大乘起信論裂網疏 2
English (machine translation) 2
- Language
- English
2.1
Narrated by the śramaṇa Zhixu of Lingfeng
2.2
Part Three: Explanation. It divides into two: first, setting forth the outline; second, the main explanation. Now the first.
2.3
"What is the section on explanation? There are three kinds: namely, revealing the true meaning; remedying wrong attachments; and distinguishing the marks of practicing the correct path."
2.4
Revealing the true meaning is to eliminate doubts; remedying wrong attachments is to remove clingings; these are precisely the awakening of faith. Distinguishing the marks of practicing the correct path is precisely continuing the Buddha lineage.
2.5
Second, the main explanation has three: first, revealing the true meaning; second, remedying wrong attachments; third, distinguishing the marks of practicing the correct path. Within the first, there are three: first, general presentation of the two aspects; next, explaining the two aspects individually; third, concluding by showing their non-separation. Now the first.
2.6
"Here, revealing the true meaning: relying on the one mind there are two aspects: namely, the aspect of the mind as tathatā, and the aspect of the mind as arising and ceasing. These two aspects each encompass all dharmas, because they are mutually inseparable."
2.7
'One mind' refers precisely to the momentary mind present right before sentient beings. Speaking of 'two aspects' does not mean that front and back or left and right are called two. It is merely that according with conditions yet immutable, this very arising-and-ceasing mind is called the aspect of tathatā; immutable yet according with conditions, this very mind of tathatā is called the aspect of arising and ceasing. It is precisely what is called 'this house has only one gate', and also what is called 'the one single path of the nirvāṇa gate of the Bhagavats of the ten directions'. But when one is deluded about it, saṃsāra begins, and tathatā in its entire essence becomes arising and ceasing; when one awakens to it, transmigration ceases, and arising and ceasing in its very essence is precisely tathatā. Therefore, the two aspects are clarified in terms of delusion and awakening. Moreover, speaking of awakening in contrast to delusion is the aspect of arising and ceasing; the equality of delusion and awakening is the aspect of tathatā. Saying that 'these two aspects each encompass all dharmas' means that in terms of the aspect of tathatā, it encompasses the hundred realms and thousand thusnesses and the hundred dharmas of the five categories, each and every one being nothing other than tathatā, because its nature is eternally equal, neither increasing nor decreasing, and without distinction. In terms of the aspect of arising and ceasing, it also encompasses the hundred realms and thousand thusnesses and the hundred dharmas of the five categories, each and every one being nothing other than arising and ceasing, because the dharmas of the six ordinary realms are formed by the causes and conditions of delusion and defilement, and the dharmas of the four noble realms are formed by the causes and conditions of awakening and purity. Throughout the worldly and the world-transcending, there is not a single dharma that is not revealed through the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing. Saying 'because they are mutually inseparable' means that apart from the one mind of tathatā, there is no arising and ceasing to be found, just as apart from direction there is no delusion or awakening, and just as apart from the wet nature there is no ice or water; apart from the one mind of arising and ceasing, there is also no tathatā to be found, just as apart from delusion and awakening there is no direction, and just as apart from ice and water there is no wet nature.
2.8
Question: Why are two aspects shown relying on the one mind? Answer: All dharmas naturally have these two aspects. Therefore, when Buddhas expound the Dharma, they always rely on the two truths: the aspect of the mind as tathatā is the ultimate truth, and the aspect of the mind as arising and ceasing is the conventional truth. Although spoken of as two truths, they are only a single dharma; therefore, the two truths are completely fused and inconceivable, so they each encompass all dharmas and are mutually inseparable. Moreover, the whole nature giving rise to both adverse and compliant cultivation is called the aspect of arising and ceasing; both adverse and compliant cultivation without altering the single nature is called the aspect of tathatā. Further, the whole principle forming phenomena is called the aspect of arising and ceasing; all phenomena being identical to principle is called the aspect of tathatā. Further, distinguishing phenomena and principle is called the aspect of arising and ceasing; obliterating phenomena and principle is called the aspect of tathatā. Further, provisional being identical to real is called the aspect of tathatā; real being identical to provisional is called the aspect of arising and ceasing. Further, distinguishing provisional and real is called the aspect of arising and ceasing; the non-duality of provisional and real is called the aspect of tathatā. Further, instituting the provisional for the sake of the real means explaining the aspect of arising and ceasing relying on the aspect of tathatā; opening the provisional to reveal the real means pointing out that the aspect of arising and ceasing is itself the aspect of tathatā. Further, instituting the provisional for the sake of the real and opening the provisional to reveal the real are both the aspect of arising and ceasing; principle being neither provisional nor real is called the aspect of tathatā. Further, expounding in accord with wisdom, arising and ceasing is itself the aspect of tathatā; expounding in accord with sentiment, tathatā is itself the aspect of arising and ceasing. Expounding in accord with both sentiment and wisdom, there are two aspects relying on the one mind.
