "Names of persons, dharmas, teachings, and meanings, / Nature, abbreviated, and extensive names, / Impure, pure, and ultimate: / The distinct objects of the ten names." / "Discarding names" means discarding all names. If this ultimate name were not established, one could not discard all names. For instance, striking a wooden clapper stops clamor: if there were not this sound, one could not halt all sounds. "If one preserves..." and so forth: if one preserves the name tathatā, it is also equivalent to not discarding names. Although it is the ultimate name, its essence is ultimately provisional; if one preserves it without forgetting it, how could that accord with the essence of dharmas? One must know that although the name tathatā is established, the name is itself nameless; the name of the nameless is therefore called a provisional name, which is itself being free from names. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "The nature of letters being transcended is itself liberation." When students arrive here, although they give rise to understanding by means of names, they must forget names to realize it.

7.21

Commentary: "One says..." onwards directly explains in terms of the self-essence of tathatā, which can be understood. "Wondrous wisdom..." and so forth: since it has no names and marks, it is not an object cognized by the mind-consciousness, but is reached only by the contemplative practice of wondrous, real wisdom. This means that the object cognized by parikalpita is provisional, and being provisional it can be discarded; what is realized by wondrous wisdom is real, and being real it cannot be discarded. The Yuanjue jing says: "When all illusions are thoroughly extinguished, the awakened mind does not move." The former means that both subject and object are false; this means that both subject and object are real. "Second, it says..." onwards explains by converging to reveal that arising and ceasing are without marks; the meaning clarifies that it does not mean discarding the dharmas of arising and ceasing by means of the essence of tathatā. "Why?" introduces the text below. "Because dharmas..." has two meanings in its explanation: First, it is explained in terms of "only the real, devoid of dharmas," which explains in terms of the gate of tathatā: there is only tathatā and no other dharma at all; how could its nature be discarded? "Furthermore..." provides the second explanation in terms of "having dharmas, devoid of nature," which explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing: although there are defilement and purity, their self-nature is fundamentally empty; what need is there to discard them further? The former is like the mirror's essence having no images; the latter is like the reflected images being immediately empty. "The outsider..." explains in terms of the gate of tathatā. "Free from deluded sentiments": names and marks are both cut off; they exist in sentiment but are absent in principle. If they could be established, how could they be free from delusion? Therefore the text below says: "Because the realm free from thought corresponds only to realization." "Furthermore, arising and ceasing..." explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. Arising and ceasing have no nature; having no nature, they are immediately the real. The real is fundamentally established of itself, hence it says "does not depend on." This means that tathatā is fundamentally established, and does not need to wait for the establishment of the dharmas of arising and ceasing to be real. Is it not like waves fundamentally being water of themselves—what need is there to wait to establish them as water? "Why?" takes up the preceding to introduce the text below. "Because it is real..." explains in terms of the gate of tathatā. "Real" means neither false nor deluded. "Tathā" (such) means unchanging and unaltering. Now if it could be discarded, it would become false and deluded; if it could be established, it would become changed and altered, because what was previously unestablished would only now be established. "Furthermore, arising and ceasing..." explains in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. Because tathatā from the beginning forms arising and ceasing in its entire essence, arising and ceasing have no nature and are constantly identical to tathatā. Nature and marks are never separated like this; when arising and ceasing are manifest, the essence of suchness is manifest. This being so, it is fundamentally evident of itself; what need is there to establish it further?

7.22

"Free from speech" means because it cannot be spoken. "Severed from deliberation" means because it cannot be thought. Because the preceding text said: "Free from the mark of names, free from the mark of mental cognition," it now concludes thus. However, all sentient beings from beginningless time have grasped at marks and been confused about the nature, unable to identify delusion and converge with the real; though acting all day long, they are not aware of it themselves. Therefore, it now indicates the real in terms of arising and ceasing. Practitioners of the Mahāyāna must go all day without eating and all night without sleeping to ponder this matter. When has there ever been a time without noble and ordinary, circumstantial and direct [retribution], emptiness and form? Where is the real essence not constantly manifest? What single dharma is not made by the nature? What single dharma is not empty and quiescent in essence? Moreover, how could empty dharmas ever be separated from the real nature? If one does not agree with this explanation, one will fall into annihilationism or eternalism, and there is no truth in it. Therefore, whenever the śāstra reveals the real in each section, it always speaks of "all dharmas."

7.23

Śāstra: "If there is such a meaning" points to the aforesaid meaning of being unspeakable and unthinkable.

