大乘起信論 顯示正義・一心二門・心真如門
這一段講的是那道不動的門。論主先用了一整段話說它是什麼，說到最後，連自己說的也拆了。
於是有人忍不住問了一句——這句問話，是這一段裡唯一一個人的聲音：
「若如是義者，諸眾生等云何隨順而能得入？」
既然不可說、不可念，那我到底要怎麼辦？
論主給了兩層，不是一層
第一層叫隨順：「若知一切法雖說，無有能說可說，雖念，亦無能念可念，是名隨順。」
照樣說、照樣念——只是知道其中沒有能說的與所說的、沒有能念的與所念的。
不是停止說念，是說念的時候不再立那兩頭。
第二層才叫得入：「若離於念，名為得入。」
隨順是路，得入是門。論主沒有要人一步跨進去。
那個被問的東西，長什麼樣
問話之前，論主是這樣說它的：「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體。」
而「一法界」的那個「一」不是數目——有一種讀法說得準：「此非算數之一。」
它是平等不二的那個一。
差別是從哪裡來的
「一切諸法唯依妄念而有差別，若離妄念則無一切境界之相。」
不是外面本來千差萬別、心去攀它。是心起了妄念，差別才現出來。
三個「離」，是把手一根一根拿開
離言說相——話一出口，它就不在話裡。
離名字相——取名叫真如，它不因此變成一個叫真如的東西。
離心緣相——連心裡去想它的那個相，也不是它。
一層比一層近身。到第三層，最後的憑藉也沒了。
但緊接著給了三個「不」
「畢竟平等、無有變異、不可破壞。」
平等，所以沒有高下；無變異，所以不因迷悟而增減；不可破壞，所以不必擔心它會壞。
前面拿掉的是抓它的手，後面給的是它自己的穩。
連「真如」這個名字也拆
「言真如者，亦無有相。」
那為什麼還說？——「因言遣言」。說到盡頭了，只好用言語遣除言語。
然後兩邊都關上：無有可遣，因為一切法悉皆真；亦無可立，因為一切法皆同如。
「空」空的是什麼
「如實空」——不是說真如自己是空的。
有一種讀法把這個介詞辨得很死：「非謂如實自空。」所空的是妄染。
論主自己收尾：「若離妄心實無可空故。」——妄心一離，根本沒有東西可空。
而空完了還有一句
「如實不空」：空掉妄之後，剩下的是「真心常恒不變淨法滿足」。
但它同樣「無有相可取，以離念境界唯證相應故」。
空是拆，不空是留。拆掉的是妄，留下的不可取。
——回到那個人的問題：他問怎麼進去。答案不在弄懂這一邊，在離念那一邊。
This passage speaks of the aspect that does not move. The author uses a whole passage to say what it is, and by the end has taken apart even what he himself has said.
Someone finally asks the question he can no longer hold back—the only human voice in the passage:
“If the meaning is like this, how can sentient beings accord with it and enter?”
If it cannot be spoken and cannot be thought, what am I actually to do?
The Author Gives Two Levels, Not One
The first level is called accordance: “If one knows that although all dharmas are spoken, there is neither one who speaks nor anything spoken, and that although thoughts arise, there is neither one who thinks nor anything thought, this is called accordance.”
Speech continues; thought continues. One simply knows that there is neither a fixed speaker and something spoken nor a fixed thinker and something thought.
It is not the stopping of speech and thought, but no longer establishing two poles while speaking and thinking.
Only the second level is called entry: “To be free from thought is called entry.”
Accordance is the road; entry is the gate. The author does not demand that a person cross the threshold in a single stride.
What the Question Is Asking About
Before the question is raised, the author describes it this way: “What is called mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm.”
And the “one” of the one Dharma-realm is not a number. One reading says it exactly: “This is not the one of numerical calculation.”
It is the one of equality and nonduality.
Where Difference Comes From
“All dharmas are differentiated only in dependence upon deluded thoughts. Apart from deluded thoughts, there are no marks of any object-realm.”
It is not that the world outside is originally divided into a thousand differences and mind goes out to grasp them. Difference appears when mind gives rise to deluded thought.
Three Freedoms Open the Hand One Finger at a Time
Free from the mark of speech—the moment a word leaves the mouth, it is not contained in that word.
Free from the mark of names—naming it suchness does not make it into a thing called suchness.
Free from the mark of mental engagement—even the mark formed when the mind tries to think it is not suchness.
Each layer comes closer. At the third, the last support is gone.
Three Unshakable Qualities Follow Immediately
“Ultimately equal, without alteration, and indestructible.”
Equal, and so without higher or lower; without alteration, and so neither increased nor diminished by delusion or awakening; indestructible, and so never in danger of damage.
What came before removed the hand that grasps. What follows gives its own stability.
Even the Name “Suchness” Is Taken Apart
“Even the word ‘suchness’ has no mark.”
Why say it, then?—“using words to dispel words.” At the limit of speech, words can only be used to remove words.
Then both sides are closed: there is nothing to dispel, because all dharmas are wholly true; there is nothing to establish, because all dharmas are the same as suchness.
What “Empty” Empties
The really-empty does not mean that suchness is itself empty.
One reading fixes the relation of the words without compromise: “It does not mean that the real is itself empty.” What is empty is delusion and defilement.
The author concludes in his own words: “Apart from the deluded mind, in truth there is nothing to empty.” The emptying, in other words, never touched suchness at all—it only ran out of delusion.
And One Sentence Remains after the Emptying
The really-not-empty: once delusion has been emptied, what remains is “the true mind—constant and unchanging, complete in pure dharmas.”
Yet it likewise “has no mark that can be grasped, because the realm free from thought accords only with realization.”
Empty is the dismantling; not empty is what remains. What is dismantled is delusion. What remains cannot be grasped.
Return to the person’s question. He asks how to enter. The answer does not lie on the side of understanding this more completely. It lies on the side free from thought.