2.9
Question: Since the two aspects are simply the two truths, how do the seven kinds of two truths subsume each other? Answer: If real existence is the conventional and the cessation of real existence is the ultimate: the conventional is subsumed under the defilement associated with attachment within the aspect of arising and ceasing; the ultimate, granting it [a concession], is subsumed under approximate awakening within the aspect of arising and ceasing, while strictly speaking it is only subsumed under the defilement associated with unceasing [flow], because it is an objective realm grasped by conceptual dharma-attachment. If illusory existence is the conventional and illusory existence as empty is the ultimate: the conventional is also subsumed under the defilement associated with attachment; the ultimate is subsumed under a minor fraction of the meaning of emptiness in the aspect of tathatā. If illusory existence is the conventional and illusory existence being both empty and not-empty together is the ultimate: the conventional is subsumed as before; the ultimate is subsumed under the meaning of original awakening in the aspect of arising and ceasing, and also subsumes a minor fraction of the meaning of emptiness in the aspect of tathatā. If illusory existence is the conventional and illusory existence being both empty and not-empty, with all dharmas converging into the empty and not-empty, is the ultimate: the conventional is subsumed as before; the ultimate is subsumed under the aspect of tathatā. If illusory existence and illusory existence being empty are both called the conventional, and neither existing nor empty is the ultimate: the conventional is subsumed under non-awakening in the aspect of arising and ceasing and also subsumes approximate awakening; the ultimate is subsumed under original awakening in the aspect of arising and ceasing. If illusory existence and illusory existence being empty are both called the conventional, and neither existing nor empty with all dharmas converging into neither existing nor empty is the ultimate: the conventional is subsumed as before; the ultimate is subsumed under the aspect of tathatā. If illusory existence, illusory existence being empty, and neither existing nor empty are all called the conventional, and all dharmas converging into existence, converging into emptiness, and converging into neither existing nor empty is the ultimate: the conventional is the aspect of the mind's arising and ceasing; the ultimate is the aspect of the mind's tathatā. Only this is the original purport of this treatise.
2.10
Question: How do the five kinds of three truths subsume each other? Answer: Illusory existence is the conventional, subsumed as before under the defilement associated with attachment. Being empty and not-empty is the ultimate; pointing to this 'not-empty' as the Middle Way: emptiness is a minor fraction of the meaning of emptiness in the aspect of tathatā, and the Middle is merely the meaning of original awakening in the aspect of arising and ceasing. If all dharmas converge into the empty and not-empty, and one points to this 'not-empty' as the Middle Way: emptiness is the meaning of emptiness in the aspect of tathatā, and the Middle is the meaning of not-empty in the aspect of tathatā. If one divides the conventional of illusory existence and illusory existence being empty into the two truths of ultimate and conventional, designating the ultimate of neither existing nor empty as the truth of the Middle: the conventional is subsumed under the defilement associated with attachment, the ultimate is subsumed under approximate awakening, and the Middle is subsumed under original awakening. If all dharmas converge into the Middle: the conventional and the ultimate are subsumed as before, while the Middle is subsumed under the meaning of not-empty in the aspect of tathatā. As for the perfect and wondrous three truths: the ultimate is the meaning of emptiness in the aspect of tathatā, the conventional entirely subsumes the meanings of awakening and non-awakening in the aspect of arising and ceasing, and the Middle is the meaning of not-empty in the aspect of tathatā. Because the one mind and two aspects are mutually inseparable, the one mind and three truths are perfectly integrated and inconceivable. One must understand that the principle fundamentally contains the three truths, but when principle integrates phenomena, there are no phenomena that are not principle, hence collapsing the three into two; phenomena also contain the three truths, but when phenomena manifest principle, there is no principle that is not phenomena, hence collapsing the three into one.
2.11
Next, explaining each of the two aspects has two parts: first, explaining the aspect of the mind's tathatā; second, explaining the aspect of the mind's arising and ceasing. Within the first, there are two parts: first, directly explaining the mark of this mind's tathatā; second, pointing directly to the essence of the Mahāyāna. The first further has two parts: first, directly expressing the essence of the dharma; second, clarifying compliance and awakening-entry. The first further has two parts: first, borrowing words to express the dharma; second, revealing that the dharma is free from words. Now, the first.
2.12
The mind's tathatā is the essence of the dharma-gate of the great general characteristic of the one dharmadhātu. This is because the fundamental nature of the mind is the mark of neither arising nor ceasing. All dharmas possess distinctions solely due to deluded thoughts; if one is free from deluded thoughts, then there are no marks of distinction among objective realms. Therefore, all dharmas from the beginning have in their nature been free from speech, cannot be overtly expressed by any written words, and, apart from the mind's cognitive grasping, have no marks whatsoever; they are ultimately equal, eternally without alteration, indestructible, and solely the one mind, and for that reason are called tathatā.
