仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 2.131

2.131

Explanation: First, the pair of oneness and difference. As for "one and different", the meaning has two explanations: First, the approach of transcending marks: not being restricted by existence, it is said to be "neither one"; its substance pervading existence and non-existence, it is said to be "nor different". Second, the approach of revealing virtues: its substance possessing myriad virtues, it is said to be "neither one"; all the myriad virtues being suchness, it is said to be "nor different". Therefore it is said to be "neither one nor different". Second, the pair of this and that. As for "this and that", "this" refers to birth and death, and "that" refers to nirvāṇa; birth and death and nirvāṇa are relative in terms of delusion and awakening. Transcending speech and absolute, it is originally equal—how could there be this and that? Moreover, this matter is explained on the basis of spatial locations of form; like being neither identical nor separate, it is neither this nor that. Third, the pair of purity and defilement. As for "purity and defilement", the meaning has two explanations: First, distinguished on the basis of form: the pure lands where all the noble assemblies dwell, and the defiled lands where all ordinary fools dwell. Moreover, between noble ones and ordinary beings each has much purity and defilement; the real mark is not form, and therefore is neither pure nor defiled. Second, distinguished on the basis of mind: all untainted wisdoms are named pure, and adventitious defilements are named defiled; the real mark is not mind, and therefore is neither pure nor defiled. Because of this, it is said to be "neither pure nor defiled". Fourth, the pair of conditioned and unconditioned. "Neither conditioned": all conditioned dharmas shift and flow from moment to moment, but the real mark is empty and quiescent, hence it is not conditioned. "Nor unconditioned": yet its real mark is indeed the true unconditioned; to refute fixed grasping, it is called "neither". From here is the second, the latter four pairs, which explain by twofold absence.