起信論疏筆削記 9

English (machine translation) 9

Language: English

9.1

Recorded by the Śramaṇa Zixuan of Changshui

Second, explaining the name "original enlightenment". The commentary has two parts: first, explaining separately following the text. The intention behind raising the objection of "two" is merely that turning it back and forth creates a difficulty, whereas in truth there are no two; hence the root commentary states: "Advancing and retreating creates a difficulty."

9.3

Regarding "by contrast with" and what follows: the text below states: "One should know that defiled dharmas and pure dharmas are entirely relative to each other." Here, it is temporarily established as inherently existing by contrast with newly arisen [enlightenment]. Because actualized enlightenment newly arises through cultivation, whereas original enlightenment is inherently and primordially present by its nature, the "original" is established by contrast with the "actualized". Regarding "furthermore" and what follows: explaining according to a distinct meaning. The preceding part explained the name "original" by contrast with the "actualized"; this part explains the name "original" because it generates the "actualized". Tracing its source, actualized enlightenment is generated by the original: with internal vāsanā as cause and external conditions as supportive power, it bursts forth into existence and is therefore named "actualized"; because it generates the actualized, it is named "original". If there were nothing generated, it would not be called "original", just as a woman can receive the title of "mother" only after giving birth to a child.

9.4

Regarding "reaching to" and what follows: this discerns the reason for naming it simply "enlightenment". Because once the actualized and the original merge, there are no two marks, and because there are no two marks there is only one enlightenment; hence the text below states: "There is also no difference of actualized enlightenment, because the four marks are primordially equal, being the same single enlightenment." Regarding "furthermore, this" and what follows: explaining according to a distinct meaning. The preceding section discerned the reason for the single enlightenment; this section discerns the reason for actualized enlightenment. The intention is to clarify that this passage of the treatise explains actualized enlightenment: because actualization arises in reliance upon the original and actualization returns to identity with the original, it is named actualized enlightenment. Because it attains for the first time the enlightenment of thoughtlessness, it is named true actualized enlightenment. Although what came before was also called actualized enlightenment, because it had not yet transcended thought it was still named non-enlightenment, or designated by names such as resembling or partial [enlightenment]. Reaching this point, thought is exhausted and the initial mark is already awakened to; hence it is named actualized enlightenment. One should know that only when it directly merges into the mind-source of original enlightenment is it named ultimate enlightenment; the mark of purity of wisdom and the like are all alike actualized enlightenment.

9.5

Regarding the question "if..." and what follows: second, question and answer resolving contradictions and obstacles. Regarding "if different, it does not constitute actualization": because the earlier text states that it is accomplished through the original, so that only when it dissolves into identity with the original essence is it named actualized enlightenment. Regarding "if identical, it does not constitute actualization": because it was said earlier that upon reaching the mind-source, actualized and original are non-dual, being equal in a single mark and having nothing to depend upon. Since neither identity nor difference can be established, how can one speak of establishing the original by contrast with the actualized? This question arises from the commentary passage just preceding. The gist of the answer: in the past one was non-enlightened, but now one is for the first time enlightened. If one investigates its essence, it is not different from the original; from the side of the relative meaning within the gate of arising and ceasing, it receives the names "actualized" and "original". Regarding "contrasting with the original non-enlightenment": it is established as "actualized" by contrasting with original enlightenment, and established as "enlightenment" by contrasting with non-enlightenment. If one reaches the mind-source, it is already subsumed under the gate of tathatā and is not subject to the earlier objection. Regarding "yet in truth actualized enlightenment" and what follows: because there are no defiled conditions of non-enlightenment to contrast with, there is no name of "enlightenment"; because it is equal to and not different from the original, there is no name of "actualized". It is simply named tathatā, not named actualized or original enlightenment. Therefore, within the gate of tathatā, only the essence is revealed, not the attributes and function.

9.6

Second, actualized enlightenment. Regarding the commentary's "clarifying the arising" and what follows: directly clarifying actualized enlightenment. Although the text comes afterward, when tracing back to its source, it originally derives from original enlightenment. Only due to delusion regarding original enlightenment do deluded thoughts exist, and deluded thoughts are precisely non-enlightenment. Thus, as previously stated, relying on the tathāgatagarbha there is the arising-and-ceasing mind, and later, relying on enlightenment there is delusion and so forth, just as relying on an awake person there is a sleeping person.

9.7

Regarding the treatise's "in reliance upon non-enlightenment there is actualized enlightenment": this is just as relying on a sleeping person there is an awakened person. The commentary has three parts: first, explaining the text separately. Regarding "original enlightenment" and what follows: the text below states: "Because the dharma of tathatā exists, it is able to perfume ignorance. Through perfuming, it causes the deluded mind to feel revulsion toward the suffering of saṃsāra and to joyfully seek nirvāṇa," and so forth. Regarding "ultimately identical with the original": the text below states: "Yet in truth there is no difference of actualized enlightenment, because they are primordially equal, being the same single enlightenment." The citation of proof in the text below is precisely from the passage on original enlightenment conforming to defilement. Thus, when original enlightenment is free from defilement and initially purified, it is conveniently named actualized enlightenment.