2.13
'Mind' directly designates sentient beings' momentary mind in the present. 'True' (tatha-) means that its nature is not false, because it is neither the fleshy mass [of the heart] nor the shadow of conditioned [objects], and it is free from false marks such as inner, outer, middle, past, present, future, demarcations, directions, and the like. 'Such' (-tā) means that its nature is not differentiated, because it is without arising and without ceasing, without defilement and without purity, without increase and without decrease, and free from distinctions. For tathatā is immutable yet accords with conditions, its entire essence becoming sentient beings' momentary mind in the present. This mind accords with conditions yet is immutable, still remaining the complete essence of the tathatā-dharmadhātu; hence it is said to be 'the essence of the dharma-gate of the great general characteristic of the one dharmadhātu.' Never having been dual, it is forced to be called 'one.' As the original source of all dharmas, it is forced to be called 'dharmadhātu.' Absolute and without an exterior, it is forced to be called 'great.' Having one mark which is markless, and being without marks of distinction, it is forced to be called 'general characteristic.' Capable of providing a standard and sustaining [its own character], it is forced to be called 'dharma.' Pervading everywhere without obstruction, it is forced to be called 'gate.' It is like the great ocean whose entire essence forms a bubble: examining this single bubble, it has no separate essence of its own, but merely takes the wet nature of the ocean as its essence; and this wet nature of a single bubble is the complete wet nature of the great ocean, having neither a dual nature nor any distinct mark. It is also like the light of the sun whose entire essence enters a chink: examining this chink of light, it has no separate essence of its own, but merely takes the brilliance of the sun-disk as its essence; and this luminous nature of a single chink is the complete luminous nature of the sun-disk, having neither a dual nature nor any distinct mark. From 'This is because the fundamental nature of the mind' downward explains this meaning. It means that, by virtue of the fundamental nature of sentient beings' momentary mind in the present, it does not arise because it has no beginning in the past, and it does not cease because it has no end in the future. It is like empty space, which does not exist temporarily nor can it be temporarily nonexistent, yet it is also not like the mark of empty space displayed in contrast to matter; therefore, out of necessity, it is forced to be called the mark of neither arising nor ceasing. Here, someone might ask: 'The sūtras often say that when the mind arises dharmas arise, and when the mind ceases dharmas cease. Now, directly witnessing all dharmas having various distinctions of arising and ceasing, is this not the very arising and ceasing of the mind? Why do you say it is the mark of neither arising nor ceasing?' Therefore, it is now explained: 'All dharmas possess distinctions solely due to deluded thoughts.' It is like diseased eyes falsely seeing flowers in the sky; 'if one is free from deluded thoughts, then there are no marks of distinction among objective realms.' It is like when the eye disease is eliminated, there are no marks of the arising and ceasing of flowers in the sky. Therefore, the tathatā of the mind is the tathatā of all dharmas, and the tathatā of all dharmas is the tathatā of the mind. Since the mind from the beginning has in its nature been free from speech, cannot be overtly expressed by any written words, is apart from the mind's cognitive grasping, has no marks whatsoever, is ultimately equal, eternally without alteration, and indestructible, therefore all dharmas are also from the beginning free from speech, up to being indestructible. Thus all buddhas, all sentient beings, and all provisional and real lands ultimately take solely the one pure mind as their essence, and apart from the one mind there are no other dharmas; hence, out of necessity, it is called tathatā.
2.14
Second, revealing that the dharma is free from words.
2.15
From the beginning it cannot be spoken of and cannot be conceptualized; all verbal explanations are merely provisional and not real, because they merely accord with deluded thoughts and are nonexistent. What is called tathatā is also markless; it is merely the culmination of all verbal explanations, using words to dismiss words, not that its essential nature has anything that can be dismissed or anything that can be established.
2.16
This clarifies that the nature of the mind's tathatā is the nature of the tathatā of all dharmas. The path of language is cut off, hence it cannot be spoken of; the place where the mind functions is extinguished, hence it cannot be conceptualized. Moreover, consider worldly things: calling 'fire' does not make it hot, and calling 'water' does not make it wet, so they cannot be spoken of either. Thinking of fire does not burn, and thinking of water does not drench, so they cannot be conceptualized either. How much less can tathatā, the ultimate truth, free from errors and cutting off non-[truth], which is only tacitly realized by the sacred wisdom of personal awakening, be spoken of or conceptualized! For all verbal explanations are merely provisional designations, not possessing real meaning; they are merely forced impositions following upon deluded thoughts, and are ultimately nonexistent. Here, someone might ask: 'Since you say it cannot be spoken of, are not the two words "tathatā" themselves speech? Since you say it cannot be conceptualized, is not the mark of tathatā's neither arising nor ceasing itself a mark?' Therefore, it is now explained: 'What is called tathatā is also markless; it is merely the culmination of all verbal explanations, using words to dismiss words,' and that is all. As the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: 'Tathatā is also a provisionally posited designation: to refute the rejection [of dharmas] as nonexistent, it is spoken of as existent; to refute the grasping [of dharmas] as existent, it is spoken of as empty; lest it be deemed illusory, it is spoken of as real; because its principle is not false and inverted, it is called tathatā. It is unlike other schools where there is a real, permanent dharma apart from form, mind, and so forth, called tathatā.' (Text) This is precisely the purport of it being the culmination of verbal explanations, using words to dismiss words. Furthermore, fearing that confused people, upon hearing this dismissal of words, might mistakenly reckon that there is a dharma to be dismissed, it says: 'not that its essential nature has anything that can be dismissed.' Still fearing that confused people, upon hearing that there is nothing to dismiss, might mistakenly reckon that there is a dharma to be established, it says: 'or anything that can be established.' Indeed, having nothing that can be dismissed, it is not inert emptiness; having nothing that can be established, it is not illusory existence. Because it is not illusory existence, it establishes the meaning of true emptiness; because it is not inert emptiness, it establishes the meaning of true non-emptiness. The Liang translation says: 'This essence of tathatā has nothing that can be dismissed, because all dharmas are completely true. Nor is there anything that can be established, because all dharmas are equally such.' The Da foding jing says: 'The five aggregates, six sense-entrances, twelve sense-bases, and eighteen elements, arising, ceasing, departing, and coming, are all the wondrous tathatā-nature of the tathāgatagarbha.' This is the meaning of having nothing that can be dismissed. It also says: 'Within the true, permanent nature, seeking for coming, going, delusion, awakening, birth, and death, nothing whatsoever can be found.' This is the meaning of having nothing that can be established. The first part, directly expressing the essence of the dharma, is concluded.
