肇論疏 3.53

3.53

Movement is precisely quiescence; hence it is called 'Movement and Quiescence'. Where the Nameless says, 'The scriptures state that the sage is unconditioned,' and so forth: The sage is unfettered; non-action is precisely action, and action is precisely non-action. Where it says, 'Because of non-action, though moving he is ever quiescent,' and so forth: Because though moving he is ever quiescent, he is said to be 'unconditioned'. Because though quiescent he is ever moving, 'there is nothing he does not do'. 'None can make them one' means that people cannot make him constantly quiescent. 'None can make them two' means that people cannot make him constantly active. 'The more he moves, the more quiescent he is' means that though moving he is ever quiescent, and so the more he moves, the more still he becomes. 'The more quiescent he is, the more he moves' means that though quiescent he is ever moving, and so the more quiescent he is, the more active he becomes. Where it says, 'Therefore, doing is precisely non-doing,' and so forth: Because in moving he is ever quiescent, doing is precisely non-doing. Although movement and quiescence are distinct, they cannot be made different: though they differ, one cannot say they are different. The *Daoxing [jing]* says, 'The mind is neither existent nor non-existent'; this refers to the sage's mind. Where it says, 'That which is not existent,' and so forth: It elucidates the aforementioned 'neither existent nor non-existent'. Where it says, 'Why is this? If there is mind, then the multitude are it,' and so forth: 'The multitude' refers to sentient beings; 'multitude' means the varieties of beings. Where it says, 'The multitude are limited to deluded thoughts,' and so forth: Sentient beings are limited to having a mind of deluded thoughts; the Great Void has no discerning illumination. Where it says, 'How could one take being limited to deluded thoughts,' and so forth: One cannot take the existence of sentient beings or the non-existence of the Great Void to be the Path of non-arising or the mind of prajñā. Where it says, 'Therefore, the sage's mind is not existent, yet cannot be called non-existent,' and so forth: It clarifies the sage's mind. 'Not existent' means not dwelling in existence; one cannot thereupon call it non-existent. The following sentence is the converse of this. Where it says, 'Because it is not existent, mental concepts are completely extinguished,' and so forth: Since it says 'not existent', one clearly knows that there are no mental concepts. Since it says 'not non-existent', one clearly knows that it tallies with the wondrous principle. 'Because there is no principle with which it does not tally, the myriad virtues are thereby magnified': since it tallies with the wondrous principle, he cultivates virtue and treats things equally; since mental concepts are extinguished, he forgets himself and is free of self. Where it says, 'Therefore, his responsive manifestations are measureless,' and so forth: It again clarifies the meaning of the non-duality of movement and quiescence. The scripture says, 'The mind engages in nothing, yet engages in everything; this is trustworthy.' Since the sage's mind is like this, how could one not believe it? Where Māṇava says, 'Formerly, across countless kalpas,' and so forth: These are the words spoken when he received the prophecy. It means that now, in offering flowers, he understood emptiness; therefore it was called an offering. Furthermore, 'a bodhisattva practicing emptiness enters the liberation door of emptiness'; this is a passage from the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*. It means that now, when practicing emptiness, one should not grasp at realization. Where it says, 'If so, then the more empty the mind, the broader the practice,' and so forth: This is the second part, the direct response. From the seventh stage upward, the mind is increasingly empty and practice is increasingly vast; how could one not advance in cultivation? Therefore the *Bhadrakalpika* praises the 'giving of non-relinquishing': fascicle four of the *Bhadrakalpika-sūtra* states, 'All dharmas have no giver; this is called giving.' The *Chengju [guangming jing]* extols 'doing without doing': that sūtra states, 'Doing without doing surpasses doing.' The dhyāna texts proclaim 'compassion without conditions': those scriptures extensively clarify the meaning of great compassion without conditions. The *Viśeṣacinti* unfolds 'knowing without knowing': that sūtra states, 'Because there is nothing to be attained, one attains; because there is nothing to be known, one knows.' 'The sage's intention is subtle and profound; different passages argue the same point': 'intention' means meaning. The distinct passages of the scriptures jointly argue the sage's intention, which is that movement is precisely quiescence. Where it says, 'How could one take conditioned action to merely be conditioned action,' and so forth: It means that this is not permissible. Where it says, 'A bodhisattva abides in the equality dharma-gate of the exhausted and the unexhausted,' and so forth: This is from the *Vimalakīrti-sūtra*. Where it says, 'Yet taking south and north as an analogy,' and so forth: It refutes the previous objection.