9.8

Regarding "this text" and what follows: second, broadly discerning the treatise's intention. This is like a sound person becoming a sleeping person, and a sleeping person becoming an awakened person; this shows how they are established in successive stages. Regarding "actualized enlightenment identical with the original" and what follows: this clarifies how they are successively eliminated. It is like an awakened person being identical with the sound person: because of being identical with the sound person, there is no sleeping person. Because there is no sleeping person, there is no awakened person. Because there is no awakened person, there is no sound person. Because there is no sound person, there is equality; yet even equality is untenable. It is called "equality" because there is no difference between actualized and original. Stating it twice contains two meanings: first, actualized enlightenment and original enlightenment are equal, because the actualized is itself the original; and original enlightenment and non-enlightenment are equal, because non-enlightenment is itself original enlightenment. Second, actualized, original, and non-enlightenment are ultimately without distinction, being primordially equal, and distinction and equality are also equal. Regarding "transcending words": if one wishes to speak of actualized enlightenment, its essence is identical with the original; if one wishes to speak of original enlightenment, it has nothing to contrast with; if one wishes to speak of non-enlightenment, its essence is itself enlightenment. Words cannot reach it; hence it is called "transcending words". Because it transcends words, no mark can be grasped and the locus of mental activity is extinguished; hence it is called "terminating contemplation". This is the complete dissolution into identity with the gate of tathatā.

9.9

Regarding "therefore" and what follows: third, concluding summary. "Perfect interfusion" means completely subsuming defilement and purity. Enlightenment and non-enlightenment interfuse and return to a single essence, pure and void of burdens, and so it is called unfettered. Delusion, enlightenment, and the Middle Way do not abide anywhere at all; hence it is named "nothing extraordinary". How much less could there be the differences of the three bodies? Since the three bodies are formed through the actualized and the original, and since actualized and original are not even established, how could there be the distinctions of the three bodies? This excludes the provisional teachings that definitively claim the distinctions among the three bodies, differentiating between conditioned and unconditioned, and the differences among the three eternals. Regarding "merely in accordance with" and what follows: resolving a doubt. Someone might ask: "Below it explains the mark of inconceivable karma, the mirror of conditions and vāsanā, the reward body, and the response body; and it also states: 'When ignorance is exhausted, there is inconceivable karma capable of manifesting in the ten directions to benefit sentient beings.' Are these not the functions of the reward and transformation bodies? Why say there are no three bodies?" Hence this is explained: it is only with reference to differences in the capacities and perceptions [of beings] that they are named reward and transformation bodies. If speaking from the ocean of fruition, there is in truth no talk of bodies. The text below refers to the greatness of function of tathatā, where the text states: "All Buddha-Tathāgatas are merely bodies of the mark of wisdom of the dharmakāya, the supreme ultimate truth, lacking any worldly truth dharma that could be seen; it is merely in accordance with sentient beings seeing, hearing, and obtaining benefit that it is spoken of as function."

9.10

Regarding the heading "actualized enlightenment": it can also be that earlier it briefly clarified the essence of actualized enlightenment, now it extensively clarifies the marks of actualized enlightenment, and later the actualized not being different from the original concludes the marks into identity with the essence. First, identifying cause and fruit. Regarding the commentary's "defiled mind": that is, the six defiled minds. "Nature-pure" is the tathāgatagarbha. Because defiling the pure forms defilement, the pure is called the source of defilement; hence the text below states: "This mind is from the very beginning pure in its own nature, yet ignorance exists; being defiled by ignorance, it has its defiled mind." "Coarse marks" refers to the marks of transformation and manifestation, together with the six coarse marks and so forth. Transformation and manifestation are also the coarse within the subtle, and are all coarse marks. The mark of arising is the karma mark, the subtlest among the deluded; because the coarse arises from the subtle, the subtle is called the source of the coarse. Hence the text below states: "The subtle within the coarse and the coarse within the subtle are the realm of bodhisattvas; the subtle within the subtle is the realm of buddhas."

9.11

However, as for the expression "mind-source" (xin yuan), there are two explanations in the commentary: The first explanation parses it as a tatpuruṣa compound (dependent-subordinate compound). The second explanation permits both tatpuruṣa and karmadhāraya (appositional/co-ordinate compound) analyses. Or it can be said that "the pure mind is itself the source" is the karmadhāraya reading; this reading, along with the first explanation of the commentary, refers to the culmination of what is realized, whereas the commentary's second explanation refers to the culmination of what is severed. Thus the two characters "mind-source" apply across both the real and the delusive. The single character "awakening" (jue) refers to actualized enlightenment. When actualized enlightenment reaches the mark of arising, the mark of arising is sufficient to be severed and eliminated. When actualized enlightenment reaches the purity of nature, the purity of nature is sufficient to be silently united with. Therefore the subsequent text states: "When one awakens to [actualized enlightenment] the mind [the purity of nature] at its initial arising [the mark of arising], the mind [silent union] has no initial mark [severed and eliminated]. Because one is far removed from subtle thoughts [that which is severed above], one attains sight of the mind-nature. The mind is then ever-abiding [that which is united above], which is named ultimate enlightenment [after subject and object have united, this separate name is established]." "The path of actualized enlightenment is perfected": "path" has the meaning of "cause." Arriving at this stage, the cause is fulfilled and bears fruit, and there is no distinction between actualized and original [enlightenment]; it is named ultimate enlightenment, which is the Buddha-ground. As for "not fully understanding," etc.: because one is obstructed by the mark of arising and so forth. As for "vajra," etc.: vajra is a metaphor for samādhi; from the uninterrupted [path] backward down to all ordinary worldlings, these are what the subsequent text refers to as "according with the partial," "similarity," "non-enlightenment," and so forth. Thus ultimate [enlightenment] is the fruit, and non-ultimate [enlightenment] is the cause.