馬鳴菩薩造·梁西印度三藏法師真諦譯《大乘起信論》〈顯示正義・一心二門・心真如門〉· 大正藏 T32n1666〔起 T32 0576a02〕。段／行首〔T32 …〕＝大正藏頁・欄・行錨。
〔T32 0576a02〕次說解釋分。 解釋分有三種。云何為三？一者、顯示正義，二者、對治邪執，三者、分別發趣道相。顯示正義者，依一心法，有二種門。云何為二？一者、心真如門，二者、心生滅門。是二種門，皆各總攝一切法。此義云何？以是二門不相離故。心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體。所謂心性不生不滅，一切諸法唯依妄念而有差別，若離妄念則無一切境界之相。是故一切法從本已來，離言說相、離名字相、離心緣相，畢竟平等、無有變異、不可破壞。唯是一心故名真如，以一切言說假名無實，但隨妄念不可得故。言真如者，亦無有相。謂言說之極因言遣言，此真如體無有可遣，以一切法悉皆真故；亦無可立，以一切法皆同如故。當知一切法不可說、不可念故，名為真如。 問曰：「若如是義者，諸眾生等云何隨順而能得入？」 答曰：「若知一切法雖說，無有能說可說，雖念，亦無能念可念，是名隨順。若離於念，名為得入。」 復次，真如者，依言說分別有二種義。云何為二？一者、如實空，以能究竟顯實故。二者、如實不空，以有自體，具足無漏性功德故。所言空者，從本已來一切染法不相應故，謂離一切法差別之相，以無虛妄心念故。當知真如自性，非有相、非無相、非非有相、非非無相、非有無俱相，非一相、非異相、非非一相、非非異相、非一異俱相。乃至總說，依一切眾生以有妄心念念分別，皆不相應故說為空，若離妄心實無可空故。所言不空者，已顯法體空無妄故，即是真心常恒不變淨法滿足，故名不空，亦無有相可取，以離念境界唯證相應故。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
馬鳴菩薩造·梁西印度三藏法師真諦譯《大乘起信論》，自「次說解釋分」至「以離念境界唯證相應故」。段首（…）＝大正藏頁·欄·行錨。
〔一·入第三分〕（0576a02）接著說第三分，解釋分。
〔二·解釋分有三科〕（0576a03）解釋分有三種。哪三種？第一是顯示正義，第二是對治邪執，第三是分別發趣道相。
〔三·一心開二門〕（0576a04）所謂顯示正義，就是依著一心法，有兩種門。哪兩種？第一是心真如門，第二是心生滅門。（0576a05）這兩種門，各自都總攝一切法。這道理怎麼說？因為這兩門不相離。
〔四·真如是什麼〕（0576a08）所謂心真如，就是一法界的大總相法門之體。也就是說：心性不生不滅。（0576a09）一切諸法只因為依著妄念，才有差別；若離開妄念，就沒有一切境界之相了。
〔五·三離與三不〕（0576a11）所以一切法從本以來，離開言說之相、離開名字之相、離開心緣之相，（0576a12）畢竟平等、沒有變異、不可破壞。
〔六·何以名為真如〕（0576a13）只是這一個心，所以叫作真如。因為一切言說都是假名而無實，只是隨著妄念而起，了不可得。
〔七·因言遣言〕（0576a14）說「真如」的時候，它也沒有相可指。這是說：言說到了盡頭，只好用言語來遣除言語。
〔八·無可遣，也無可立〕（0576a15）這個真如之體，沒有什麼可遣除——因為一切法全都是真的；也沒有什麼可建立——因為一切法全都同於如。（0576a17）要知道：一切法不可說、不可念，所以名為真如。
〔九·問：怎麼進得去〕（0576a19）問：『若是這樣的義理，眾生要怎麼隨順而能夠得入？』
〔十·答：隨順與得入〕（0576a21）答：『若知道一切法雖然說了，卻沒有能說的與所說的；雖然起念，也沒有能念的與所念的——這叫作隨順。（0576a22）若離於念，就叫作得入。』
〔十一·真如依言說分二義〕（0576a24）再者，真如若依著言說來分別，有兩種義。哪兩種？（0576a25）第一是如實空，因為它能究竟顯出真實。第二是如實不空，因為它有自體，具足無漏的性功德。
〔十二·如實空〕（0576a27）所說的「空」，是說從本以來，一切染法都與它不相應——也就是離開一切法的差別之相，因為沒有虛妄的心念。
〔十三·十句遣相〕（0576a29）要知道真如的自性：不是有相、不是無相；不是非有相、不是非無相、不是有無俱相；不是一相、不是異相；不是非一相、不是非異相、不是一異俱相。
〔十四·空之所指〕（0576b03）總的說：因為一切眾生有妄心念念分別，而這些都與真如不相應，所以說它是空；若離開妄心，其實沒有什麼可空的。
〔十五·如實不空〕（0576b05）所說的「不空」，是既已顯出法體空而無妄，那就是真心——常恆不變、淨法滿足，所以名為不空。（0576b06）它同樣沒有相可取，因為那是離念的境界，唯有親證才能相應。
Composed by the Bodhisattva Aśvaghoṣa and translated by Paramārtha, Tripiṭaka Master of Western India, under the Liang. The Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle, from “Next is spoken the part on explication” through “because the realm free from thought accords only with realization.” The figures in parentheses at the head of each segment give the Taishō page, register, and line.
〔1 · Entering the third part〕（0576a02）Next is spoken the third part, the part on explication.
〔2 · Three divisions within the part on explication〕（0576a03）The part on explication has three divisions. Which three? First, displaying the true meaning; second, countering deviant attachments; third, distinguishing the marks of setting out on the path.
〔3 · The one mind opens into two aspects〕（0576a04）What is called displaying the true meaning is this: in dependence upon the dharma of the one mind there are two aspects. Which two? First, the aspect of mind as suchness; second, the aspect of mind as arising and ceasing.（0576a05）Each of these two aspects encompasses all dharmas in their entirety. How is this so? Because the two aspects are not separate from one another.
〔4 · What suchness is〕（0576a08）What is called the aspect of mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm. That is to say: the nature of mind neither arises nor ceases.（0576a09）All dharmas are differentiated only in dependence upon deluded thoughts. Apart from deluded thoughts, there are no marks of any object-realm.
〔5 · Three freedoms and three unshakable qualities〕（0576a11）Therefore, from the beginning, all dharmas are free from the mark of speech, free from the mark of names, and free from the mark of mental engagement.（0576a12）They are ultimately equal, without alteration, and indestructible.
〔6 · Why it is named suchness〕（0576a13）Because there is only this one mind, it is named suchness. All speech consists of provisional names without reality; it merely arises following deluded thoughts and can never be apprehended.
〔7 · Using words to dispel words〕（0576a14）Even when “suchness” is spoken, it has no mark that can be pointed to. That is to say: at the very limit of speech, words can only be used to dispel words.
