大乘起信論略述 1.73

1.73

[Treatise:] "That which neither arises […] are neither one nor different." [Commentary:] This distinguishes the marks. Because the non-arising and non-ceasing mind of the tathāgatagarbha is stirred in its entirety, it is not apart from arising and ceasing; and since the marks of the mind of arising and ceasing are nothing other than the true, they are also not apart from the non-arising and non-ceasing mind. Such non-separation is termed "in union with." Both are the non-arising and non-ceasing in union with the non-arising and non-ceasing, because this is the aspect that proceeds toward the branch and accords with conditions; it is not the arising and ceasing in union with the non-arising and non-ceasing, because this is not the aspect that proceeds toward the root and returns to the true. Regarding "neither one nor different": because the entire essence of the non-arising and non-ceasing mind is stirred, the mind and arising and ceasing are not different; yet because the nature of the true mind is perpetually never lost, the mind and arising and ceasing are not one. If they were definitively one, when arising and ceasing were exhausted, the true mind would also perish, falling into the extreme of annihilation. If they were different, when perfumed by avidyā, the mind would not stir, falling into the extreme of permanence. Since it is free from both extremes, they are neither one nor different. Only because they are neither one nor different is union established.