9.12

Commentary: "The former three" refers to cessation, difference, and abiding. To awaken to these three marks and backward is named non-ultimate. The latter one refers to the mark of arising; because this single mark is exhausted, it is named ultimate. This is spoken with regard to going against the stream, and therefore the mark of arising is placed at the end; if spoken with regard to following the stream, then the mark of cessation would be at the end.

9.13

Topical outline: "Revealing the four stages." This corresponds to the four stages of ordinary being, worthy, noble, and fruit in the Yuanjue jing. Alternatively, they may be unfolded into five stages, namely: provision, application, penetrating comprehension, cultivation, and ultimate. Or they may be subsumed into three, called: practice of faith, pure mind, and ultimate. In broad terms, there are fifty-two stages.

9.14

Commentary, three parts: First, general account of the intention, which has seven texts. Now, the first: briefly indicating the general meaning. The coarse is the mark of cessation; the subtle is the mark of arising; viewed relatively between them, they mutually partake of coarse and subtle. As for "entrusted to reveal," etc.: entrusted upon the marks of the four kinds of defilements to reveal and clarify the scope and efficacy of actualized enlightenment; this then distinguishes the depth or shallowness of the cognizing awakening by relying on the coarseness or subtlety of that which is awakened.

9.15

"However, this..." below: Second, sorting out and examining the four marks. The intention is to reveal that the true mind perfumed by avidyā goes from subtle to coarse, from delusion to karma. Entrusted upon this delusion and karma, it is spoken of as four meanings, which are the four marks of a single period. As for "not with regard to," etc.: although a single kṣaṇa possesses the four marks, it is not what is distinguished here, and is therefore excluded.

9.16

"Now, relying on..." below: Third, properly explaining the basic meaning, in two parts: First, marking and listing, as in the text.

9.17

Second, explaining the text, in two parts: First, general, in three parts: First, general account of the arising of delusion, in two parts: First, proper account. "To trace the origin" (yuan) has the meaning of probing to the bottom. "Now" (fu) is an initial particle. It means probing to the bottom of the causes of these four marks, which are fundamentally formed on the basis of deluded mind. Or both characters are the beginning of an utterance. Below "the mind-nature": recounting the mind-essence that is deluded about, which is the aspect of tathatā, as the previous text says: "What is called the mind-nature is neither produced nor destroyed," down to "separated from marks of mental cognition," and so forth. Below "yet there is": explaining that delusion constitutes production and destruction, which is the aspect of production and destruction, as stated previously: "Relying on the tathāgatagarbha, there is the mind of production and destruction," and so forth.

9.18

"A sštra says..." below: Second, adducing proof. The first is the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sštra, as cited before. "Another sštra" refers to the Anšnatvāpšrṇatvanirdeőa-sštra, which says: "This very dharmakāya, bound by boundless afflictions exceeding the sands of the Ganges, has drifted and wandered back and forth through birth and death in accordance with the waves of the mundane world since beginningless kalpas, and is named 'sentient being'." Now the commentary briefly cites the general gist. Below "This...": namely the text on original enlightenment according with defilement.

9.19

"Now with regard to..." below: Second, general matching with the four marks. As in the text.

9.20

"The Foxing..." below: Third, adducing a treatise to explain and establish it. That treatise states that there is no saṃskṛta phenomenon that is not altered by the four marks, in order to prove the four marks of a single period in the present treatise.