〔8 · Nothing to dispel, nothing to establish〕（0576a15）There is nothing to dispel from the substance of suchness, because all dharmas are wholly true. Nor is there anything to establish, because all dharmas are the same as suchness.（0576a17）Know that all dharmas cannot be spoken and cannot be thought; hence it is named suchness.
〔9 · Question: how can one enter〕（0576a19）Question: “If the meaning is like this, how can sentient beings accord with it and enter?”
〔10 · Answer: accordance and entry〕（0576a21）Answer: “If one knows that although all dharmas are spoken, there is neither one who speaks nor anything spoken, and that although thoughts arise, there is neither one who thinks nor anything thought, this is called accordance.（0576a22）To be free from thought is called entry.”
〔11 · Suchness divided into two meanings in dependence upon speech〕（0576a24）Furthermore, when suchness is distinguished in dependence upon speech, it has two meanings. Which two?（0576a25）First, the really-empty, because it is able ultimately to reveal the real. Second, the really-not-empty, because it has a substance of its own and is complete in the uncontaminated qualities of its nature.
〔12 · The really-empty〕（0576a27）What is called “empty” means that, from the beginning, all defiled dharmas have never accorded with it. That is, it is free from the differentiated marks of all dharmas, because it is without deluded thoughts of mind.
〔13 · Ten clauses dispelling marks〕（0576a29）Know that suchness in its own nature is not a mark of being, not a mark of nonbeing; not a mark of not-being, not a mark of not-nonbeing, and not a joint mark of being and nonbeing; not a mark of oneness, not a mark of difference; not a mark of not-oneness, not a mark of not-difference, and not a joint mark of oneness and difference.
〔14 · What “empty” points to〕（0576b03）In sum: sentient beings have deluded minds and discriminate thought after thought, and all these fail to accord with suchness; therefore it is said to be empty. Apart from the deluded mind, in truth there is nothing to empty.
〔15 · The really-not-empty〕（0576b05）What is called “not empty” means that once the substance of dharma has been revealed as empty and without delusion, it is the true mind—constant and unchanging, complete in pure dharmas—and therefore is named not empty.（0576b06）It likewise has no mark that can be grasped, because the realm free from thought accords only with realization.
立義分只用一百七十四字立好了架子。從這裡起，論主開始拆給人看——而他先拆的，是那道不動的門。
這一段五百一十字，做的其實只有一件事：把「真如」這兩個字所能引起的一切誤會，一層一層拿掉。
拿掉之後剩下什麼？論主給了一句話：「若離於念，名為得入。」
先看三科：解釋分要做三件事
「解釋分有三種。云何為三？」
- 顯示正義——把正面的道理立出來。本單元起，一直到體相用那一段，都在這一科裡。
- 對治邪執——把讀者可能生的誤解一一破掉。
- 分別發趣道相——說明從發心到不退，路上有哪些階次。
先立、後破、再指路。 這個次第本身就是教法：不先把正面說清楚，破執就成了空談；不指出階次，立與破都落不到腳下。
一個心，兩道門，而兩道門各攝一切
「顯示正義者，依一心法，有二種門。云何為二？一者、心真如門，二者、心生滅門。」
要緊的是下一句：「是二種門，皆各總攝一切法。」
不是真如門管一半、生滅門管另一半。是兩門各自都把一切法收盡了。 論主自己解釋為什麼：「以是二門不相離故。」
這一句把後面所有的話都定了調。若二門各管一半，修行就成了從這一半搬到那一半；既然各攝一切、彼此不離，那麼所謂修行就不是搬家，是在原地轉向。
這一句還有一個更貼身的意思。二門既然不相離，那麼一個人在生滅裡的每一刻——起念、動心、看見境界——都不是離開真如另有的事。你並沒有站在真如的外面等著進去。 後面那個「云何隨順而能得入」的問題之所以能有答案，根就在這裡：若二門真的是兩處，問『怎麼進去』就無解了。
真如是什麼：九個字
「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體。」
這九個字很密，一個一個看。
「一法界」的「一」不是數目。 有一種讀法點得很準：「此非算數之一。謂如理虛融平等不二故。稱為一。」——不是一個、兩個的一，是平等不二的那個一。
「大總相」——不是某一個個別的相，是總攝一切相的那個相。「法門體」——它是門，也是體：是一切法從中出入之門，也是一切法所依之體。
接著論主自己解釋：「所謂心性不生不滅，一切諸法唯依妄念而有差別，若離妄念則無一切境界之相。」
這句話裡有一個極重要的轉：差別是哪裡來的？「唯依妄念而有」。 不是外境本來千差萬別、心去攀它；是心起了妄念，差別才現出來。所以離開妄念，境界之相就沒有了。
三離、三不：把手一根一根拿開
「是故一切法從本已來，離言說相、離名字相、離心緣相」——
三離是三層剝除，一層比一層近身：
- 離言說相——不是說出來的那個。話一出口，它就不在話裡。
- 離名字相——也不是安個名字就有的那個。給它取名叫「真如」，它並不因此變成一個叫真如的東西。
- 離心緣相——連你心裡去攀緣、去想它的那個相，也不是它。
前兩層還在語言上，第三層直接進到心裡：連想都想不到它。 到這裡，讀的人最後的憑藉也被拿掉了。
而剝完之後，論主立刻給了三個「不」：「畢竟平等、無有變異、不可破壞。」
平等，所以沒有高下；無變異，所以不會因你迷或悟而增減；不可破壞，所以不必擔心它會壞掉。
前面拿掉的是你抓它的手，後面給的是它自己的穩。 這兩邊要一起讀：只讀前半會落空，只讀後半會落執。
「因言遣言」——連剛說的也拆
接著論主做了一件很特別的事：他把自己剛說的話也拆了。
「唯是一心故名真如，以一切言說假名無實，但隨妄念不可得故。言真如者，亦無有相。」
連「真如」這個名字也沒有相可指。那為什麼還要說？——「謂言說之極因言遣言」。說到盡頭了，只好用言語來遣除言語。