2.17
Second, clarifying compliance and awakening-entry.
2.18
Question: If it is like this, how do sentient beings comply with it and enter awakening? Answer: If one knows that although all dharmas are spoken of, there is no speaker and nothing spoken; and although all dharmas are thought of, there is no thinker and nothing thought. At that time, this is compliance; when deluded thoughts are entirely exhausted, this is called awakening-entry.
2.19
Tathatā is the real nature of all dharmas, the real nature of all speech, and the real nature of all thought; hence it originally does not exist outside of all dharmas, all speech, and all thought. However, by being immutable yet according with conditions, its entire essence becomes the speaker and the spoken, the thinker and the thought. According with conditions yet immutable, all speakers, what is spoken, thinkers, and what is thought are tathatā, their nature being eternally equal without distinction. Sentient beings do not know this, and within the equal dharma of tathatā, falsely reckon the speaking, spoken, thinking, and thought to be real existents; this is contrary to tathatā, yet ultimately does not fall outside the nature of tathatā, which may also be called compliance at the stage of principle. If, right within these deluded thoughts, one hears the Mahāyāna teaching and is able to know their lack of intrinsic nature, this is compliance at the stage of names and words. If one causes this knowledge to continue thought after thought to form wisdom born of reflection, this is compliance at the stage of contemplative practice. If one causes this knowledge to become naturally mature to form wisdom born of cultivation, this is compliance at the stage of resemblance. If, on the basis of this knowledge, one helps arouse the wondrous observing wisdom to contact and realize tathatā, this is the complete exhaustion of deluded thoughts, which is compliance at the stage of partial realization, further named 'awakening-entry.'
2.20
Question: If deluded thoughts are entirely exhausted, this should be the mark of the ultimate stage; why is it called "partial realization"? Answer: At the time of the true path of seeing, because all conceptual discriminations do not become active, and because the tathatā realized is without limitation, it may also be said to be "entirely exhausted". All subsequent advancements consist of untainted wisdom factors and are called true cultivation. Unlike the tainted wisdom born of hearing, contemplation, and cultivation, which is called conditioned cultivation, they are therefore no longer called deluded thoughts.
2.21
Question: The advancements of true cultivation are indeed not called deluded thoughts; but when emerging from contemplation, subtle deluded thoughts of ignorance still become active—how can they be called "entirely exhausted"? Answer: If upon emerging from contemplation a subtle deluded thought occasionally arises, that is not called accordant. As the saying goes, "Only a sage who neglects mindfulness becomes foolish." If at [the stage of] verbal understanding one can know that deluded thoughts lack self-nature, that is also called accordant, as the saying goes, "Only the foolish who master mindfulness become sages." In brief, the principle-identity is pure discordance, while the ultimate is pure accordance. From verbal understanding on up to virtual enlightenment and below, discordance and accordance are entirely intermingled. It is like the waxing moon from the first night to the fourteenth night: although the light gradually increases, the dark aspects are not yet exhausted. But having partially realized, one has attained the untainted and never regresses. It is like the crescent moon when first appearing, whose light shines upon the great earth; it may also be called "deluded thoughts entirely exhausted". The first part, correctly explaining the mark of tathatā of this mind, is concluded.
2.22
Second, revealing the essence of the Mahāyāna, which has two [parts]: first, a brief indication and explanation; second, an extensive explanation and establishment. Now, the first.
2.23
"Furthermore, tathatā, when established in reliance on verbal expression, has two kinds of distinction: first, genuinely empty, because it is ultimately free from unreal marks and reveals the real essence; second, genuinely non-empty, because its original nature is replete with boundless virtues and it possesses its own essence."