9.21

Second, "Separately..." below, in two parts: First, brief matching. As for "The subsequent text with regard to stages," etc.: taking these four marks of awakening and matching them against the subsequent text on the six defiled minds, one then knows that in distinguishing these four separately, each comprises varying amounts, as the subsequent text states: "First is the defilement corresponding to attachment; based on the liberation of the two vehicles and the stage corresponding to faith, it is left far behind." This is precisely the text here, such as: "the contemplative wisdom of the two vehicles and initial aspiring bodhisattvas," etc., "awaken to the difference of thought, so that thought lacks the mark of difference," etc. The subsequent text states in full: "Second is the defilement corresponding to non-interruption; based on the stage corresponding to faith, cultivating expedient means, one is gradually able to abandon it, and upon attaining the stage of the pure mind, it is ultimately separated from," down to: "Fifth is the defilement not corresponding to the capable-of-seeing mind; based on the stage of mental mastery, one is able to separate from it." The above four defilements are precisely what the text here says: "like a dharmakāya bodhisattva awakening to the abiding of thought, so that thought lacks the mark of abiding," etc. Furthermore, the subsequent text says: "Sixth is the fundamental karmic non-corresponding defilement; based on the bodhisattva's culminating stage, attaining entry into the Tathāgata-stage, one is able to separate from it." This is precisely the text here: "like when the bodhisattva stages are exhausted, having fulfilled expedient means, in a single thought of correspondence, one awakens to the mind at its initial arising, so that the mind lacks the initial mark," etc. Matching this against that, the meaning of distinguishing the four marks separately is fully evident. However, because that text speaks exclusively of the path of afflictions with regard to pure wisdom overturning defilement, it does not speak of the mark of cessation. The present text speaks comprehensively of the four marks because it treats the arising of awakening in its entirety from beginning to end. According to the Haedong Commentary's correlation: the mark of arising has three, namely the three subtle marks; the mark of abiding has four, namely the four afflictions of the seventh consciousness; the mark of difference has six, namely the six root afflictions; the mark of cessation has seven, namely the three bodily and four vocal [actions]. Yet the actual dharmas spoken of there are identical; they differ only in unfolding and combining. The present commentary simply relies on what is distinguished in this treatise itself, in order to conform strictly to its main tenets, so there is no need to abandon the near to take up the far.

9.22

"Mark of arising..." below: Second, detailed explanation, in four parts. Now, the first: "Mark of karma" designates the name. Below "It means by..." explains the mark. Below "Through avidyā..." concludes it, indicating that this did not exist previously, and hence is called the mark of arising. Below "Extremely deep..." separately praises it. Below "The subsequent text..." adduces proof, which is the text in the conditions of production and destruction. Below "namely the subsequent text..." categorizes and subsumes. The first one is the mark of karma, the latter one is the fundamental karmic non-corresponding defilement, and the first is the karmic consciousness. Below "These..." concludes the whole. It is simply because the gates through which they are expounded are different, yet the essence of the dharma is one, that they are all subsumed together. "The gates through which they are expounded are different": the nine marks explain non-enlightenment; the five consciousnesses and six defilements explain the conditions of production and destruction, except that the five consciousnesses are the conditions of production, while the six defilements are the conditions of destruction. Because the meanings differ, the names are not the same, and the places of exposition are also distinct; because their essence is identical, they are comprehensively subsumed. The designations, explanations, conclusions, and subsumptions in the subsequent sections follow this example.

9.23

"Mark of abiding..." below: Second, the mark of abiding. As for "These two," etc.: the three subtle marks mentioned above are three non-corresponding minds belonging to the fundamental consciousness. As for "These two both reside in," etc.: these are the subtle among the coarse, belonging to the phenomenon-consciousness. As for "Avidyā," etc.: concluding it. Solidly fixed and unaltering, it is therefore named firmly abiding. The latter two are the mark of transformation and the mark of manifestation; the first two are the mark of cognition and the mark of continuation; the latter four are the transforming consciousness, manifesting consciousness, cognitive consciousness, and continuing consciousness; the middle four are the defilement not corresponding to the capable-of-seeing mind, the defilement not corresponding to the manifested matter, the defilement corresponding to discriminating cognition, and the defilement corresponding to non-interruption.

9.24

"As for difference..." below: Third, the mark of difference. As for "This resides in," etc.: these two are the coarse among the coarse, belonging to the phenomenon-consciousness. As for "Avidyā," etc.: the delusion is coarse and manifest, capable of giving rise to the bodily and vocal distinctions of greed, anger, and so forth, and is therefore named the mark of difference. Below "The subsequent text..." categorizes and subsumes. "The middle two" are the mark of grasping and the mark of conceptualizing names. "The first one" is the defilement corresponding to attachment. Because two marks are combined into one defilement, the mental consciousness is the consciousness of the mind (manovijñāna).

9.25

"As for cessation..." below: Fourth, the mark of cessation. "Ceasing the prior different mind": delusion reaches its culmination here and enters the karmic path. Like the mark of cessation in the Hīnayāna, it ceases the present mind and makes it enter the past. As for "Through avidyā," etc.: from subtle to prominent, giving rise to delusion and creating karma. Once the karmic cause is completed, the mind invites the future retribution; the affairs of a single period are concluded, and it is therefore called fully completed. Because it is fully completed, it is called the mark of cessation, not that afflictions will not arise from this point on. It is like a person planning a project: when the conditions are assembled and the project is accomplished, it is called fully completed. Below "Because retribution...": or someone may ask: "Among the nine marks, the four marks of arising and so forth have already subsumed the first eight; why do they not subsume the mark of suffering bound to karma?" Therefore this explains it. The intention is: regarding the cause, that which has not been committed is not committed, and that which has been committed is overturned and eliminated, meaning there is the possibility of severance. But when it comes to the karmic retribution, when one is already in the place of receiving it, it cannot be severed. Just as once one has arrived in hell, one must inevitably suffer it. Therefore the Buddha instructed to know suffering and sever the origin, not to sever suffering; this is the meaning, and therefore it is set aside and not spoken of in the present text. "The sixth" refers to the very last of the six coarse marks.

