大乘起信論裂網疏 1.7

1.7

二、釋起信，亦二：初分釋；次合釋。分釋復二：初釋起；次釋信。初釋起者，問：一切諸法無生無起，云何乃言起耶？答：法性無起，亦無不起。若但言起，即失真如門義；若但言不起，即失生滅門義；若言亦起亦不起，即互相違；若言非起非不起，即成戲論。當知四句皆不可說。若不墮情執、順四悉檀，則有因緣故，亦可得說。今言起者，乃非起非不起而論起耳。何者？一心絕待，本無能信所信之殊，而迷此一心，則起無量疑惑，如水成氷；翻此迷惑，遂起圓常正信，如氷還成水。迷悟雖分，一性不動，故非起；性無增減，迷悟宛然，故非不起。是則起即不起，不起而起。約此論起，妙在其中，蓋雖熾然起信，仍唯一心，仍無能信所信之異。無能無所，而能而所，能所皆即一心法界，如燈有照，還照於燈。故云：自心起信，還信自心，是為無上性起法門。

Second, explaining "awakening faith" (qixin) also has two parts: first, explaining them separately; second, explaining them together. Explaining them separately again has two parts: first, explaining "awakening"; second, explaining "faith". First, to explain "awakening": Question: "All phenomena are without production and without arising. Why, then, speak of 'arising' [or awakening]?" Answer: "The dharmatā is without arising, yet also not without arising. If one speaks only of arising, one loses the meaning of the aspect of tathatā. If one speaks only of non-arising, one loses the meaning of the aspect of arising and ceasing. If one says it both arises and does not arise, they contradict each other. If one says it neither arises nor does not arise, that becomes frivolous discourse (prapañca). One should know that all four propositions are ineffable. Yet if one does not fall into emotional attachment and accords with the four siddhāntas, then on account of causes and conditions, it may also be expressed. In speaking of 'awakening' now, it is discussing arising precisely in terms of 'neither arising nor non-arising'. Why? The one mind is non-dual and absolute; originally there is no distinction between the subject that has faith and the object that is believed in. Yet when one is deluded about this one mind, immeasurable doubts arise, like water turning into ice. When this delusion is overturned, round and eternal right faith then arises, like ice turning back into water. Although delusion and awakening are distinct, the one nature does not move; hence it is 'not arising'. Although the nature neither increases nor decreases, delusion and awakening are apparent; hence it is 'not non-arising'. Thus, arising is itself non-arising, and non-arising arises. To discuss 'awakening' in terms of this holds the wondrous truth within it. For though faith blazes forth and arises, it remains solely the one mind, and there remains no difference between the subject that has faith and the object of faith. Without subject and without object, yet functioning as subject and object, both subject and object are identical to the one mind dharmadhātu, just as a lamp has illumination, which illuminates back onto the lamp itself. Therefore it is said: 'From one's own mind faith arises, and it believes back in one's own mind'—this is the unsurpassed teaching of nature-origination (xindeng/xingqi)."