起信論註 1.22

1.22

Treatise: What is called neither arising nor ceasing is in conjunction with arising and ceasing, neither identical nor different. (Commentary: This distinguishes the marks. The unarising and unceasing mind of the tathāgatagarbha, because its entire essence [...], is not separated from arising and ceasing; because the marks of the mind of arising and ceasing are nothing other than the true, they are also not separated from the unarising and unceasing mind. Such non-separation is called conjunction. But it is only the unarising and unceasing in conjunction with arising and ceasing, because this is the aspect of proceeding toward the branches and following conditions; it is not arising and ceasing in conjunction with the unarising and unceasing, because it is not the aspect of proceeding toward the root and returning to the real. As for "neither identical nor different," it is the unarising and unceasing mind. Reply: Proceeding toward the branches is wholly arising and ceasing, without pure tathatā; proceeding toward the root and returning to tathatā is also pure tathatā. Reply: Tathatā and arising and ceasing being harmonious with each other accomplishes the meaning of conjunction; hence it says neither identical nor different. Because its entire essence moves, the mind and arising and ceasing are not different; yet because it constantly does not lose the mind-nature of tathatā, the mind and arising and ceasing are not identical. If they were definitively identical, when arising and ceasing ended the true mind would also cease, falling into the extreme of annihilationism. If they were definitively different, when perfumed by avidyā the mind would not move, falling into the extreme of eternalism. Since it is free from both extremes, it is neither identical nor different. Because it is neither identical nor different, conjunction is thereby accomplished.)