9.26

"Therefore..." below: Fourth, concluding the previous explanation. "Only a single dreaming mind" is the metaphor. For example, there is a person (tathatā) who suddenly falls asleep (avidyā), dreams (mark of karma), sees (mark of transformation) various things (mark of manifestation), gives rise to mental discrimination (mark of cognition), uninterrupted thought after thought (continuation), gives rise to deep grasping and attachment toward favorable and adverse conditions (grasping), takes them as good or evil, near or distant (conceptualizing names), provides various benefits toward the good and the near, and commits various violations and injuries toward the evil and the distant (generating karma); or receives joy from repaying kindness, or undergoes suffering from facing revenge (mark of suffering bound to karma). Suddenly waking up, the above matters are all dispelled; one should know that these matters were only a single dreaming mind. As for "All due to..." etc.: this is the dharma. The arising of the nine marks all relies on this power, just as all dream events rely on sleep. "A sūtra says..." below: adducing proof, which is the Śremālādevī-sūtra. It says: "World-Honoured One! The power of such an avidyā entrenchment-stage is the greatest in power among the four entrenchment-stages of the category of craving for existence." The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśā says: "For example, because the great earth has superior power, it bears four heavy burdens, and is therefore called an 'abiding ground' (bhūmi): first, the great ocean; second, the mountains; third, the grasses and trees; fourth, sentient beings. Avidyā is also like this; among the five entrenchment-stages, this is the most difficult to eliminate, hence we know its power is great." The subsequent text is the text concluding the end of the nine marks.

9.27

"Although [the marks] again..." is fifth: synthesizing and subsuming according to principle. First, it concedes and recapitulates the preceding text, meaning: the subtle is not the coarse, affliction is not karma, attachment to dharmas is not attachment to self, and the fundamental consciousness is not the object-engaging consciousness. The prior stage differs from the subsequent stage, hence it says "gradation." "Yet its..." subsumes those distinctions of coarse and subtle into a single thought-moment. The expression "a single thought-moment" has two meanings: first, it is simply a single thought of fundamental ignorance; second, it is a thought-moment of a single kṣaṇa. For example, suppose a person suddenly encounters an enemy and proceeds to kill him (arising of karma), conceptualizing him as a person named Zhang or Wang (reckoning names), definitively declaring, "He bears an enmity toward me" (clinging and grasping), with an evil mind continuing uninterrupted (continuation), differentiating between enemy and friend (mark of cognition). That [enemy] constitutes the seen (manifesting mark), oneself constitutes the seer (transforming mark), and the mental thought begins to stir (karmic mark)—thus within a single thought-moment, the eight marks are fully present. Yet between the two meanings, it is strictly only the former meaning. It can also be that "a single thought-moment" is just the One Mind; hence the text below states: "A single thought-moment corresponding" is precisely the single thought of no-thought. "Because coarse..." brings out the reason. Someone might ask: "Since there are gradations of coarse and subtle, before and after, how can it be spoken of as a single thought-moment?" Hence this explains it: although there are gradations of coarse and subtle, they are produced by the One Mind. How could the mind be present in the mark of cessation while there is no mind in the mark of arising? If one says it is absent, upon what would arising depend? Nor can this One Mind be divided to correspond to the four marks. Since the mind cannot be divided, and further has no before and after, how could the four marks have a before and after? It is like one person dreaming of various matters: though the dream-matters are manifold, they have no before and after. "Therefore it is said..." adduces proof, namely the concluding text on actualized enlightenment. The text properly says: "Yet in truth there is no difference of actualized enlightenment, because the four marks exist simultaneously, none having self-subsistence; they are fundamentally equal, being the same enlightenment."

9.28

"Yet not yet..." is sixth: resolving and penetrating the latent objection. Someone might object: "Since the four marks are simultaneous, why do those who realize enlightenment have before and after?" Hence this explains it. From "penetrating the source of the mind..." onward, it means that only by clearly understanding that the four marks equally depend on the mind can one know them simultaneously. It is like a person in a dream speaking of the dream: gradually he comes to know it, or only upon awakening can he comprehend all at once. This success or failure lies with the person; one should not doubt the Dharma. "As a sūtra says..." adduces proof. From "'Beginning'..." onward, it further explains what was cited. All may be understood.

9.29

"Since relying..." is seventh: concluding the formulation of actualized enlightenment, in two parts: first, explaining that which is enlightened in terms of conforming to the flow [of saṃsāra]. That which is enlightened is precisely non-enlightenment. The manifold dream-thoughts are the affliction obstacle; turning up to the mark of cessation is the karmic obstacle; from "long slumber" onward is the retribution obstacle. Since one is covered by the three obstacles and entirely unaware, never having awakened from beginningless time until now, it is called "long slumber." The three realms are the dependent retribution, and the six destinies are the primary retribution; repeatedly returning to and heading toward these six, they are called "destinies."

9.30

"Now, relying..." is second: explaining that which is capable of enlightenment in terms of reversing the flow. That which is capable of enlightenment is precisely actualized enlightenment, in two parts: first, clarifying the causes and conditions for the arising of enlightenment. "Perfumed by original enlightenment" is the perfuming by the internal cause. The power of enlightenment silently perfumes, subtle and unfathomable, and is called "inconceivable." Original enlightenment is the essence; perfuming so as to cause aversion [to suffering] and seeking [for nirvāṇa] is the function—this is the essence and function of the internal cause. From "Further, relying..." onward, it clarifies the perfuming power of external conditions. Tathatā is the essence; the teaching and doctrine flowing from it is the function—this is the essence and function of external conditions. The Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says that from the pure dharmadhātu flows the fundamental cognition; from the fundamental cognition flows the subsequently attained cognition; from the subsequently attained cognition flows the mind of great compassion; from the mind of great compassion flow the twelve divisions of teaching. The pure dharmadhātu is precisely tathatā; speaking according to the root, it says "the teaching and doctrine flowing from tathatā." "Hearing and perfuming" means that by the wisdom of hearing one is perfumed with the teaching flowing from the real, which reciprocally aids the enlightened nature and gives it strength. Thus the teaching and doctrine flowing from original enlightenment in turn perfumes original enlightenment itself.

9.31

"Because the essence..." is second: revealing the efficacy of the arising of enlightenment. This refers to the aforementioned inner and outer perfuming powers being able to initiate actualized enlightenment. "The essences are identical" means the essence of the external condition and the essence of the internal cause have no duality of marks; that is, tathatā is identical with original enlightenment. "The functions fuse" means the external condition of the teaching and the internal aversion and seeking harmonize with each other without conflict or resistance. "Receiving that hearing and perfuming" directly shows the character of identity and fusion; if they were not identical and fused, there would be no receiving. Because it receives that, it is able to support and benefit, internally perfuming the enlightened nature and initiating the understanding of actualized enlightenment. When the power of understanding increases and the power of ignorance weakens, one can reverse the flow and gradually approach the mind's source. From "First ceasing the mark of cessation..." onward, it clarifies the meaning of gradually approaching. From the stage of initial faith, one halts the committing of evil; next one clearly realizes personal selflessness, gradually cuts off attachment to dharmas, awakens up to the fundamental consciousness, and exhausts the mark of arising. Once the fine dust is completely eliminated, the enlightened illumination alone remains; hence it says "lucidly and greatly awakens," which is the exhausting of the dream of ignorance and the realization of ultimate enlightenment. In "Realizes...", the mind's source is ever-placid and fundamentally immovable; since the mark of movement does not exist, against what could one speak of stillness? Below it says: "When the mind's initial arising is realized, the mind has no initial mark." It also says: "Like a person who is confused about east and takes it as west, the direction does not actually turn," and so forth. "Equality" means the mind has no duality of marks. Repeating it twice is because the mark of equality is itself also equal. Or it means the equality of root and branch, the equality of subject and object, the equality of self and other—in short, all mutually relative dharmas are completely equal.

9.32

"As a sūtra says..." adduces proof, namely the Avataṃsaka-sūtra. The sūtra says: "Like a person who in a dream sees his body fallen into a great river, and desiring to cross over, produces great boldness and employs great expedient means; because of producing great boldness and employing expedient means, he immediately awakens; having awakened, all actions cease. The bodhisattva is also like this: seeing the bodies of sentient beings in the four flows, desiring to rescue them, he produces great boldness and generates great vigor; by means of bold vigor, he reaches the Immovable ground; once he has reached this, all [actions] cease, and the activities of both characters do not appear at all." Its intention is to say that this bodhisattva, from having marks and having exertion, enters this ground of marklessness and non-exertion, attaining the endurance of the non-arising of dharmas, seeing neither self nor sentient beings, neither bodhi nor nirvāṇa, neither saṃsāra nor afflictions. Both activities cease, because he has attained the non-conceptualization of dharmas. Here, in terms of the ultimate stage, actualized enlightenment is identical with the original; there is no mark to be awakened to, and it is equal and equal. Although the stages differ, the general meaning is not different; hence it says "the general meaning is like this."

9.33

"Next, directly..." is second: distinct explanation, in two parts: first, presenting the text, which may be understood.

9.34

Second, directly explaining. The treatise has four parts: this is the first. Commentary: "Questioning the general mark" means asking: in terms of persons and dharmas, what is the meaning of ultimate versus non-ultimate enlightenment? Because it follows the general statement and raises the question.

9.35

"Ten faiths" are the ordinary beings outside the kalpa. Generally speaking, "ordinary beings" extends throughout the stages prior to the bhūmis. Here, since they are already capable of halting evil, they are not of the confused type who have not yet awakened to afflictions, nor are they from the ten abodes upward; being precisely within the indeterminate group, it says "ten faiths."

