大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 4.2

4.2

論。以不達至名為無明　釋曰。此顯無明緣起之由釋上而有無明義也。有義。不達即是自心無別。無明名為不達。謂自不了平等一味。與自本心不相應故。名為無明。無別法故。有義。不能違上所說。無明所染有染心故。能染所染因緣及果緣起體相有差別故。若如前說。覺即不覺。即當如前所破過失。若謂與心不相應故名無明者。即前三染應是覺悟。言相應故。由是別有能迷無明。雖不離真非即真體。是不了達無念法界最極微細即心之惑。此正應言不相應心。未有能所王數別故。言中倒故云心不相應。非謂與分不相應也。故新論云。不覺一法界故不相應。無明分別起唯此能為諸染之源。更無染本。故言忽然念起　經說五住處。前無更別法起故名無始無明住地。顯無別法始無明者。即是此論忽然起義也。此約細麁相依門說。非約時節起無初故。

Treatise: "Because of not comprehending […] it is called avidyā." / Commentary: This reveals the reason for the conditioned arising of avidyā, explaining the prior meaning of "yet there is avidyā." One opinion states: non-comprehension is simply one's own mind, and there is no separate avidyā called non-comprehension; that is, one does not understand the equality of single taste, and because it is not associated with one's own fundamental mind, it is called avidyā, as there is no separate phenomenon. Another opinion states: one cannot contradict what was stated above, that defiled by avidyā there is a defiled mind; for there are distinctions in the substance and marks of conditioned arising between the active defiler and the object defiled, the causes, conditions, and fruits. If it were as previously stated, that awakening is itself non-awakening, then it would incur the fault refuted earlier. If it is claimed that being unassociated with the mind is what is called avidyā, then the preceding three defilements should be awakened states, since they are said to be associated. Therefore, there is a distinct avidyā that is capable of deluding: although it is not separate from tathatā, it is not the very substance of tathatā; it is the most extremely subtle delusion identical with mind that fails to comprehend the unthinking realm of phenomena. This precisely should be called "unassociated mind"; because there is not yet the distinction between active and objective, or between primary mind and mental factors, the phrasing is inverted, stating "mind is not associated," not that it is unassociated with components. Thus the new translation states: "Because of not awakening to the one realm of phenomena, it is unassociated; avidyā discriminately arises." Only this can be the source of all defilements; there is no further root of defilement. Therefore it says "suddenly a thought arises." The sūtra speaks of five abodes; because no other phenomenon arises prior to it, it is called the abode ground of beginningless avidyā. Revealing that no other phenomenon initiates avidyā is precisely the meaning of "suddenly arising" in this treatise. This is stated in terms of the gateway of subtle and coarse mutual dependence, not in terms of temporal duration, because its arising has no beginning.