大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 19.39

19.39

疏「若約融真俗」下，三約雙融。所以辯此者，自有二意。一者古德自科入法界藏云：一證理法，故於止義唯就理明，今此別明事理無礙。二者即所證理，是即事之理不遮雙融。但上雙融，唯取權智對於真止，故為非耳。故今不要以止對真，而智自有權實雙融。對真俗雙融，以與昔別，況云而不失止，則二智之上自有二止：權智之上有隨緣止、實智之上有體真止。二止亦融，對上二智即止觀雙融，若融智境方為一味。

Regarding the Commentary's text from 'If in terms of harmonizing the absolute and conventional' onward, the third is in terms of dual harmonization. The reason for discerning this naturally contains two meanings. First, the former master's own sectioning of entering the repository of the dharmadhātu stated: 'First, the dharma of realizing principle', hence regarding the meaning of cessation he explained it solely in terms of principle; now, this separately clarifies the non-obstruction of phenomena and principle. Second, the very principle realized is the principle that is identical with phenomena, not precluding dual harmonization. However, the dual harmonization above merely took expedient cognition to correspond to real cessation, and therefore was flawed. Thus now one does not need to pair cessation with the real; rather, cognition itself possesses the dual harmonization of the expedient and the real. Pairing this with the dual harmonization of absolute and conventional differentiates it from the past [interpretations]. Furthermore, in saying 'and yet not losing cessation', upon the two cognitions there naturally are two cessations: upon expedient cognition there is cessation in concordance with conditions, and upon real cognition there is cessation by embodying the real. The two cessations are also harmonized, and when paired with the two cognitions above, this is the dual harmonization of cessation and contemplation; only when cognition and object are harmonized does it become of a single flavor.