7.24

Śāstra: "How do all sentient beings..." and so forth: since uttering speech violates the principle, and stirring thought runs counter to the real; and all sentient beings continue thought after thought, never having been free from thought: if they wish not to run counter, how should they accord? If they wish to tally with realization, how should they enter?

7.25

Śāstra: "What can be spoken" is that which is spoken; thought is also like this.

7.26

Commentary: "Thought is immediately no-thought" and so forth means that when one knows that one thinks of all dharmas, there is fundamentally neither cognizing thought nor cognized thought; it does not mean extinguishing this to make it non-existent, because the essence of thought is fundamentally cut off, which is itself no-thought. Therefore the Yuanjue jing says: "Toward all deluded minds, one also does not extinguish them." "Not by extinguishing..." onwards explains both "thought being immediately no-thought" to transcend the two extremes. If one extinguishes thought to cut it off, one falls into the view of annihilationism; if one does not know that thought is immediately empty, one falls into the view of eternalism. Now, since one neither extinguishes it and yet knows it is immediately non-existent, one avoids these errors. This is to forget words while in speech, not to be completely silent; to have no-thought while in thought, not to be completely unthinking. Therefore the sūtra says: "Without departing from letters, liberation is spoken; the nature of letters being transcended is itself liberation." The text below says: "Because sentient beings are confused, they take the mind to be thought; the mind is truly unmoving. If they can contemplate and know that the mind has no thought, they will be able to accord and enter the gate of tathatā." "In a single..." concludes with the benefit. Merely in a single thought being no-thought, one has already transcended the two faults. The two faults already being absent, one accords with the Middle Way dharmatā, which does not run counter to tathatā. "Furthermore..." and so forth: the former directly addresses the dharma essence, speaking of thought being immediately no-thought; this means that at the time when thought arises, one uses contemplation to observe that the cognizing thought and cognized thought, whether already arisen or not yet arisen, are completely ungraspable; speech is also like this, hence it says "and so forth." "Although not yet free from thought": when contemplating in this way, coarse thoughts do not arise but subtle thoughts still remain, hence it says "not yet free." It is like merely putting out the fire while the fire-poker still remains. "Yet according with no-thought": because one constantly contemplates the absence of subject and object, contemplating in this way is precisely according with no-thought. As the text below says: "If there are sentient beings who can contemplate no-thought, they are heading toward the Buddha's wisdom." "As above..." and so forth: because what was spoken of previously was merely an expedient for entering the principle, the earlier commentary called it "answering with the expedient contemplation." "Then one is able to..." and so forth: because the former contemplation has matured, one can transcend this thought of subject and object and tally with the real principle of no-thought. Since the real is devoid of thoughts of subject and object, now that one is free from this, one can tally with the real. "Correct contemplation": this contemplation corresponds precisely with tathatā, like a box and its lid. Furthermore, "correct" means noble: the stage corresponds to entering the bhūmis and beyond, who are called noble beings who have entered the principle. The previous expedient corresponds to the stages prior to the bhūmis; "tallying and entering" has the meaning of realization: because one is free from the thought of subject and object, one realizes tathatā, which is called tallying and entering. Therefore the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: "When with respect to the cognized object, / Wisdom grasps nothing at all, / At that time one abides in consciousness-only, / Because one is free from the marks of the two graspers." However, what was said above provisionally refers to attaining a portion of undefiled correct wisdom, which is called entering through transcending thought; if speaking of ultimate transcendence, it is only the one person of wondrous enlightenment. "The sphere of action of wisdom": tathatā is the place traversed by correct wisdom, clarifying that it is not the sphere of action of inverted delusion. Therefore the Avataṃsaka-sūtra says: "The profound, true dharmatā / Wondrous wisdom accords with and enters." "Furthermore..." and so forth: the former explanation refers to the absence of the cognized thought; the present explanation refers to the absence of the cognizing thought as well. The mind that contemplates thought—this mind is called knowing; if one preserves this thought of the absence of subject and object, one still does not enter, because the slightest intention of mind errs. Therefore the Yuanjue jing says: "Transcend the illusion of distancing, and also transcend that transcendence; when there is nothing left to transcend, all illusions are eliminated." Heze said: "When delusion arises, there is awareness; when delusion ceases, awareness ceases; when both awareness and delusion are extinguished, that is tathatā." Thus, the essence of tathatā is free from thought; stirring immediately runs counter to the real. If one can know that thought is no-thought and contemplate unceasingly, according like this, there is still a time of entry. May all practitioners diligently cultivate wondrous wisdom! However, according to the previous question and answer, both speech and thought were clarified, but in the subsequent answer on correct contemplation speech is not discussed, because the subtle illustrates the coarse. Mental thought is subtle and yet must be transcended; how could coarse and shallow speech remain?