2.24
Tathatā is free from the marks of verbal expression, yet it is established in reliance on verbal expression with a view to the aspect of arising and ceasing below. By force, with respect to the essence devoid of name and mark, these provisional names are borrowed to explain it, enabling people to see the real moon of the essence by means of the finger of provisional names. Yet tathatā is not even one; how could there be two distinctions? It is merely because the imagined is originally non-existent and the other-dependent is like an illusion that it is called genuinely empty; and because the consummate is originally replete, it is again called genuinely non-empty. Only by emptying the imagined and the other-dependent is the consummate non-empty revealed. For example, only by understanding that the snake is non-existent and realizing that the rope is not real is the non-emptiness of the hemp's substance revealed. Only by seeing that the consummate is non-empty does one believe that the imagined and the other-dependent are non-existent. For example, upon seeing the four subtle atoms of the hemp, one knows that the snake is certainly originally non-existent and the rope is also not real. It is just this momentary mind-nature present before sentient beings: it originally has no real self and no real dharmas, nor any differentiated illusory marks such as the five categories of one hundred dharmas or the hundred realms and thousand suchnesses; hence it says "ultimately free from unreal marks". By this, it reveals that the mind-nature is entirely real in its delusion, the true and permanent uniquely laid bare; hence it says "reveals the real essence". Since the real essence is revealed, one knows that this mind's original nature is inherently replete with boundless virtues—the so-called three thousand inherently present in principle and the three thousand manifested in phenomena. Because all marks of virtue and all functions of activity are identical with the essence of tathatā and without differentiation, every dust mote is the Flower Treasury and every thought is Vairocana, mutually pervasive and mutually interfused, yet without fixed location. For emptiness and non-emptiness are exclusively the essence of the tathatā of the one mind. This essence of tathatā is precisely the essence of the Mahāyāna.
2.25
Second, the extensive explanation and establishment, which has three [parts]: first, explaining the meaning of empty; second, explaining the meaning of non-empty. Now, the first.
2.26
"Furthermore, as for being genuinely empty: because from the beginningless past it does not associate with any defiled dharmas, because it is free from the differentiated marks of all dharmas, and because it has no false and discriminative mind. It should be known that tathatā is neither with marks nor without marks, neither [both] with [and] without marks, nor neither with [nor] without marks; it is neither a single mark nor differentiated marks, neither [both] a single [and] differentiated marks, nor neither a single [nor] differentiated marks. In brief, because it cannot be touched [and realized] by the falsely discriminative minds of all sentient beings, it is established as empty. According to the true principle, deluded thoughts are non-existent, and the nature of emptiness is also empty, because that which is refuted is non-existent, and that which refutes is also non-existent."
2.27
This clarifies that "genuinely empty" merely expresses that on the essence of tathatā there is originally no defiled delusion, and so the word "empty" is used to refute its deluded existence; it does not point to this emptiness as the essence of tathatā. As for the momentary mind-nature present before us, seeking it from the beginningless past it is completely unattainable; how could it associate with defiled dharmas? How could it possess differentiated marks of phenomena? Where could there be room for false discrimination? Therefore, the four marks of existence and non-existence, and the four marks of oneness and difference, are all empty, up to all falsely discriminative minds being entirely incapable of touching and realizing this mind-nature. However, although it is said that the falsely discriminative mind cannot touch it, this falsely discriminative mind itself is completely unattainable when sought, up to all defiled dharmas being originally unattainable and all differentiations being originally unattainable; how could one wait for emptiness to eliminate them before they become empty! If one eliminates delusion and preserves emptiness, emptiness is still delusion. Now, in speaking of "empty", it merely refutes deluded thoughts to make clear original emptiness; it does not point to this emptiness as tathatā.
2.28
Second, explaining the meaning of non-empty.
2.29
"As for what is called genuinely non-empty: because deluded thoughts are empty and non-existent, the true mind is revealed to be eternal and immutable, replete with pure dharmas; hence it is called non-empty. Yet it also has no mark of non-emptiness, because it is not an object traversed by the mind of deluded thoughts, and is realized only by those who are free from thoughts."
2.30
This clarifies that "genuinely non-empty" means that if one can only realize that deluded thoughts are originally empty, the true mind is revealed to be eternal and immutable, replete with pure dharmas, and so it is expressed as non-empty; it is not the same as the mark of non-emptiness conceived by deluded thoughts. If one takes the non-emptiness conceived by deluded thoughts to be the mark of tathatā, that would be identical to the conception of other schools that apart from form, mind, and so forth there is a real, permanent dharma called tathatā—which is an extreme error. In the text, "eternal" is the virtue of permanence; "immutable" is the virtue of self; "pure dharmas" is the virtue of purity; "replete essence" is the virtue of bliss. The four virtues are inconceivable; hence it is realized only by those who are free from thoughts. The first part, explaining the aspect of tathatā, is concluded.
2.31
Second, explaining the aspect of the mind's arising and ceasing, which has two [parts]: first, correctly explaining the marks of the causes and conditions of this mind's arising and ceasing; second, revealing the essence, marks, and function of the Mahāyāna. Under the first there are two: first, explaining the arising and ceasing of defilement and purity; second, explaining the perfuming of defilement and purity. Under the first there are three: first, correctly explaining the mind's arising and ceasing; second, explaining the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing; third, distinguishing the marks of arising and ceasing. The first again has three: first, setting forth names and listing meanings; second, explaining each according to its meaning; third, generally distinguishing identity and difference. Now, the first.
2.32
"As for the aspect of the mind's arising and ceasing: it means that in reliance on the tathāgatagarbha there is the evolution of the mind of arising and ceasing. The non-arising-and-ceasing and arising-and-ceasing harmonize, being neither one nor different, which is called the ālayavijñāna. This consciousness has two kinds of meanings: it can subsume all dharmas, and it can produce all dharmas. Furthermore, it has two kinds of meanings: first, the meaning of enlightenment; second, the meaning of non-enlightenment."