然後他把「遣」與「立」兩邊都關上：「此真如體無有可遣，以一切法悉皆真故；亦無可立，以一切法皆同如故。」
沒有什麼可遣除的，因為一切法本來都是真的；也沒有什麼可建立的，因為一切法本來都同於如。
能遣的、所遣的，能立的、所立的，一起落空。 最後一句收得極平常：「當知一切法不可說、不可念故，名為真如。」
這一段的用意，不是要讀者陷入無話可說。論主拆的是『以為說出來的那個就是它』這個習慣，不是說話這件事本身。 若不拆，人讀完真如二字就以為手裡握到了什麼；一拆，才知道那不是可以握的東西。而拆到最後他仍然說了——因為不說，人連走近的機會也沒有。這就是「因言遣言」四個字的分寸：話是要說的，只是說完要把梯子撤掉。
那怎麼進得去？
這時候讀者心裡自然有一個問，論主替他問了出來：「若如是義者，諸眾生等云何隨順而能得入？」
既然不可說、不可念，那我怎麼辦？
答覆分兩層，而這兩層的分別是本段最實用的一著：
- 隨順——「若知一切法雖說，無有能說可說，雖念，亦無能念可念，是名隨順。」照樣說、照樣念，只是知道其中沒有能說的與所說的、沒有能念的與所念的。不是停止說念，是說念的時候不再立那兩頭。
- 得入——「若離於念，名為得入。」
隨順是路，得入是門。 論主沒有要人一步跨進門，他先給了一條在念中就能走的路——這對絕大多數讀的人，才是真正接得上的那一句。
而這條路後面還會再出現：修行信心分裡的止觀，講的就是怎麼把這句「離於念」變成可以日日操作的事。
這兩層的分別，也解釋了一件讀者常有的困惑：明明讀懂了「不可說不可念」，心裡卻仍然一句接一句地說、一念接一念地念。論主並沒有把這種情形判為失敗——在念中而知其無兩頭，已經是隨順。得入是另一件事，但路已經在腳下了。
真如可以分說：空與不空
「復次，真如者，依言說分別有二種義。」
先注意那五個字：「依言說分別」。上文才說真如離言說相，這裡又依言說來分二義——所以這二義是為了說而設的，不是真如自己裂成兩塊。
第一，如實空——「以能究竟顯實故」。
這裡有一個極容易讀錯的地方。有一種讀法把句法點得很準：「言如實空者。此以如實之中空無妄染故。云如實空。非謂如實自空。」——所空的是妄染，不是如實自身。 若讀成『真如自己是空的』，這部論就成了斷滅之談。
論文自己也說得清楚：「從本已來一切染法不相應故」——一切染法從來就與它不相應。
然後是那十句遣相：不是有相、不是無相，不是非有相、不是非無相、不是有無俱相；不是一相、不是異相，不是非一相、不是非異相、不是一異俱相。
十句不是玩弄辭令。前五句遣「有無」，後五句遣「一異」——而每一組都再用「非非」與「俱」把退路封住：你說它非有吧，「非非有相」也否掉；你說它有無都是吧，「非有無俱相」也否掉。凡是能被安上去的判斷，這裡一句一句地拆。
最後論主自己交代這個「空」字的分量：「若離妄心實無可空故。」——連「空」也不是它的一個屬性；妄心一離，根本沒有東西可空。
第二，如實不空——「以有自體，具足無漏性功德故」。
空講完緊接著講不空，次第不能倒。有一種讀法把「不空」分成兩層：一是「異妄無體故云有自體」——不同於妄法之無體，所以說它有自體；二是「異恒沙有漏煩惱故云具足無漏性功德」——不同於恆沙有漏煩惱，所以說它具足無漏功德。
論文說：「已顯法體空無妄故，即是真心常恒不變淨法滿足，故名不空」——先顯它空掉了妄，剩下的那個就是不空的。
但隨即又補一句：「亦無有相可取，以離念境界唯證相應故。」不空也不是可以拿在手上的東西；那是離念的境界，唯有親證才相應。
空是拆，不空是留；拆掉的是妄，留下的不可取。 兩義合起來，才是真如門的全貌——而這一門到此說完，下一段論主就要轉身，去說那道會動的門。
承衍——注家如何讀這一段
上來是這一段自身的義。此下另以注家之眼旁照——注非論，只是同一樁事，換一個位置來看。
法藏《大乘起信論義記》於此段逐句牒釋。上文所說「一法界」之「一」非算數之一、「如實空」是「如實之中空無妄染」而「非謂如實自空」、「不空」之二層，皆出其手。他釋「法界」時引《中邊論》「法界者。聖法因為義故」為證；釋「如實空」時又引其「無能取所取有。有能取所取無。是名空相」；釋「不空」則引《攝論》與《佛性論》。
他釋「空」字時特別點出句法：這是「如實之空」，屬依主之釋——空的是如實之中的妄染，不是如實自己空。一部注疏肯在一個介詞上停下來辨，正因為這裡一錯，全論皆倒。
元曉《起信論疏》於本段不重錄論文，是隨科而釋，故逐句的對讀之用不及《義記》；兩本此段亦無相違之判可並錄。
而論自己那句「若離於念，名為得入」還立在那裡——它不需要注家，也不需要階位。
The part on setting up the meaning used only a hundred and seventy-four characters to build the frame. From here the author begins to take it apart for the reader—and the first aspect he takes apart is the one that does not move.
These five hundred and ten characters are doing only one thing: removing, layer by layer, every misunderstanding that the word suchness can produce.
What remains after all that removal? The author gives one sentence: “To be free from thought is called entry.”
Three Divisions: What the Part on Explication Must Do
“The part on explication has three divisions. Which three?”
- Displaying the true meaning—the positive principle is set forth. From this unit through the passage on substance, mark, and function, everything belongs to this division.
- Countering deviant attachments—each misunderstanding that may arise in the reader is taken apart.
- Distinguishing the marks of setting out on the path—the stages along the road from arousing the mind to non-retrogression are explained.
Establish first, dismantle afterward, then point out the road. This sequence is itself a teaching. Unless the positive meaning is first made clear, the breaking of attachments becomes empty talk. Unless the stages are identified, both establishing and dismantling fail to reach the ground beneath one’s feet.
One Mind, Two Aspects, and Each Aspect Encompasses All
“What is called displaying the true meaning is this: in dependence upon the dharma of the one mind there are two aspects. Which two? First, the aspect of mind as suchness; second, the aspect of mind as arising and ceasing.”
The crucial sentence comes next: “Each of these two aspects encompasses all dharmas in their entirety.”
It is not that the aspect of suchness governs one half while the aspect of arising and ceasing governs the other. Each aspect, by itself, completely encompasses all dharmas. The author explains why: “because the two aspects are not separate from one another.”
