御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.110

2.110

Sūtra: “What is called mental abiding is non-abiding, [...] past mind cannot be apprehended, and so forth.”
Exposition: These initial minds to be known encompass both defiled and pure. Defiled minds are accompanied by desire, co-occurring with desire; pure minds are separated from desire. Saying "non-mental abiding," etc.: because they abide in the three times and abide in defilement and purity, they are called "abiding"; in terms of the paramārtha, it is spoken of as "non-abiding," for within the true supreme meaning there are no characteristics of mental abiding as defiled or pure. This means: because the Buddha sees that the mind is not mind and attains the true principle, he is able to know comprehensively. If one grasps mental marks, obstruction arises at every turn and one cannot comprehensively know the minds of sentient beings. This answers the previous question; otherwise, it would be loose and incomplete, with nowhere to conclude. That commentary focuses on the ability to know defiled minds, explaining them as inversions. Why is this? Because those defiled minds can act as obstructions and are precisely what are to be delivered; therefore, singling them out does not contradict this commentary. It says: "The Tathāgata speaks of all mental abidings as non-mental abidings; this sentence shows being far removed from the four applications of mindfulness." By what meaning is it "mental abiding"? Abiding in those applications of mindfulness; and because of being separated from those applications of mindfulness, it is called "non-abiding." Exposition: Generally discussing mental abiding, it naturally has two meanings: first, an ignorant person being defiled and attached to objects is called abiding; second, the worthy and noble abiding by observing the four applications of mindfulness is also called abiding. Here, speaking of the defiled mind, being separated from that mindful abiding is called non-abiding. "This is named mental abiding" generally concludes that ordinary fools abide in inversion. That [commentary] also says: "Furthermore, 'abiding', 'unmoving', and 'fundamental' have different names but one meaning." Jin'gangxian explains: "Because with the four applications of mindfulness one lodges the mind in the principle of tathatā, it is called abiding; not being destroyed by the five desires, nor being destroyed by the two vehicles, it is called unmoving; being able to serve as the foundation for bodhi, it is called fundamental." Exposition: Although the three names are different, what they signify identically refers to the application of mindfulness; hence it says "different names but one meaning." This is a general explanation of the alternative names for the application of mindfulness. The new commentary is slightly different, and one should consult that text.