2.33
The tathāgatagarbha is precisely tathatā. Tathatā is immutable yet accords with conditions, its entire essence becoming arising and ceasing. Now, instead of saying that in reliance on tathatā there is the evolution of the mind of arising and ceasing, it says that in reliance on the tathāgatagarbha there is the evolution of the mind of arising and ceasing, because tathatā designates the essence of this mind, like pointing to the wet nature of water; whereas tathāgatagarbha designates the mark of this mind, like pointing to the water of wet nature. Since tathatā neither arises nor ceases, the tathāgatagarbha likewise neither arises nor ceases. Tathatā accords with conditions in its entire essence; therefore, in reliance on the eighth, the tathāgatagarbha, there is the evolution of the mind of arising and ceasing of the preceding seven consciousnesses. These preceding seven consciousnesses all arise in reliance on the eighth consciousness and all take tathatā as their essence, just as waves arise in reliance on water, and the waves also take wetness as their essence. The eighth consciousness and the preceding seven consciousnesses rely on each other in turn and are causes and effects to each other, like water and waves; hence it is called "harmonize". Because the marks of the perfuming agent and the object of perfuming are distinct, they are "not one"; because they equally take tathatā as their essence, they are "not different". Because it has the meanings of storing, being stored, and being clung to as store, it further receives the name ālaya (ālaya is translated here as "store"). Because its essence is tathatā, it can subsume all dharmas; because it receives perfuming and holds seeds, it can produce all dharmas.
2.34
Question: The essence of the ālaya is tathatā, and the ālaya can subsume all dharmas; since tathatā in its entire essence becomes the ālaya, tathatā should also produce all dharmas. Answer: The principle is indeed so. However, when viewed in terms of being immutable yet according with conditions, it is called tathāgatagarbha and is also called ālaya; therefore it may be said to produce all dharmas. If viewed in terms of according with conditions yet immutable, it is called tathatā; it can only be said to subsume all dharmas, all being non-arising and non-ceasing, and cannot be said to produce all dharmas.
2.35
Question: Since tathatā cannot be said to produce all dharmas, the ālaya should also not be said to subsume all dharmas. Answer: The ālaya entirely takes tathatā as its essence and is not a partial fraction of tathatā; therefore it can subsume all dharmas. Subsuming all dharmas is precisely the three thousand inherently present in principle; producing all dharmas is precisely the three thousand manifested in phenomena. Only because there is inherent presence in principle can there be manifestation in phenomena; only through manifestation in phenomena is inherent presence in principle revealed. If it did not subsume all dharmas, how could it produce all dharmas? If it did not produce all dharmas, how could it reveal the subsumption of all dharmas? Furthermore, tathatā and the ālaya are neither one nor different. Because they are not different, both are said to subsume all dharmas; because they are not one, tathatā is not said to produce all dharmas. Furthermore, tathatā is immutable yet accords with conditions: not only does its entire essence become the tathāgatagarbha and ālayavijñāna, but its entire essence also becomes the evolving consciousnesses and all dharmas. For example, the wet nature not only becomes water in its entire essence, but also becomes waves in its entire essence. Therefore, each evolving consciousness and all dharmas, according with conditions yet immutable, are the entire essence of tathatā, not a partial fraction of tathatā. It should be known that each evolving consciousness and all dharmas, according to the true principle, can each without exception subsume all dharmas and produce all dharmas. Now, merely explaining that the ālaya can subsume and can produce speaks provisionally with respect to the differentiated marks within the aspect of arising and ceasing. If viewed in terms of the identical mark, all are the entire essence of tathatā, and all possess the great function of tathatā. Furthermore, although the marks of the preceding seven evolving consciousnesses arise and cease, their essence is tathatā, originally non-arising and non-ceasing; although the essence of the tathāgatagarbha neither arises nor ceases, since it accords with causes and conditions, its marks also arise and cease. Now, merely designating the seven evolving consciousnesses as the mind of arising and ceasing, and the tathāgatagarbha as non-arising-and-ceasing, speaks provisionally with respect to the meaning of "not one" within the aspect of arising and ceasing. If spoken of in terms of the meaning of "not different", the arising and ceasing of the seven consciousnesses is precisely the arising and ceasing of the store consciousness; the non-arising-and-ceasing of the store consciousness is precisely the non-arising-and-ceasing of the seven consciousnesses. Thus the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: "The seven consciousnesses do not transmigrate, do not experience suffering and pleasure, and are not the cause of nirvāṇa"—which is the meaning of the seven consciousnesses being non-arising and non-ceasing. It also says: "The tathāgatagarbha experiences suffering and pleasure, is conjoined with causes, and both arises and ceases"—which is the meaning of the store consciousness arising and ceasing. The phrase "furthermore, it has two kinds of meanings" means that within this store consciousness, from the beginningless past, there are inherently present seeds of untainted wisdom and virtue that can produce all untainted dharmas, which is called the meaning of enlightenment; and there are inherently present seeds of tainted ignorance that can produce all tainted dharmas, which is called the meaning of non-enlightenment.
2.36
Question: Below, in explaining the meaning of enlightenment, [the text] says: "That is, the supreme nature of the mind is the equal dharmakāya of all Tathāgatas, which is spoken of as original enlightenment." How can it be explained by means of untainted seeds? Answer: Tathatā is immutable yet accords with conditions, its entire essence becoming untainted and tainted, whether as seeds or as actualisations. Therefore it says below: "Such diverse illusory functions of untaintedness and ignorance are all identical with the true mark." Now, if the seeds and actualisations of ignorance are still identical with the true mark, how much more so the untainted seeds and actualisations—are they not the supreme nature itself? Are they not the equal dharmakāya of all Tathāgatas? Truly, because untainted seeds are originally self-existent, they are called original enlightenment; because the mental categories of the four wisdoms first arise as actualisations, they are called initial enlightenment. The mental categories of the four wisdoms achieved in the fruit of Buddhahood are identical with the untainted seeds, their entire essence being tathatā, without increase or decrease, equally equal; hence it is said that initial enlightenment is original enlightenment. May you happily abandon old attachments and deeply reflect upon this!
2.37
Second, explaining each according to its meaning, which has two parts: first, explaining the meaning of enlightenment; second, explaining the meaning of non-enlightenment. The first has three parts: first, universally establishing the two enlightenments, original and initial; second, separately distinguishing the two enlightenments, original and initial; third, universally revealing the four great meanings. Now for the first.
2.38
"The meaning of enlightenment is: the supreme nature of the mind is free from all marks of deluded thought. Because it is free from all marks of deluded thought, it equals the realm of empty space, pervading everywhere; the single mark of the dharmadhātu is the equal dharmakāya of all Tathāgatas. In reliance upon this dharmakāya, it is said that all Tathāgatas are original enlightenment. In relation to initial enlightenment, it is established as original enlightenment. Yet at the time of initial enlightenment, it is original enlightenment itself; no other enlightenment arises. In establishing initial enlightenment: in reliance upon original enlightenment there is non-enlightenment, and in reliance upon non-enlightenment it is said that there is initial enlightenment."
2.39
"Mind" refers to the present fleeting mind of sentient beings. "The supreme nature" refers to the untainted seeds, accomplished from beginninglessness and unchanging, which is called "nature". "Free from all marks of deluded thought" means that although these untainted seeds depend upon the fundamental consciousness, they cannot be cognised by the fundamental consciousness. "Equals the realm of empty space, pervading everywhere" means that the nature of these untainted seeds conforms to tathatā and cannot be confined by spatial limits or bodily forms. "The single mark of the dharmadhātu" means that since these untainted seeds conform to tathatā, they share the same inconceivable mark as the tathatā dharmadhātu. "Is the equal dharmakāya of all Tathāgatas" means that wisdom and tathatā are equally equal; simply this suchness and the wisdom of suchness are what all Tathāgatas mutually realise, collectively named the dharmakāya. "In reliance upon this dharmakāya it is said to be original enlightenment" means that although it seems newly attained, it is actually the old Buddha. "In relation to initial enlightenment it is established as original enlightenment" means that although it is the old Buddha, this does not hinder newly attaining it. "Yet at the time of initial enlightenment, it is original enlightenment itself; no other enlightenment arises" means that the seeds in their entire essence become the actualisations, and the actualisations do not alter the beginningless seeds, just as water becomes ice and ice turns back into water—there is no other new water. Someone might ask: "Since it says that no other enlightenment arises, how can it be called initial enlightenment?" Therefore it is now answered: in reliance upon original enlightenment there is non-enlightenment, like water becoming ice; in reliance upon non-enlightenment it is said that there is initial enlightenment, like ice first melting into water. Further relying on the text below, this may be clarified with an analogy: the Tathāgatagarbha is tathatā, like the fixed directions of east and west, which are neither delusion nor awakening, yet can serve as the support for delusion and awakening. Since there are these fixed directions of east and west, there must be this knowing that knows east and knows west, which is the meaning of original enlightenment contained within the fixed directions. Having never known from the beginning, it is called delusion; this is the meaning of non-enlightenment contained within the fixed directions. Due to non-enlightenment, taking east for west and taking west for east—this is the mark of deluded thought of the transforming consciousness arising within the fixed directions. The fixed directions either accord with conditions of delusion or accord with conditions of awakening; there is never a time when they do not accord with conditions; hence there are the two meanings of enlightenment and non-enlightenment, termed the aspect of arising and ceasing. Delusion is also this direction, and awakening is also this direction, definitely not changing according to conditions; this is termed the aspect of tathatā. When deluded, one is deluded about this tathatā to form arising and ceasing, and speaking of awakening in contrast to delusion, awakening must also belong to the aspect of arising and ceasing; this is what is called "words of delusion reveal the true, yet delusion and truth are both dual delusions." When awakened, one awakens to these arisings and ceasings as being tathatā itself, and in the truth there is neither delusion nor awakening, so delusion also wholly returns to the aspect of tathatā; this is what is called "all sentient beings are identical with the mark of nirvāṇa and cannot be extinguished again; they are identical with the mark of bodhi and cannot be attained again." Vijñaptimātra also clarifies that the seeds of all dharmas exist only conventionally, not as ultimate truth, which is just like having the two dharmas of delusion and awakening in reliance upon direction. It also clarifies that tathatā is the real nature of consciousness, and there is no separate tathatā outside of matter and mind, which is just like discerning directions in reliance upon delusion and awakening; outside the two minds of delusion and awakening, how could any separate direction be found? Alas! It is clear that Aśvaghoṣa and Dharmapāla definitely have no two different intentions!