This sets the tone of everything that follows. If each aspect governed half, practice would become a move from one half to the other. Since each encompasses all and the two are inseparable, practice is not a change of residence. It is a turning where one already stands.
The sentence has a still more immediate meaning. Since the two aspects are inseparable, every moment a person spends amid arising and ceasing—each thought, each movement of mind, each appearance of an object—is not something apart from suchness. You are not standing outside suchness, waiting to be admitted. This is why the later question, “how can one accord with it and enter?” can have an answer. If the two aspects were truly two places, the question “how do I get inside?” would be insoluble.
What Suchness Is: Thirteen Characters
“What is called mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm.”
These nine characters are dense. Take them one by one.
The “one” in “one Dharma-realm” is not a number. One reading makes the point exactly: “This is not the one of numerical calculation. Because, in accord with principle, it is open, interpenetrating, equal, and nondual, it is called one.” It is not the one in a sequence of one and two. It is the one of equality and nonduality.
“Great comprehensive mark”—not a particular mark among others, but the mark that encompasses every mark. “Substance of the Dharma-gate”—it is both gate and substance: the gate through which all dharmas enter and emerge, and the substance upon which all dharmas depend.
The author then explains it himself: “The nature of mind neither arises nor ceases. All dharmas are differentiated only in dependence upon deluded thoughts. Apart from deluded thoughts, there are no marks of any object-realm.”
There is a decisive turn in this sentence. Where does differentiation come from? It exists “only in dependence upon deluded thoughts.” It is not that the external realm is originally divided into a thousand differences and mind then grasps them. Differentiation appears when mind gives rise to deluded thought. Apart from that thought, the marks of the object-realm are no longer there.
Three Freedoms and Three Unshakable Qualities: Opening the Hand One Finger at a Time
“Therefore, from the beginning, all dharmas are free from the mark of speech, free from the mark of names, and free from the mark of mental engagement.”
The three freedoms strip away three layers, each closer than the last:
- Free from the mark of speech—it is not the thing that has been spoken. The moment a word leaves the mouth, it is not contained in that word.
- Free from the mark of names—nor does it come into being when a name is assigned. Naming it suchness does not make it into a thing called suchness.
- Free from the mark of mental engagement—even the mark toward which your mind reaches when it tries to think suchness is not suchness.
The first two remain at the level of language. The third goes directly into mind: even thought cannot reach it. At that point the reader’s last support has been removed.
And immediately after this stripping away, the author gives three unshakable qualities: “ultimately equal, without alteration, and indestructible.”
Equal, and so without higher or lower; without alteration, and so neither increased nor diminished by your delusion or awakening; indestructible, and so never in danger of being damaged.
What was removed before is the hand with which you grasp it; what is given afterward is its own stability. The two sides must be read together. Read only the first and one falls into vacancy; read only the second and one turns stability into an attachment.
“Using Words to Dispel Words”—Taking Apart Even What Was Just Said
The author next does something unusual: he takes apart the very words he has just spoken.
“Because there is only this one mind, it is named suchness. All speech consists of provisional names without reality; it merely arises following deluded thoughts and cannot be apprehended. Even the word ‘suchness’ has no mark.”
Even the name suchness points to no mark. Why speak it at all? “At the limit of speech, words are used to dispel words.” Speech has reached its furthest point, and language can only be used to remove language.
Then he closes both sides, “dispelling” and “establishing”: “There is nothing to dispel from the substance of suchness, because all dharmas are wholly true. Nor is there anything to establish, because all dharmas are the same as suchness.”
The one who dispels and what is dispelled, the one who establishes and what is established—all fall away together. The final sentence is remarkably plain: “Know that all dharmas cannot be spoken and cannot be thought; hence it is named suchness.”
The point is not to leave the reader unable to speak. What the author dismantles is the habit of supposing that the thing spoken is the thing itself, not the act of speaking. Without that dismantling, a person reads the word suchness and believes something has been placed in the hand. Once the word is dismantled, one sees that suchness is not a thing to be held. Yet even after the dismantling the author still speaks—for if he said nothing, no one could draw near at all. This is the exact measure of “using words to dispel words”: words must be spoken, but when their work is done, the ladder must be taken away.
Then How Does One Enter
At this point a question naturally forms in the reader, and the author asks it for him: “If the meaning is like this, how can sentient beings accord with it and enter?”
If it cannot be spoken and cannot be thought, what am I to do?
The answer has two levels, and their distinction is the most usable move in the passage:
- Accordance—“If one knows that although all dharmas are spoken, there is neither one who speaks nor anything spoken, and that although thoughts arise, there is neither one who thinks nor anything thought, this is called accordance.” Speech continues; thought continues. What changes is the knowledge that no fixed speaker and spoken, thinker and thought, stand at the two ends. It is not the stopping of speech and thought, but no longer establishing two poles while speaking and thinking.
- Entry—“To be free from thought is called entry.”
Accordance is the road; entry is the gate. The author does not demand that a person cross the threshold in one stride. He first gives a road that can be walked within thought itself. For nearly every reader, this is the sentence one can actually meet.
The road will appear again. In the part on practicing the mind of faith, calming and contemplation explain how “free from thought” can become something practiced day by day.
The distinction between the two levels also answers a common perplexity. A person may understand perfectly well that suchness cannot be spoken or thought, while inward speech continues sentence after sentence and thought follows thought. The author does not pronounce this a failure. To remain amid thought while knowing that its two poles cannot be established is already accordance. Entry is another matter, but the road is already beneath one’s feet.
Suchness Can Be Spoken in Two Ways: Empty and Not Empty
“Furthermore, when suchness is distinguished in dependence upon speech, it has two meanings.”
Notice the phrase “in dependence upon speech.” The preceding passage has just said that suchness is free from the mark of speech, and here speech divides it into two meanings. The two meanings therefore exist for the sake of speaking; suchness itself has not broken into two pieces.
First, the really-empty—“because it is able ultimately to reveal the real.”
This is very easy to misread. One old reading settles the syntax exactly: “Because within the real there is emptiness of delusion and defilement, it is called the really-empty. It does not mean that the real is itself empty.” What is empty is delusion and defilement, not the real itself. Read it as “the real is itself empty” and the treatise is turned into a doctrine of annihilation.
The treatise says the same directly: “From the beginning, all defiled dharmas have never accorded with it.”
