大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 3.11

3.11

論。是故一切至無始無明　釋曰。此顯不覺之失也。文中三節。謂標釋結。是故等者乘前標也。是前無念名為覺故。除佛已還不名為覺。以從等者。釋所以也。若除佛外不名覺者。何故前言隨分覺等。以從無始至成佛來無明之念念念相續未曾離故。新論意同前對四相夢之差別故說漸覺。今約無明眠之無異故說不覺。如仁王經同此義云。始從伏忍至頂三昧照第一義不名為見。所謂見者是薩婆若故。故說無始無明者。結不覺義。謂從無始而有無明。既依無明而起諸念。故有念者說彼皆是無始無明不名覺也。新論無此文義亦足。

Treatise: Therefore all [...] beginningless avidyā. Commentary: This shows the fault of non-awakening. In the text there are three sections: designation, explanation, and conclusion. "Therefore" and so forth follows upon the previous to designate it: because the previous thoughtlessness is called awakening, all except the Buddha are not called awakening. In "because from [...]" and so forth, it explains the reason. If none except the Buddha are called awakening, why did it previously speak of "partial awakening" and so forth? Because from beginningless time until attaining Buddhahood, the thoughts of avidyā have continued thought after thought without ever having departed. The intention of the new treatise is the same: previously, in contrast to the differences among the dreams of the four characteristics, gradual awakening was taught; now, in terms of the non-difference of the sleep of avidyā, non-awakening is taught. As the Benevolent Kings Sūtra agrees with this meaning, saying: "From the forbearance of subduing up to the summit samādhi, illumining the ultimate truth is not called seeing; what is called seeing is sarvajñā." In "therefore it is called beginningless avidyā," it concludes the meaning of non-awakening. That is, from beginningless time there has been avidyā, and since all thoughts arise relying on avidyā, those who possess thoughts are all said to be in beginningless avidyā and are not called awakening. The new treatise lacks this sentence, but the meaning is also sufficient.