大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 25.53

25.53

疏「亦不得言通一切世界海說」者，第四逆遮昔救。恐有救云：一剎海中剎，不充一剎海之塵。今取一切剎海中剎，以充一剎海中塵數，豈不得耶？亦如一槃彈子之多，不充一槃之塵。若多槃彈子，豈不充一槃之塵耶？故今遮云：若依此義，義則粗通，奈何違下文。下文云「一世界海中即有世界海塵數。」不可言一切世界海共為一世界海塵數，豈得將此而為救耶？亦猶一槃彈子即有一槃彈子塵數，不言多槃有一槃之塵也。

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Nor can it be said to speak generally of all oceans of world systems": this is the fourth part, anticipatorily refuting the past [master's] rescue [argument]. One might fear that there is a rescue argument stating: The kṣetras in a single ocean of kṣetras do not fill out the dust motes of a single ocean of kṣetras. Now, taking the kṣetras in all oceans of kṣetras to fill out the number of dust motes in a single ocean of kṣetras—how could that not be permissible? It is also like the multitude of pellets in a single tray not filling out the dust motes of a single tray: if there are the pellets of many trays, would they not fill out the dust motes of a single tray? Therefore, it is now refuted: If one relies on this meaning, the meaning is roughly plausible, but how can one deal with its contradiction of the text below? The text below says: "Within a single ocean of world systems there are the dust motes of oceans of world systems." One cannot say that all oceans of world systems collectively make up the dust motes of a single ocean of world systems; how can one take this as a rescue argument? It is just as a single tray of pellets has the dust motes of a single tray of pellets; it does not say that many trays have the dust of a single tray.