肇論疏 3.51

3.51

[This chapter] criticises and appraises [the idea that] a bodhisattva advances in cultivation and engages in activity; hence it is called thus. This chapter stems from the meaning in the preceding eighth chapter, 'Objection on Differentiation'; it is raised once more here and then answered. Where the Named says, 'The scriptures state that from the dharmakāya upward one enters the unconditioned realm,' and so forth: A bodhisattva of the seventh stage and above realizes the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas and attains the body of dharma-nature (dharmatākāya). With their mind and form being like this, how could it be said that the bodhisattva Māṇava advanced in cultivation through the three stations and extensively accumulated all virtues? Where it says, 'Now advancing in cultivation stems from preferences,' and so forth: Advancing in cultivation implies having a mind of preference, and accumulating virtue implies having the intention of pursuing [something]. Where it says, 'When there is preference, the sentiments of taking up and abandoning appear,' and so forth: One takes up what is superior and abandons what is inferior; there is decrease and increase. Where it says, 'Since one takes taking up and abandoning as one's mind,' and so forth: If one has this mind, then it is not quiescence. Where it says, 'These texts conflict and their tenets diverge,' and so forth: It means that taking up and abandoning versus quiescence are mutually contradictory texts, and their theoretical tenets are distinct; yet now they are brought together within a single person. This is like pointing south and calling it north, attempting to enlighten a confused person—it is impossible.