7.27

"Explaining the marks of tathatā": previously it said "the marks of the tathatā of this mind." Prior to this, the two words "tathatā" have already been explained. From here onward, it only now explains the single word "marks."

7.28

First, the general presentation. Śāstra: "Furthermore, as for tathatā—" Question: Since this is now explaining the marks of tathatā, why does it not bring forward the word "marks"? Answer: Because marks are distinguished from within the markless, marks are identical to the markless, not different from the dharma that transcends words. Moreover, marks are meanings; now, within the true essence, two meanings are unfolded and explained, and hence it says "there are two kinds of meanings"—meaning is itself mark. "Single flavor": because it was previously said that it is the One Mind and the single dharma-realm. However, this is provisionally from the perspective of principle: because it is free from all marks, it is forcibly designated as "one", yet this single mark is itself ungraspable. The Dharmapada-sūtra says: "The myriad phenomena in their dense profusion / are imprinted by a single dharma. / Yet the one is not a 'one', / [spoken] only to shatter all numbers. / Those of shallow wisdom upon hearing it / see 'one' and deem it a one; / may those of deep wisdom / forget conceptual thought and embody it." "There are two": since it admits of verbal explanation and conceptual differentiation, there are marks of one and two. "One must not follow the words": although the essence was previously revealed to transcend words, one must not cling to it as having no explanation, because it has two meanings. Now, although the two meanings are conceptually differentiated, one must not grasp it as having marks, because marks are identical to the markless and do not differ from transcending words; therefore, one cannot cling and grasp in accordance with the words. "Only because..." below: if there were definitely no words, on what could one rely for faith and understanding? If there were definitely two, it would completely conflict with the dharma-essence and one would be utterly cut off from realization; the citation of the text can be understood from this.

7.29

Second, brief differentiation. Commentary: "Free from defilement of delusion": because within the essence of true reality, it fundamentally does not associate with the nine marks and six defilements, it is called empty; it is not that the true essence itself is empty. "The emptiness of true reality": true reality is the true nature, and emptiness is the absence of the defilement of delusion. "The emptiness of true reality" is a determinative compound (tatpuruṣa): just like saying a "jar is empty" simply because there are no things inside the jar, not meaning that the jar's substance itself is empty; the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra has this exact metaphor.

7.30

Śāstra: "Ultimate": means the supreme limit, meaning that establishing the word "empty" at its utmost limit is solely for the sake of revealing the real and true. "Can subsequently..." and so forth: taking the emptiness of delusion as that which reveals, and the real and true as that which is revealed. Were it not for that emptiness of delusion, how could this real and true be known? "Different from delusion in having no substance": delusion borrows the real to exist, whereas the real is fundamentally self-existent; hence it is called "different". "Flow of existences": "existences" refers to the three existences and twenty-five existences; "flow" refers to the four flows and nine flows. Because the afflictions of those existences can drift and drown sentient beings, they are collectively called "flows", which are the twenty-six fetters of root and secondary afflictions and so forth; in this śāstra, they are the three subtle and four coarse marks. Such afflictions are incalculably numerous, and hence are called "sands of the Gaṅgā". If based on what this śāstra explains, they exceed the number of the sands of the river; in principle they are truly immeasurable—how could they stop at the sands of the river? If there were a fixed number, it would probably not be the definitive teaching. As for the word "different": the former is called affliction, whereas the latter is called virtue; the former is defiled and the latter pure, the former empty and the latter existent. "Apart from each other": the substance of delusion is fundamentally empty and has nothing that can accompany [the real]; hence the text below says: "All defiled dharmas of affliction are falsely existent, their nature is fundamentally non-existent, and they have never associated with the tathāgatagarbha." "Unsurpassable dharmas": namely the meanings of the radiance of great wisdom and so forth, which are the dharmas realized by the Buddha, and are therefore called "unsurpassable". These are all virtues identical with nature, and the virtues are all nature itself, not abandoning or departing from each other; hence they are said to "accompany each other".