Then come the ten clauses that dispel marks: not a mark of being, not a mark of nonbeing, not a mark of not-being, not a mark of not-nonbeing, not a joint mark of being and nonbeing; not a mark of oneness, not a mark of difference, not a mark of not-oneness, not a mark of not-difference, not a joint mark of oneness and difference.
The clauses are not verbal play. The first five dispel being and nonbeing; the latter five dispel oneness and difference. Each group uses not-not and joint to close off the final retreat. Say that it is not-being, and not-being is denied as well. Say that it is being and nonbeing together, and that too is denied. Every judgment that can be set upon it is removed, one sentence at a time.
At the end the author gives the full weight of “empty”: “Apart from the deluded mind, in truth there is nothing to empty.” Even emptiness is not one of suchness’s attributes. When deluded mind is gone, nothing remains to be emptied.
Second, the really-not-empty—“because it has a substance of its own and is complete in the uncontaminated qualities of its nature.”
Not empty follows empty immediately, and the order cannot be reversed. One reading distinguishes two levels of “not empty.” First, “because it differs from delusion, which has no substance, it is said to have a substance of its own.” Second, “because it differs from the contaminated afflictions as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, it is said to be complete in the uncontaminated qualities of its nature.”
The treatise says: “Once the substance of dharma has been revealed as empty and without delusion, it is the true mind—constant and unchanging, complete in pure dharmas—and therefore is named not empty.” First reveal its emptiness of delusion; what remains is the not-empty.
But the next sentence immediately adds: “It likewise has no mark that can be grasped, because the realm free from thought accords only with realization.” The not-empty is not something that can be held in the hand. It is a realm free from thought, and only direct realization accords with it.
Empty is the dismantling; not empty is what remains. What is dismantled is delusion; what remains cannot be grasped. Together the two meanings complete the aspect of suchness. At this point that aspect is fully spoken, and in the next passage the author turns to the aspect that moves.
Carrying Forward—How the Commentators Read This Passage
The foregoing is the sense of this passage in itself. What follows lets the commentators’ eyes shine on it from the side—a commentary is not the treatise, only the same matter seen from another position.
Fazang’s Record of the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle takes up and explains this passage phrase by phrase. The points above—that the “one” of the one Dharma-realm is not numerical; that the really-empty means emptiness of delusion and defilement within the real and “does not mean that the real is itself empty”; and that the not-empty has two levels—come from his hand. In explaining Dharma-realm he cites the Treatise on the Middle and Extremes, “Dharma-realm means the cause of the noble dharmas.” In explaining the really-empty he cites, “the nonexistence of grasper and grasped is present; the existence of grasper and grasped is absent; this is called the mark of emptiness.” In explaining the not-empty he cites the Compendium of the Great Vehicle and the Treatise on Buddha-Nature.
His explanation of empty pauses over the syntax. This is “the emptiness belonging to the real”: what is empty is the delusion and defilement within the real, not the real itself. A commentary stops over the relation of two words because if that relation is read wrongly, the whole treatise overturns.
Wonhyo’s Commentary on the Awakening of Faith does not repeat the text here but explains it by outline, and so it is less suited than the Record of the Meaning to phrase-by-phrase comparison. Nor is there a divergent judgment between the two works to record for this passage.
And the treatise’s own sentence remains where it was spoken: “To be free from thought is called entry.” It requires neither a commentator nor a stage.
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
本單元為全論十六單元之第四，範圍〔T32 0576a02–0576b06〕，五百一十字。所說為解釋分之標科、一心二門之立、心真如門之全部（真如之界說・三離三不・因言遣言・隨順與得入之問答・如實空與如實不空）。
碑界之特殊：本單元之訖處〔0576b06〕與次單元之起處〔0576b07「心生滅者」〕落在底本同一段之內——大正藏此處自「復次，真如者」至「本來平等同一覺故」為一整段。二套義理同段，故依義切之而不動一字。
解釋分之三科出於論文自標：「解釋分有三種。云何為三？一者、顯示正義，二者、對治邪執，三者、分別發趣道相。」〔T32 0576a03〕本單元屬其第一科之首段。
法藏《大乘起信論義記》於此段逐句牒釋，其牒句之首為「心真如者即是一法界大總相法門體」〔T44n1846 0252a25〕。
二、異譯對勘
| 事 | 本段（真諦本） | 實叉難陀本 |
|---|---|---|
| 真如之界說 | 「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體」〔0576a08〕 | 「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體」〔0584c07〕——二本此句逐字全同 |
| 二義之名 | 「一者、如實空」「二者、如實不空」〔0576a25〕 | 「依言說建立有二種別。一真實空」〔0584c20〕——彼本作「真實空」 |
「一法界大總相法門體」一句二本全同，是二本對勘中少見之全等處，誌之不判。二本此段之逐段對勘未備，誌之。
三、經論宗依
本段無逐字引經之句（已逐句查本單元）。逐文疏所引者（疏主之徵引，非本段之引文）：釋「法界」引《中邊論》「法界者。聖法因為義故。是故說法界。」〔T44n1846 0252a29〕；釋「如實空」引其「無能取所取有。有能取所取無。是名空相故也。」〔T44n1846 0253c05〕；釋「不空」引《攝論》「四德本有故也」與《佛性論》偈〔T44n1846 0253c10〕。
四、本段釋要
