大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 3.6

3.6

Treatise: As bodhisattvas having reached the end of the stages [...] it is called ultimate awakening. Commentary: As for this fourth characteristic of awakening: "As bodhisattvas having reached the end of the stages" first clarifies the persons capable of awakening. In the text, the two paths are shown generally and specifically. The first phrase generally designates the stage capable of contemplation, which is the stage of the vajra-like equal awakening; it does not mean that the tenth stage is called the end of the stages, because the new treatise says "if one transcends the bodhisattva stages." The next two phrases specifically clarify the two paths: "satisfying expedient means" is the path of preparatory application, because it is the expedient means of satisfaction. The new treatise says "the ultimate path is satisfied," taking the specific by presenting the general, because the path of preparatory application is subsumed under this. "In one thought corresponding" is the uninterrupted path; because in that uninterrupted path, within a single kṣaṇa one tallies with the principle and cuts off subtle thoughts. As the Abhidharma[-samuccaya] says: "The ultimate path refers to the vajra-like samādhi; this has two kinds: namely, that subsumed under the path of expedient means, and that subsumed under the uninterrupted path." In "awakening to the mind's initial arising," this shows the characteristic of what is awakened to. Fundamental avidyā, relying on awakening, becomes deluded and stirs that calm mind, causing subtle thoughts to arise; this is precisely the "mind's initial arising" here. Only upon reaching this stage does one first awaken to and know it: apart from original awakening there is no non-awakening, which means the stirred mind is originally calm. Just as when one is truly lost, one considers east to be west; when one awakens, west is itself east—how could there still be a mark of west at the time of awakening? Thus one awakens to the mark of the initial mind. Therefore it says "awakening to the mind's initial arising, the mind is without the initial mark." Alternatively, the mind of initial awakening initially arising is called "awakening to the mind's initial arising." Thus the new treatise says: "awakening to the mind's initial arising is first called awakening, departing from the mark of awakening." The former explanation conforms to the old treatise and contradicts the new treatise; the latter explanation conforms to principle and does not contradict either treatise. This is the "dhyāna of the Tathāgatas" spoken of in the sūtra. Thus the Laṅkāvatāra says: "Entering the Buddha stage, abiding in the three kinds of joy of the noble cognition of self-realisation, and performing inconceivable deeds for sentient beings." Although in the previous three stages there were stirred thoughts, hence it said "thoughts are without abiding" and so forth, now in this stage stirred thoughts are entirely exhausted and only the one mind remains, hence it says "the mind is without the initial mark"; this means that the mind is without the mark of the initial thought. In "far departing from," this clarifies the benefit of awakening. The stirred thought of the characteristic of karma is the subtlest among thoughts, named the micro-subtle thought; that is the characteristic of arising. Alternatively, subtle discrimination is called micro-subtle thought, without distinguishing and matching it to avidyā and the characteristic of karma. In the third stage, one awakens that thought and thoughtlessness are both markless, abandoning medium discrimination; now in this stage, even the mark of awakening does not exist, and with nothing whatsoever to be attained, one departs from subtle thoughts. The new treatise only calls it "subtle discrimination." Because this thought is forever gone, it says "far departing from." Far departing from empty marks, the true mind-nature is then manifested, hence it says "attaining the vision of the mind-nature." The wind of avidyā ceases, the waves on the ocean of nature become calm, and there is forever no arising or ceasing; hence it says "the mind is immediately permanently abiding." Relying on these two meanings, the new treatise says: "The mind's fundamental nature permanently abides and is manifest before one." In the previous three stages, the marks of thought were not yet exhausted; therefore, it did not say "attaining the vision of the mind-nature." Because awakening had not reached the source, avidyā still remained, stirring that calm mind so that the karmic consciousness arose and ceased; therefore, it did not say "the mind is immediately permanently abiding." In "it is called ultimate awakening," this concludes the scope of contemplation. Before reaching the source of the mind, dream thoughts are not yet exhausted; beginning and end are not identical with the source, so it is not ultimate awakening. Seeking the cessation of this stirring, one hopes to reach the other shore; now that dream thoughts have ceased, one has awakened to the source of the mind—originally there was no transmigration, and now there is no beginning of calm; it is constantly of itself the one mind. When the beginning is not different from what was originally attained, one becomes a Tathāgata; this is called ultimate awakening. If so, since initial awakening becomes permanently abiding, does this not contradict what is taught in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha: "Since the root is permanently abiding, the branches rely on the root and continuously persist forever," and so forth in detail? The two works have different intentions, so their principles do not conflict. This treatise intends to show that originally due to non-awakening the calm mind was stirred, and now having ceased non-awakening, it returns to original calm, thus becoming permanently abiding. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha intends to explain that relying on the permanent dharmakāya one gives rise to practices of merit and wisdom; since the resultant reward thus incurred arises from conditions, it speaks of continuity. The myriad virtues of initial awakening must possess both meanings: relying on the former meaning, it is permanently abiding; relying on the latter meaning, it is arising and ceasing. Arising and ceasing, and permanent abiding, do not obstruct each other. Because each and every thought penetrates the three times, although pervading the three times it does not exceed a single thought—just as a single pore pervades the ten directions, yet although pervading the ten directions it does not enlarge the pore. The Buddha's virtues are like this, unobstructed and unhindered; how could one cling one-sidedly between them? As the Avataṃsaka Sūtra praises this meaning in verse: