大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 20.33

20.33

疏「不可取為一異俱不俱等」者，普遍諸會，此應有異；充滿法界，此應唯一。今性相俱寂，故皆叵得。若有一異，則合此為俱。一異既亡，俱從何有？若有俱句遣此雙非，俱句已無，雙非寧立？故四句皆遣、百非俱亡，寂乎唯寂。而言等者，亦不可說有無等四、真應等殊，唯證相應耳。

Regarding the Commentary's statement, "cannot be apprehended as identical, different, both, neither, etc.": pervading all assemblies, this should be different; filling the dharmadhātu, this should be solely one. Now, both nature and characteristics are quiescent, so neither can be grasped. If there were identity and difference, these would combine to form "both." Since both identity and difference are gone, from where could "both" come? If there were a proposition of "both" that negates the double negative [of "neither"], then since the proposition of "both" is already absent, how could the double negative be established? Therefore, all four propositions are negated, and all hundred negations are extinguished; quiescent, solely quiescent. As for saying "etc.," one also cannot speak of the four [propositions] of existence, non-existence, etc., or the distinctions between the true and the responsive; there is only resonance through realization.