7.31

First, brief explanation. Commentary: "Conceptual differentiation of subject and object": namely, mind and objects. Although defiled dharmas are numerous, they are completely subsumed by these; therefore the śāstra says "all", while the commentary says "subject and object". Below, mind and objects are distinguished separately. "Marks grasped": namely the mark of the objective realm, within which there are differences of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and so forth; hence it says "distinctions". "Views that grasp": namely the mark of cognition, continuing consciousness, and so forth, within which differences of seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing are distinguished, collectively called "that which grasps", which is the consciousness that separates below. This is an explanation in terms of mutually dismissing both mind and objects. "Moreover..." below: explains in terms of solely dismissing the objective realm. The previous two clauses only said that objects are non-existent; this now provides the reason why objects are non-existent, meaning that whatever is an objective realm is generated from thoughts of the mind: since thoughts of the mind are non-existent, from where could objects exist? Hence the previous text says: "All objective realms exist with distinctions solely relying on false thoughts; if one is free from thoughts, then there are no objective realms whatsoever." According to this, it is the mark of the perceiver in the fundamental consciousness, because its function of generating objects and grasping objects is distinct from the mark of cognition. "Because..." below: comprehensive explanation of the textual meaning. "Existent in sentiment, non-existent in principle": existent within false sentiment, non-existent within true principle, like sky-flowers seen because of cataracts. "Existent in principle" and below: can be understood as the inverse of the above. "Therefore they do not associate": concludes the preceding delusive dharmas. Since they do not exist within principle, what association could be spoken of? These, on the contrary, associate with sentiment, because they are born from false thoughts, and apart from thoughts there are no dharmas whatsoever.

7.32

Śāstra: "One should know..." below: second, the four propositions; first, the four propositions on existence and non-existence. Commentary: "Free from false existence": because people cling to existence, it is said to be "not existent"; if there were nothing clung to, based on what could one speak of "not"? The words "false existence" subsume all marks. "Deluded ones..." below: because they do not understand that the words "not existent" dismiss the existence of sentimental clinging, they instead assume that the dharma-essence is non-existent. Now this explains: above, it only used "not" to negate your clinging to existence, not saying that this dharma is itself non-existent; hence it says "not non-existent". "Both negations are the true dharma": thinking that tathatā is non-existence and non-non-existence, it is therefore refuted: "not the mark of non-existence, not the mark of non-non-existence". In all these, the upper character "not" is the medicine that cures, and the lower three characters are the disease that is cured. "The explanation says..." below: can be understood through careful examination. Among the four occurrences of the word "deem" before and after this: in the first two, the upper is the "deem" of conceptual estimation, and the lower is the "deem" of verbal expression; the latter two are analogized to this. "Further positing..." and so forth: clinging to the first and second propositions as simultaneously having the marks of existence and non-existence, both being tathatā. "Not admitting that both are..." and so forth: if I merely said "not-not", you would be allowed to double-cling to the marks of existence and non-existence. But I use two negations together, negating the mark of existence and the mark of non-existence simultaneously—why be confused and upside-down, double-clinging to both existence and non-existence? Therefore the śāstra now says: "not the mark of both existence and non-existence together". "Mark of both": namely, the simultaneity of existence and non-existence; now both are negated.

7.33

Śāstra: "Not one..." below: second, the four propositions on oneness and difference. Commentary: "According to the preceding..." and so forth: the preceding was merely about existence and non-existence, while this is about oneness and difference; the two clingings differ, but the rest are identical; it can be understood merely by correlating and explaining as in the preceding commentary. "However, clinging..." below: concludes the general subsuming the particulars, meaning that the graspings clung to by sentient beings are limitless and boundless, fundamentally arising from these two sets of four propositions. Therefore, the hundred negations are spoken of solely based on this, the meaning of which was seen in the preceding text. "Therefore broadly..." below: cites an analogy. "All are non-real": these are delusive conceptual attachments that do not accord with true principle, identical to these two sets of four propositions on existence/non-existence and oneness/difference. "What is clung to differs": four people each cling to one proposition. "Existence" is the proposition of existence, which is dismissed by this first proposition; "non-existence" is the proposition of non-existence, which is dismissed by this second proposition; "both" is the proposition of both existence and non-existence, which is dismissed by this fourth proposition; "neither" is the proposition of neither existence nor non-existence, which is dismissed by this third proposition. "Oneness" and so forth are correlated by this analogy. "Correlated in order": correlated into four propositions as above; however, this is solely correlated with respect to their [views], not correlated directly with this śāstra—all are delusive clingings, hence called "non-real".

First 33 of 40 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

起信論疏筆削記 — Classical Chinese