大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 3.25

3.25

Treatise: "What are the four?… because of the meaning of awakening and illuminating." / Commentary: Next below is the distinct explanation. Distinctly explaining the four meanings, it is divided into four. This is the first. The text contains the heading and the explanation; what follows should be understood according to this. "The mirror of true emptiness" designates its name. Because the substance of awakening is not false, it is called "truly"; because there is no delusion within it, it is called "empty"; being free from delusion and clearly pure, it is compared to a mirror. Here the metaphor and meaning of empty space are omitted; the new translation fully possesses them, as that text says: "The great meaning of true emptiness, pure like empty space and a clear mirror." In the analysis of characteristics below, there are four phrases in total. The upper two phrases generally designate the characteristic of being free from the sense-objects of the mind. The lower two phrases explain the reason. That is, the deluded mind and its objects originally do not exist, like the hair of a tortoise; because they do not appear in the mirror, in reference to original awakening they are not that which is awakened and illuminated, and awakening in reference to the mind and its objects is not that which can awaken and illuminate. Since that which is illuminated does not exist, that which can illuminate does not exist; hence it says "there is no dharma that can be manifested, because of the meaning of [not] awakening and illuminating." Therefore the new translation says: "That is, the characteristics of all mental objects and the characteristics of awakening are both unobtainable." / If so, why does the text below say that the sense-objects of the world all appear within it? / Answer: That is spoken with reference to dependent origination (paratantra) appearing like [them] from the true; not being different from tathatā, it says "it is the true nature." This is spoken with reference to there being no separate real dharma of imagined nature (parikalpita) that can be manifested; hence it says "there is no dharma that can be manifested." The meanings revealed are different, so they do not contradict each other. / If so, should the manifested dependent-origination-like dharmas not arise from that imagined grasping to reality? / Answer: Although they arise from grasping to reality, their substance is only ever a resemblance, like a shadow appearing because of a form. In the mirror, the form does not appear; because the form does not appear, there is no dharma that can be manifested. Because it can manifest shadows, all appear within it.