肇論疏 2.57

2.57

Second, specifically answering the earlier three questions, which forms three sections. Here he answers the first question concerning whether the essence of wisdom possesses knowledge or lacks knowledge. In this text there are four parts: first, directly answering the question; second, discerning the sage's mind; third, rebuking conceptual clinging; and fourth, interrogating erroneous views. Although there are four sections, all together they constitute the answer to the question. Here, the first part quotes his earlier words. The meaning of "marvelously reaching the end and darkly tallying cannot be named in terms of samādhi and prajñā": "marvelously reaching the end and darkly tallying" is the mind of prajñā, of one characteristic and non-dual; how could one say that within it there are the two designations "samādhi" and "prajñā"? Regarding "spiritually tranquil, responding singularly, it cannot be said to cease in correspondence to the multiplicity of things": this is the mind of prajñā, which leaves nothing unilluminated; how could one say it does not respond to the multiplicity of things? Regarding "although the two statements differ, their marvelous function is ever one": "marvelously reaching the end and darkly tallying" is one statement, and "spiritually tranquil, responding singularly" is another statement; one is movement, and one is stillness. From the perspective of our seeing its traces, movement and stillness differ; but in terms of the sage's fundamental mind, movement and stillness are non-dual.