「一法界」之「一」不是數目——《義記》：「一法界者。即無二真心為一法界。此非算數之一。謂如理虛融平等不二故。稱為一。」〔T44n1846 0252a26〕又：「又對下依言有二義故。今約體但云一也。」〔T44n1846 0252a28〕
「如實空」之句法——《義記》：「言如實空者。此以如實之中空無妄染故。云如實空。非謂如實自空。此則如實之空。依主釋也。」〔T44n1846 0253c02〕所空者是妄染，不是如實自身；一字之差便成斷滅。又云「以妄空故。遂能顯示真理。故云顯實也。」〔T44n1846 0253c04〕
「不空」有二種——《義記》：「不空者有二種。一異妄無體故云有自體。二異恒沙有漏煩惱故云具足無漏性功德。」〔T44n1846 0253c08〕
五、諸家異釋（分欄並錄）
| 鏡 | 逐字 | 錨 |
|---|---|---|
| 法藏《義記》（唐·釋一法界） | 「此非算數之一。謂如理虛融平等不二故。稱為一。」 | 〔T44n1846 0252a26〕 |
| 法藏《義記》（唐·釋空之句法） | 「非謂如實自空。此則如實之空。依主釋也。」 | 〔T44n1846 0253c03〕 |
元曉《疏》為科釋體，本段之逐句牒文不備；本段無二家相違之判可並錄——已查 T44n1846、T44n1844 兩本。
六、術語
- 一法界大總相法門體〔0576a08〕：真如之界說。二本逐字全同（目二）。
- 心真如門・心生滅門〔0576a04〕：一心所開之二門。論文明言「是二種門，皆各總攝一切法」，非各攝其半。
- 如實空／如實不空〔0576a25〕：真如依言說所分之二義。
- 隨順／得入〔0576a21〕：本論所立之二階，前者在念中，後者離於念。
- 因言遣言〔0576a14〕：論文自標之法。
七、譬喻·修辭
本段無譬喻——五百一十字全為直說與遣相之語，無一譬。誌此，不代為本段造譬。
其修辭之特出者二：
- 三離〔0576a11〕：離言說相・離名字相・離心緣相——三層遞進，末層入心。
- 十句遣相〔0576a29〕：「非有相、非無相、非非有相、非非無相、非有無俱相，非一相、非異相、非非一相、非非異相、非一異俱相」——前五遣有無、後五遣一異，各以「非非」與「俱」再遣一層。
八、徵引承衍
- 論內之前後相繫：本段「依一心法，有二種門」承立義分「是心真如相」與「是心生滅因緣相」之立；二門「各總攝一切法」為後文「從生滅門即入真如門」之根據。「不覺義」此段未出，其名在次單元方立——論自標其所將說。
- 本叢書之內：本段無被本叢書他帙徵引之處（已查）。
九、校本定位
本單元域〔0576a02–0576b06〕之異讀九處，並錄不判：
| 錨 | 大正作 | 他本作 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔0576a10〕 | 妄 | 心 |
| 〔0576a15〕 | 極 | 相 |
| 〔0576a21〕 | 知 | 〔－〕 |
| 〔0576a24〕 | 真如 | 此真如 |
| 〔0576a27〕 | 本 | 昔 |
| 〔0576a27〕 | 已 | 以 |
| 〔0576a29〕 | 相 | 〔－〕 |
| 〔0576b06〕 | 故 | 〔－〕・則 |
| 〔0576b06〕 | 名 | 則名 |
〔0576a10〕「唯依妄念」之「妄」他本作「心」，於本段起處之義相關；並錄不判。
本單元域內：缺字標記 0、私用區字 0、夾註 0。
I. Doctrinal-Outline Placement
This unit is the fourth of the sixteen units of the whole treatise. Its range is 〔T32 0576a02–0576b06〕, comprising five hundred and ten characters. It contains the headings of the part on explication, the establishment of the one mind and its two aspects, and the whole of the aspect of mind as suchness: the definition of suchness; the three freedoms and three unshakable qualities; using words to dispel words; the question and answer on accordance and entry; and the really-empty and the really-not-empty.
A peculiarity of the unit boundary: the end of this unit at 〔0576b06〕 and the opening of the next at 〔0576b07「心生滅者」〕—“as for mind as arising and ceasing”—fall within a single paragraph of the base text. In the Taishō, the passage from 「復次，真如者」—“furthermore, as for suchness” through 「本來平等同一覺故」—“because they are originally equal and identical in awakening” forms one unbroken paragraph. Since it contains two distinct bodies of doctrine, the boundary follows the meaning without altering a single character.
The three divisions of the part on explication are set out by the treatise itself: 「解釋分有三種。云何為三？一者、顯示正義，二者、對治邪執，三者、分別發趣道相。」—“The part on explication has three divisions. Which three? First, displaying the true meaning; second, countering deviant attachments; third, distinguishing the marks of setting out on the path” 〔T32 0576a03〕. This unit is the opening passage of the first division.
Fazang’s Record of the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle takes up and explains the passage phrase by phrase. Its first cited phrase is 「心真如者即是一法界大總相法門體」—“what is called mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm” 〔T44n1846 0252a25〕.
II. Cross-Recension Collation
| Matter | Present passage (Paramārtha’s recension) | Śikṣānanda’s recension |
|---|---|---|
| Definition of suchness | 「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體」—“what is called mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm” 〔0576a08〕 | 「心真如者，即是一法界大總相法門體」—“what is called mind as suchness is the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm” 〔0584c07〕—the sentence is word-for-word identical in the two recensions |
| Names of the two meanings | 「一者、如實空」—“first, the really-empty”; 「二者、如實不空」—“second, the really-not-empty” 〔0576a25〕 | 「依言說建立有二種別。一真實空」—“established in dependence upon speech, there are two distinctions: first, true emptiness” 〔0584c20〕—that recension has 「真實空」—“true emptiness” |
The sentence 「一法界大總相法門體」—“the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm” is identical in the two recensions, a rare point of complete verbal agreement in their collation. It is recorded without adjudication. A passage-by-passage collation of this section in the two recensions has not been prepared; this is recorded.
III. Scriptural and Treatise Basis
This passage contains no verbatim citation from a scripture (the unit has been checked sentence by sentence). The citations occur in the word-by-word commentary and belong to its author, not to the passage. In explaining 「法界」—“Dharma-realm,” the Record of the Meaning cites the Treatise on the Middle and Extremes: 「法界者。聖法因為義故。是故說法界。」—“Dharma-realm means the cause of the noble dharmas; for this reason it is called Dharma-realm” 〔T44n1846 0252a29〕. In explaining 「如實空」—“the really-empty,” it cites, 「無能取所取有。有能取所取無。是名空相故也。」—“The nonexistence of grasper and grasped is present; the existence of grasper and grasped is absent. For this reason it is called the mark of emptiness” 〔T44n1846 0253c05〕. In explaining 「不空」—“not empty,” it cites the Compendium of the Great Vehicle, 「四德本有故也」—“because the four qualities are originally present,” together with a stanza from the Treatise on Buddha-Nature 〔T44n1846 0253c10〕.
