大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 5.65

5.65

The treatise says: "What is called cessation..." up to "the meaning of contemplation."
The commentary says: Next below is the explanation of the characteristics. In this there are also two: first a brief explanation, and then an extensive presentation. Within the brief [explanation] there are two: first presenting their separate cultivation to clarify conformity, and then presenting their simultaneous operation to explain the meaning of conformity. This is the first. "Ceasing the characteristics of all sensory realms": because sensory realms arise solely from the discriminating mind, if one now calms the false mind, there will be no sensory realms; having no discrimination, it is called cessation. Thus the new treatise says: "Extinguishing all realms of conceptual elaboration is the meaning of cessation." "Discriminating the characteristics of arising and ceasing through causes and conditions": observing the characteristics of arising and ceasing through causes and conditions generates wonderful wisdom to thoroughly understand that suffering and the like are not pleasurable, and so forth; hence it is called contemplation. Thus the new treatise says: "Clearly seeing the characteristics of arising and ceasing of cause and effect is the meaning of contemplation." As the Bodhisattvabhūmi of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Here, when a bodhisattva has no discrimination regarding all dharmas, this should be known as cessation; if one has wonderful worldly wisdom regarding the profound purport of all dharmas and the innumerable conventional purports, this should be known as contemplation." "Conforming to the meaning of śamatha contemplation...": In Sanskrit it is called śamatha, translated here as cessation; vipaśyanā is translated here as contemplation. However, since these words are absent in the new treatise, the author of this treatise added this text to show that cessation and contemplation are the expedients that conform to the two wisdoms. That is, by cultivating cessation to cease all realm characteristics, one accomplishes the fundamental non-discriminative wisdom; by cultivating contemplation to understand the characteristics of arising and ceasing, one accomplishes the subsequently attained non-discriminative wisdom. Because their causal characteristics are different, cessation and contemplation have distinct names; because their fruit characteristics are the same, they are called contemplation. If one explains the text of the treatise with this meaning: here, that which can cease realm characteristics is śamatha, which can conform to the meaning of contemplation; that which discriminates the characteristics of arising and ceasing through causes and conditions is vipaśyanā, which can conform to the meaning of contemplation. It was to show this meaning that these words were set down. Some hold that this explanation is logically incorrect, because it contradicts the meaning of conformity in the treatise. Since what is conformed to below is simultaneous operation, the contemplation here does not refer to the two wisdoms. Furthermore, if one only cultivates cessation, the mind sinks—how could this accomplish the fundamental wisdom? If one only cultivates contemplation, the mind does not rest—how could it give rise to the subsequently attained non-discriminative wisdom? If it were not so, would the two accomplished wisdoms each lack the cause of cessation or contemplation? If ceasing realm characteristics is śamatha, and this can conform to the meaning of contemplative wisdom, the treatise ought to have said, "This is śamatha conforming to the meaning of contemplation." Why would it reverse the words? Therefore, we know this explanation is deeply inadmissible. One should say that cessation and contemplation are of two kinds: first, the expedients of initial separate cultivation; second, true cessation and contemplation operating simultaneously. To distinguish the expedients from true cessation and contemplation, this phrase "conforming to śamatha..." is added. If both were rendered according to Chinese words, it would say "conforming to the meaning of cessation-contemplation" and "conforming to the meaning of contemplation-contemplation"; referring to true cessation and contemplation, the Sanskrit terms are retained, calling them śamatha and so on, while for their expedients, they are translated into Chinese and both called "the meaning of contemplation." What is shown here is using contemplation to accomplish cessation. The preceding "ceasing the characteristics of all sensory realms" uses the contemplation of awakening wisdom to break through external dust-like marks, which is contemplation conforming to the true cessation of śamatha; the preceding "contemplating the characteristics of arising and ceasing through causes and conditions" also uses awakening wisdom to observe dharma characteristics, which is contemplation conforming to the true contemplation of vipaśyanā. If explained in this way, the text flows and the meaning is [sound]. Otherwise, why would the word "conforming" precede śamatha and [vipaśyanā]? Although it is said that cessation and contemplation mutually assist each other, here it is provisionally explained in terms of [...] contemplation being accomplished, because at initial arising it is contemplation that possesses superior capacity. Some hold that this explanation is also not yet correct, because it strongly contradicts the meaning of the various texts of the treatise. The treatise itself clearly states: "What is called cessation means ceasing all false realm characteristics." How could this be called expedient contemplation? Accomplishing cessation through contemplation is called "contemplation conforming to śamatha"; if accomplishing contemplation through cessation, it ought to be called "cessation meaning conforming to vipaśyanā." Why do both texts say "contemplation"? Sūtras and treatises all say that cessation and contemplation mutually accomplish each other; why does this [explanation] speak only of accomplishing cessation through contemplation? Furthermore, since contemplation accomplishes contemplation here, why not also say that cessation accomplishes cessation? In addition, it contradicts the meaning of what is conformed to in the text below. Below it speaks of simultaneous operation, which is what is conformed to; therefore this is not explained here, but rather what can conform; hence ceasing realms is not contemplation. One should say that for the expedients, the Sanskrit terms are retained, while for true cessation and contemplation, they are translated into Chinese, because at the time of simultaneous operation it is true contemplation; therefore it speaks of true contemplation, pure contemplation, and so forth. Otherwise, would the Great Sage lack cessation? Now, explaining this text according to the correct meaning: at the time of expedients, ceasing all dust-like marks is cessation conforming to true contemplation; moreover, being able to discriminate the characteristics of conditions and so forth is contemplation conforming to true contemplation. Hence it says "conforming to contemplation-contemplation." The phrase here is inverted, saying "contemplation conforming to śamatha." If stated in proper phrasing, it should say "conforming to contemplation of śamatha," just as in the preceding treatise there was an inverted phrasing. If explained in this way, it wonderfully supports both text and meaning.