大乘起信論裂網疏 2.16

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.