IV. Exegesis of the Passage (the word-by-word mirror, phrase by phrase)
The 「一」—“one” of 「一法界」—“one Dharma-realm” is not a number. The Record of the Meaning says: 「一法界者。即無二真心為一法界。此非算數之一。謂如理虛融平等不二故。稱為一。」—“The one Dharma-realm is the nondual true mind, taken as the one Dharma-realm. This ‘one’ is not the one of numerical calculation. Because, in accord with principle, it is open, interpenetrating, equal, and nondual, it is called one” 〔T44n1846 0252a26〕. It further says, 「又對下依言有二義故。今約體但云一也。」—“Again, in contrast to the two meanings established below in dependence upon speech, here it is called only ‘one’ in terms of its substance” 〔T44n1846 0252a28〕.
The syntax of 「如實空」—“the really-empty.” The Record of the Meaning explains: 「言如實空者。此以如實之中空無妄染故。云如實空。非謂如實自空。此則如實之空。依主釋也。」—“As for the expression ‘the really-empty’: because within the real there is emptiness of delusion and defilement, it is called the really-empty. It does not mean that the real is itself empty. This is the emptiness belonging to the real, a gloss in which one term depends upon the other” 〔T44n1846 0253c02〕. What is empty is delusion and defilement, not the real itself; a one-character difference would turn the passage toward annihilation. The commentary further says, 「以妄空故。遂能顯示真理。故云顯實也。」—“Because delusion is empty, the true principle can thereby be revealed; hence it is said to reveal the real” 〔T44n1846 0253c04〕.
There are two senses of 「不空」—“not empty.” The Record of the Meaning says, 「不空者有二種。一異妄無體故云有自體。二異恒沙有漏煩惱故云具足無漏性功德。」—“Not empty has two senses. First, because it differs from delusion, which has no substance, it is said to have a substance of its own. Second, because it differs from the afflictions with contamination, as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, it is said to be complete in the uncontaminated qualities of its nature” 〔T44n1846 0253c08〕.
V. Divergent Readings of the Commentators (recorded side by side, without adjudication)
| Mirror | Word for word | Anchor |
|---|---|---|
| Fazang, Record of the Meaning (Tang · on the one Dharma-realm) | 「此非算數之一。謂如理虛融平等不二故。稱為一。」—“This ‘one’ is not the one of numerical calculation. Because, in accord with principle, it is open, interpenetrating, equal, and nondual, it is called one.” | 〔T44n1846 0252a26〕 |
| Fazang, Record of the Meaning (Tang · on the syntax of emptiness) | 「非謂如實自空。此則如實之空。依主釋也。」—“It does not mean that the real is itself empty. This is the emptiness belonging to the real, a gloss in which one term depends upon the other.” | 〔T44n1846 0253c03〕 |
Wonhyo’s Commentary is an outline commentary and does not supply a complete phrase-by-phrase citation of this passage. There is no divergent judgment between two commentators to record for this passage—both T44n1846 and T44n1844 have been checked.
VI. Terms (first occurrences in this passage)
- 一法界大總相法門體 — the substance of the Dharma-gate of the great comprehensive mark of the one Dharma-realm 〔0576a08〕: the definition of suchness. It is word-for-word identical in the two recensions (see II).
- 心真如門・心生滅門 — the aspect of mind as suchness · the aspect of mind as arising and ceasing 〔0576a04〕: the two aspects opened from the one mind. The treatise explicitly says 「是二種門，皆各總攝一切法」—“each of these two aspects encompasses all dharmas in their entirety”; they do not each encompass only half.
- 如實空／如實不空 — the really-empty / the really-not-empty 〔0576a25〕: two meanings distinguished in suchness in dependence upon speech.
- 隨順／得入 — accordance / entry 〔0576a21〕: two stages established by the treatise, the former within thought, the latter free from thought.
- 因言遣言 — using words to dispel words 〔0576a14〕: the method named by the treatise itself.
VII. Simile and Rhetoric
This passage has no simile—all five hundred and ten characters speak directly or dispel marks, without a single figure. This is recorded; no simile is manufactured on the passage’s behalf.
Two rhetorical structures stand out:
- The three freedoms 〔0576a11〕: freedom from the mark of speech, freedom from the mark of names, and freedom from the mark of mental engagement—a threefold progression whose final level enters the mind.
- The ten clauses dispelling marks 〔0576a29〕: 「非有相、非無相、非非有相、非非無相、非有無俱相，非一相、非異相、非非一相、非非異相、非一異俱相」—“not a mark of being, not a mark of nonbeing, not a mark of not-being, not a mark of not-nonbeing, not a joint mark of being and nonbeing; not a mark of oneness, not a mark of difference, not a mark of not-oneness, not a mark of not-difference, not a joint mark of oneness and difference.” The first five dispel being and nonbeing; the latter five dispel oneness and difference. Each group uses 「非非」—“not-not” and 「俱」—“joint” to dispel one level further.
VIII. Citation and Carrying Forward
- Connections before and after within the treatise: this passage’s 「依一心法，有二種門」—“in dependence upon the dharma of the one mind there are two aspects” carries forward the part on setting up the meaning’s 「是心真如相」—“the mark of this mind as suchness” and 「是心生滅因緣相」—“the mark of this mind as the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing.” The statement that the two aspects 「各總攝一切法」—“each encompasses all dharmas in their entirety” provides the ground for the later 「從生滅門即入真如門」—“from the aspect of arising and ceasing one enters directly into the aspect of suchness.” The term 「不覺義」—“the meaning of non-awakening” does not yet appear here; it is established only in the next unit—the treatise itself indicates what it is going to say.
- Within this series: this passage is not cited in another work of the series (checked).
IX. Text-critical Placement
Nine variant readings occur within the range of this unit 〔0576a02–0576b06〕. They are recorded side by side without adjudication:
| Anchor | Taishō | Other witnesses |
|---|---|---|
| 〔0576a10〕 | “deluded” | “mind” |
| 〔0576a15〕 | “uttermost” | “mark” |
| 〔0576a21〕 | “knows” | absent |
| 〔0576a24〕 | “suchness” | “this suchness” |
| 〔0576a27〕 | “from the beginning” | “formerly” |
| 〔0576a27〕 | “already” | “by means of” |
| 〔0576a29〕 | “mark” | absent |
| 〔0576b06〕 | “because” | absent; “then” |
| 〔0576b06〕 | “named” | “then named” |
At 〔0576a10〕, in the expression 「唯依妄念」—“only in dependence upon deluded thoughts,” other witnesses read 「心」—“mind” in place of 「妄」—“deluded.” The difference bears upon the meaning at the opening of the passage; it is recorded without adjudication.
Within the range of this unit: lacuna markers 0, private-use-area characters 0, interlinear notes 0.