大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 4.94

4.94

[Treatise:] What are the two? [The first is relied upon the evolving consciousness, which the minds of ordinary beings and followers of the two vehicles see; it is called the nirmāṇakāya, because they do not know it appears from the evolving consciousness and see it as coming from outside, grasping at demarcated physical marks; therefore they do not] fully know [it]. [Commentary:] The explanation below has two [parts]: first, directly revealing the characteristics of the activity; second, questions and answers resolving doubts. The former also has two: first, directly revealing its meaning; second, restating and differentiating. The former also has two: first, clarifying the nirmāṇakāya; second, revealing the saṃbhogakāya. This is the first. In the text there are two sections: first, revealing the seeing of coarse physical marks. Ordinary beings and followers of the two vehicles who see the Buddha see through reliance on the differentiating phenomenal consciousness. This consciousness does not know that all objects are mind-only; grasping external objects, it gives rise to differentiation. Relying on this coarse consciousness to differentiate the Buddha-body, they merely see the coarse physical marks of the nirmāṇakāya and do not see the subtle and wondrous physical marks of the saṃbhogakāya; therefore what they see is called the nirmāṇakāya. 'Because they do not know' and below explains the reason for seeing what is coarse. Confused about marks being mind-only, it says 'from outside'—meaning that the Buddha came externally from Tuṣita heaven. Furthermore, not penetrating that form is free of demarcated limits, they grasp at the marks of the Buddha's form as merely being sixteen feet high, and are confused about demarcations; in truth, physical marks have no demarcations. Therefore it is said that they do not 'fully know it.' Regarding 'appears from the evolving consciousness,' there are multiple explanations: One opinion says: The evolving consciousness is precisely the first seven [consciousnesses]. That is, the first seven consciousnesses can produce deluded objects, just as in the clear sky one sees […] flowers and so forth. Now, due to this consciousness, they deludedly see the Buddha-body; therefore it is said that it appears relying upon the evolving consciousness. Because the Buddha is solely the supreme truth, it is merely what is deludedly seen by the evolving consciousness. Another opinion says: The previous explanation is untenable, for it implies there is no activity benefiting others. The fundamental consciousness can also manifest deluded realms; it is not that only the first seven are called the evolving consciousness. It is the second, the characteristic of manifestation, among the three subtle [aspects] of the ālayavijñāna. The intention is to reveal that the Buddha-body arises from the fundamental consciousness; hence, from among the three subtle aspects, it takes up one of them. That is, seeing the Buddha involves causes and conditions: the condition is the power of the great compassionate vows of all Buddhas; the cause is the good seeds in the fundamental consciousness of sentient beings. When the condition of compassionate vows strikes and arouses the seeds of consciousness, the Buddha-body is transformed and manifested in the fundamental consciousness. In other places, with respect to conditions, it merely says that the Buddha manifests physical marks of saṃbhoga and nirmāṇa; here, solely with respect to the cause, it says that it appears relying on the evolving consciousness. Another opinion says: This explanation is not yet completely clear. Saying that 'evolving' means the fundamental consciousness is indeed tenable in principle; but seeing the Buddha's causes and conditions according to the Dharmalakṣaṇa doctrine fails to reveal the meaning of the harmonization of the real and the deluded. Since this consciousness is a harmonization of the real and the deluded, at this stage it is said that the Buddha-body is manifested, intending to reveal that it is manifested through the cause and condition of the real and the deluded. The cause refers to the pure true substance of sentient beings; the condition refers to the avidyā-deluded thoughts of sentient beings. The true mind of sentient beings and the substance of the Buddha are not two. Because of confusion through deluded thoughts, at that time tathatā merely follows defiled characteristics and does not reveal its pure activity. When original awakening internally perfuses avidyā, it causes that deluded mind to give rise to revulsion and aspiration. Because there is revulsion and aspiration, the true activity manifests. When revulsion and aspiration are inferior, the characteristics of the activity are coarse. As revulsion and aspiration gradually increase, the characteristics of the activity become subtler. In this manner, gradually proceeding until the source of the mind is reached and avidyā is exhausted, revulsion and aspiration entirely cease. Initial awakening becomes identical with the original; the activity returns to the substance; they are equal, equal without duality and without distinction. How could there be physical marks of saṃbhoga or nirmāṇa to manifest? Before reaching the source of the mind, within the consciousness of active characteristics, coarse or subtle characteristics manifest according to faculties; therefore it is said that the Buddha-body appears from the evolving consciousness. If so, and it merely manifests the Buddha from the real, why say that it appears from the evolving consciousness? Answer: Because tathatā alone cannot manifest independently, the evolving consciousness is spoken of in terms of harmonization. That is, flowing along with saṃsāra, delusion has efficacy; although delusion has efficacy, apart from the real it cannot be established. If one reverses the flow and escapes entanglement, the real has efficacy; although the real has efficacy, apart from delusion it cannot become manifest. Therefore, for the real to manifest the Buddha, it must depend on the condition of delusion. Hence, its activity is spoken of with respect to harmonization. If so, this is the true activity of one's own mind; how can it be spoken of as the Buddha's saṃbhoga and nirmāṇa [bodies]? Answer: Sentient beings' true mind is precisely the substance of all Buddhas; hence, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, relying on this, says in verse: 'If someone wishes to know all Buddhas of the three periods of time, they should create [the thought] thus...' The Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśa Sūtra also states: 'The dharmakāya is sentient beings; sentient beings are the dharmakāya. Dharmakāya and sentient beings are identical in meaning and different in name.' Since all dharmakāyas give rise to the activities of saṃbhoga and nirmāṇa, why would it not be the mind of sentient beings? If so, and the mind-Buddha itself constitutes sentient beings, why speak of the power of the Buddha's compassionate vows? Answer: This very true mind is the Buddha's compassionate vows. That is, the mind of sentient beings and the Buddha are not two. Since the compassionate vows of all Buddhas arise relying on the real, they are also present in the true mind of sentient beings. When sentient beings have revulsion and aspiration, the true activity manifests; how could this not be the Buddha's compassionate vows? It is precisely the great compassion without condition arising from the nature, and the unhindered vows identical with its own substance. If so, and sentient beings have had this mind from beginningless time, why did they not arouse the activity earlier to eliminate avidyā? Answer: Because the perfusion of the real lacked power, and they had not yet had revulsion and aspiration. If so, and original awakening has existed from the very beginning, why did it not perfuse earlier to cause revulsion and aspiration? Answer: Because the thickness of avidyā differs in nature, and causes and conditions precede and follow, being mutually lacking. If so, and the true mind is precisely the Buddha, why speak of cultivating causes to attain accomplishment? Answer: Because there is a distinction between original and initial awakening. If with respect to the aspect of original awakening following defilement, the mind of sentient beings is called the Buddha; however, initial awakening is also […] produced through cultivation, and when awakening reaches the source of the mind, it is of one equal limit—how could there be any distinction to speak of arising from production?