2.40
Second, separately distinguishing the two enlightenments, initial and original, which has two parts: first, distinguishing the meaning of initial enlightenment; second, distinguishing the meaning of original enlightenment. The first has three parts: first, universally indicating the shallow and deep; second, explaining in detail the shallow and deep; third, clarifying that the shallow and deep are without nature. Now for the first.
2.41
"Furthermore, because one is enlightened to the source of the mind, it is called ultimate enlightenment; because one is not enlightened to the source of the mind, it is not ultimate enlightenment."
2.42
To strictly determine the meaning of enlightenment possessed by the storehouse consciousness, it is simply the mental factor of wisdom (prajñā/mati) among the five object-determining mental factors. This mental factor of wisdom also completely grasps tathatā as its essence, and therefore can embrace all dharmas and produce all dharmas. For instance, the views of a personal self held by non-Buddhists and ordinary beings, and the views of a dharma-self held by ordinary beings, non-Buddhists, and the two vehicles, are defiled wisdom; cleverness and skillfulness possessed by all worldly beings are neutral wisdom; right views possessed by all worldly beings are tainted wholesome wisdom; the categories of wisdom of emptiness of self possessed by the three vehicles are untainted wisdom, also called shared prajñā; the categories of wisdom of emptiness of dharmas possessed by the Mahāyāna are also untainted wisdom, additionally called unshared prajñā; the mental categories of the four wisdoms possessed by all Buddhas are inconceivable wisdom, also called unsurpassed bodhi. Furthermore, the preparatory non-conceptual wisdom is the tainted wisdom of hearing, contemplation, and cultivation; the fundamental non-conceptual wisdom is real wisdom; the subsequent non-conceptual wisdom is provisional wisdom. Furthermore, during the cause, illuminating principle is called wisdom of the path; illuminating phenomena is called wisdom of path-species. In the fruit, illuminating principle is called all-knowledge; illuminating phenomena is called knowledge of all aspects. Alternatively, illuminating truth is called all-knowledge; illuminating the conventional is called wisdom of path-species; illuminating the middle is called knowledge of all aspects. Such diverse names and diverse combinations are all the single mental factor of wisdom, and all constitute what is called the meaning of enlightenment here. Or, taking only the untainted is called enlightenment. Only the four-wisdom bodhi of the Buddhas can fully awaken to the fundamental source of the mind, which is called ultimate enlightenment; everything below this is not ultimate enlightenment.
2.43
Second, explaining in detail the shallow and deep.
2.44
"As an ordinary person whose previous thought was not enlightened, afflictions arose, and with a subsequent thought subdues them so they do not arise again: although this is called enlightenment, it is indeed non-enlightenment."
2.45
Non-enlightenment is ignorance. Ignorance is the mental factor of delusion (moha) among the fundamental afflictions. This mental factor of delusion also completely grasps tathatā as its essence, and therefore also embraces all dharmas and produces all dharmas. If it is the delusion of a dharma-self associated with the seventh consciousness, it is called fundamental ignorance, which is what the text below calls "not knowing truly that the true dharma is one." Its actualisation is subdued only when the wisdom of equality manifests before one; its seeds are severed only by the vajropamasamādhi right before becoming a Buddha; severing this is called being a Buddha. If it is the delusion of a personal self associated with the seventh consciousness, it is called ever-active unshared ignorance, which is severed only when the three vehicles realise the stage of no-more-learning. If it is the delusion of a dharma-self associated with the sixth consciousness, there are two kinds: one is discriminating dharma-delusion, severed suddenly upon ascending to the first bhūmi; the other is innate dharma-delusion, severed gradually part by part throughout the ten bhūmis, ending only upon Buddhahood. If it is the delusion of a personal self associated with the sixth consciousness, there are also two kinds: one is discriminating self-delusion, severed suddenly at the initial path of seeing of the three vehicles; the other is innate self-delusion, severed gradually part by part in the path of cultivation of the three vehicles, ending only when realising the stage of no-more-learning. If it is innate delusion associated with the first five consciousnesses, its presence or absence follows the sixth consciousness, being severed completely only in the fruit of Buddhahood. Thus, due to this delusion, there are the six ordinary dharmadhātus; due to transforming this delusion into non-delusion, there are the four noble dharmadhātus. Does it not embrace all dharmas and produce all dharmas? Now, in saying that an ordinary person's previous thought was not enlightened, this is spoken provisionally in terms of either discriminating delusion or innate delusion associated with the sixth consciousness, since the delusion of the seventh consciousness must be ever-active, needless to say. "Afflictions arose" means the arising of defilements such as greed and anger associated with the first six consciousnesses. "With a subsequent thought subdues them so they do not arise again" means applying either worldly right view or the tainted wisdom of hearing and contemplation as an antidote. "Although this is called enlightenment" is because it is wholesome wisdom. "It is indeed non-enlightenment" is because it is not yet untainted.
First 45 of 93 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 大乘起信論裂網疏 — Classical Chinese