9.36

Second, the marks contemplated. Commentary: From "Before entering..." onward, it temporarily clarifies the mark of cessation that is awakened to. Before entering the stage of faith, when confused and deluded, the deeds one performs follow evil alone. The body has three kinds: killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct. The mouth has four evils: false speech, frivolous speech, harsh speech, and duplicitous speech. Not understanding that this karma definitively incurs bitter retributions, out of not knowing, one blazes with action; this is the time when one does not recognize cause and effect and knows nothing of sin and blessing. From "Now, entering..." onward, it clarifies the function of that which is capable of enlightenment: believing in the karmic conditions of good and evil and that the retributions received as fair or foul are like echoes to sounds and shadows to forms, without the slightest error. "Awakening to the mark of cessation" means only then knowing the faults and perils of this mark to be like this. The text of the treatise only speaks of "awakening to and knowing the arising of evil," without the words "mark of cessation"; hence the commentary correlates them.

9.37

Third, discerning the benefit. Commentary: In "does not commit evil," etc., although the preceding thought arises, it is merely the gateway of affliction. By halting so that subsequent ones do not arise, it ultimately does not become the path of karma. Once the mental ground is halted, the body and mouth do not act.

9.38

Fourth, concluding the contemplation. Commentary: In "Being able to know...," etc., one only knows that karma of good and evil does not perish, but does not know selflessness and non-action. Therefore, although it is an awakening, it is just non-enlightenment; this is explained according to the present stage. From "This only..." onward, it is explained in looking forward to subsequent stages. Because subsequent stages have already awakened to affliction, this stage only awakens to karma; affliction and the meaning of enlightenment directly oppose and overturn each other, whereas karma and actualized enlightenment are not yet directly opposed, so it is merely called "halting."

9.39

Treatise: In the mark of difference, first is that which contemplates. Commentary: "Ten understandings" is an alternative name for the ten abodes. That one is named "producing the mind," while this one is named "generating the intention"; name and meaning are both the same. The single character "etc." is intended to cover the remaining nine abodes along with the practices and dedications, hence it says "after." "Retaining afflictions" means suppressing without severing them, and "thus not realizing" is for the sake of benefiting sentient beings. This means that these bodhisattvas comprehend that the real is fundamentally present and understand that the false is fundamentally empty; complying with tathatā, they cultivate the contemplation of consciousness-only, suppressing both obstacles together so that they do not arise in active manifestation, merely retaining the seeds. If according to the Dharmalakṣaṇa school, it is said that because the power of śamatha-vipaśyanā is weak, they do not sever the latencies. If relying on the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, bodhisattvas prior to the bhūmis generate practice relying on the teaching, and inconceivable obstacles of affliction do not arise; by the power of compassionate vows they assist afflictions to moisten karma, receiving bodies in saṃsāra and teaching and transforming in the six destinies—this corresponds precisely to this meaning. If according to the Vijñaptimātra[siddhi], only compassion-predominant bodhisattvas on the first bhūmi and above have the meaning of retaining afflictions. Now, in this commentary, discussing retaining afflictions at the stage of the three worthies is because these are bodhisattvas of the true teaching of the Dharmatā school, whose faculties and nature are sharp and fierce; upon first generating the mind, they can immediately and suddenly comprehend the fundamental nature, understand that the essence of the false is empty, cultivate the perfections in accord with the nature, advance swiftly toward the principle, and have mastery over afflictions; hence retaining is spoken of even at the three worthies. "Attaining mastery" is because they can enter this contemplation and suppress these afflictions. Since their application of contemplation is equal, they are placed in the same stage. Question: Why does the treatise text not directly speak of the two vehicles, but speaks of "contemplative wisdom"—what does this mean? Answer: Because the two vehicles exclusively contemplate personal emptiness, whereas bodhisattvas contemplate both emptinesses, a distinction between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna is made. Now, speaking solely in terms of the point of identity where they employ the contemplation of personal emptiness, they can be discussed together. This is only in terms of the power and function of contemplative wisdom being partially identical with bodhisattvas, not wholly identical. If it directly said "the two vehicles," it might cause the fault of conflation; since they are identical while being different, it was necessary to say "contemplative wisdom."

9.40

Second, that which is contemplated. Commentary: "Two kinds" are the mark of clinging and grasping and the mark of reckoning names. In "conceptualizing," etc., reckoning an inner self within the body, an external mine without, and between them containing both innate and conceptually differentiated [forms], hence it says "views and craving." Yet among the six root [afflictions], except for the view of self which is an affliction of views, the remainder are all craving, as is commonly discussed. "These two..." means the two vehicles and the three worthies equally awaken to this mark, both being able to fully know this attachment to self. From "Clarifying the root..." onward, it clarifies the causes and conditions for the arising of the mark of difference that is awakened to, meaning that before wisdom arises, the thought of fundamental ignorance combines with the mark of difference to arouse the afflictions, blazing without rest, entirely unperceived. From "Yet now..." onward, it clarifies the function of that which is capable of enlightenment, meaning that within the thought of ignorance, one observes and investigates whether the personal self, craving, and views exist or not, knowing that these afflictions arise from ignorance; only then does one comprehend coarse thoughts, hence it says "subtly awakens," which is awakening to the meaning of difference within thought.

9.41

Third, the benefit. Commentary: In "Since being able to...," etc., investigating the essence of the personal self within ignorance in accord with principle, it is completely unobtainable; hence it says "the thought has no mark of difference," which is precisely the meaning of personal emptiness.

9.42

Fourth, concluding the contemplation. The Śāstra states: "By abandoning..."—this text has two aspects: first, it concludes the contemplation; second, it explains what precedes. The two below are to be understood by analogy. The Commentary explains: "Because in..." means that because one awakens to self-emptiness, the afflictions of self-grasping do not arise; hence it is called "abandoning coarse conceptual differentiation," and so forth. "Yet still..." means that because they are not yet able to awaken to dharma-grasping, this comprehensively clarifies that both the two vehicles and the three stages of worthies are called "approximate enlightenment." "Because..." below explains the reason. Bodhisattvas who have not yet realized their original portion are approximate to the two vehicles; although [the two vehicles] are in their own vehicle, it is termed "entering realization," [yet] in relation to the Mahāyāna they have only attained self-emptiness and not yet realized dharma-emptiness, so they are also termed "not yet having realized"; thus both are alike in approximate enlightenment. Hence, in relation to the realization of tathatā at the first bhūmi, this is termed "approximate." In the question, quoting what precedes to raise an objection is obvious. In the answer, it first concedes. "If from the perspective of..." below refutes [the objection], meaning: based on enlightenment there is non-enlightenment; non-enlightenment is delusion. Non-enlightenment and enlightenment are directly opposed; only by turning and relying on the delusion of non-enlightenment does one begin to create karma. Karma is separated from the meaning of enlightenment by another layer, so it is not directly opposed. Because it is directly opposed, it is called "approximate enlightenment"; because it is not directly opposed, it is called "non-enlightenment." It is like a dusty mirror in a case: the case and the mirror are not directly opposed, but the dust and the mirror are directly opposed. This meaning is also like that.

9.43

The mark of abiding has four [parts]: First, the subject of contemplation. The Commentary explains: "The first bhūmi..." means that the bodhisattvas of the ten bhūmis all realize tathatā and take the dharma of tathatā as their own essence; hence they are called "dharmakāya bodhisattvas." Because at the culminating mind of the tenth bhūmi one immediately achieves perfect enlightenment, in this stage only the first nine are indicated.

9.44

Second, the object of contemplation. The Śāstra states: "Awakening to the mind's abiding": because these bodhisattvas, within the thought of avidyā, sequentially awaken to the four kinds of marks of abiding: the first bhūmi awakens to [the mark of] continuity; from the second to the seventh bhūmi they awaken to the mark of cognition; the eighth bhūmi awakens to the manifesting mark; the ninth bhūmi awakens to the transforming mark. These four are all termed "abiding"; hence it says "awakening to the mind's abiding."

9.45

Third, the benefit. The Commentary explains: "Although knowing..." means to clarify that although continuity is extinguished at this bhūmi, the mark of cognition still remains from the second to the sixth bhūmis; it is absent while in contemplation, but present again upon emerging from contemplation; although not intentional, it is naturally so, because it is an innate affliction to be eliminated in the path of cultivation. Now, the Śāstra speaks of "having no mark of abiding" only with respect to the time of being in contemplation and the subsequent stages. Furthermore, it is also possible that this text is looking back to explain the practices before the bhūmis, meaning: while before the bhūmis, believing the teaching and practicing contemplation, one knows that all dharmas are only the manifestations of consciousness and does not give rise to coarse thoughts of conceptual differentiation and attachment; this is already departing from the preceding mark of difference. Yet, not having directly realized dharma-emptiness, upon emerging from contemplation one still gives rise to conceptual differentiations of dharma-grasping regarding defiled and pure dharmas, which is the mark of continuity. If one reaches the first bhūmi, one directly realizes the realm of mind-only, distances oneself from the two graspings and the dormant afflictions of conceptual differentiation, and awakens to the mark of continuity up to the mark of seeing; hence it says "the thought has no mark of abiding." The Śāstra's current statement of "having no mark of abiding" is only stated comprehensively with respect to the subsequent stages. "Clarifying that..." below distinguishes the causes and conditions for the arising of the mark of abiding that is awakened to, meaning that when one has not yet awakened, the thought of avidyā combines with this mark of abiding, firmly grasps it and abides in it, without ever altering it. "Now together with..." below clarifies the function of the subject that awakens, meaning that within the thought of avidyā, one investigates whether dharma-self, as well as subjective and objective mind and objects, exist or not, and finds them completely unobtainable; that is, the conceptually differentiating mind is transformed into non-conceptual wisdom; hence it says "the thought has no mark of abiding."

First 45 of 58 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

起信論疏筆削記 — Classical Chinese