大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 30.41

30.41

疏「一孤標獨立」者，即前多中無一性、一亦無有多，二法互無，故得獨立。亦一即多而唯多、多即一而唯一，廢己同他，故云獨立。「二雙現同時」，即下經云「知以一故眾，知以眾故一。無一即無多，無多即無一」故，故二雙現更無前後，如牛二角。「三兩相俱忘」者，即前二俱捨也。「四自在無礙」者，欲一即一，不壞相故；欲多即多，一即多故。一既如此，多亦準之。常一常多、常即常離，故云自在。「五去來不動」者，一入多而一在、多入一而多存，若兩鏡相入而不動本相。相即亦然。「六無力相持」者，因一有多，多無力而持一；因多有一，一無力而持多。「七彼此無知」者，二互相依，皆無體用故，不相知故。覺首云：「諸法無作用，亦無有體性。是故彼一切，各各不相知。」「八力用交徹」者，即前一中解無量、無量中解一。「九自性非有」者，互為因起，舉體性空。十「究竟離言」者，不可言一、不可言非一、不可言亦一亦非一、不可言非一非非一。不可言相即，以相入故。不可言相入，以相即故。不可言即入，不壞相故。不可言不即不入，互交徹故。口欲辯而辭喪，心將緣而慮亡，唯證方知，同果海故。一多既爾，染淨等法無不皆然。

Regarding the commentary's phrase “First, solitary standing and independent presence”: this means, as explained earlier, that within the many there is no nature of the one, and the one also does not have the many. Because the two phenomena are mutually devoid [of each other], they can each stand independently. Moreover, the one is identical to the many yet is purely the many; the many is identical to the one yet is purely the one. Relinquishing the self to assimilate to the other is why it is called “independent presence.”
Regarding “Second, simultaneous manifestation of both”: this is just as the subsequent scripture states: “Knowing that through the one there are the many; knowing that through the many there is the one. Without the one there are no many; without the many there is no one.” Therefore, the two manifest together without before or after, like the two horns of an ox.
Regarding “Third, mutual forgetting of both characteristics”: this means the aforementioned discarding of both.
Regarding “Fourth, unhindered mastery”: wishing for the one, it is the one, because it does not destroy its characteristic; wishing for the many, it is the many, because the one is identical to the many. As this is true of the one, the many should be understood likewise. Ever one and ever many, ever identical and ever separate—hence it is called “mastery.”
Regarding “Fifth, staying unmoved through coming and going”: when the one enters into the many, the one remains; when the many enters into the one, the many persists. It is like two mirrors mutually interpenetrating without altering their original forms. Mutual identity is likewise.
Regarding “Sixth, sustaining each other without individual capacity”: because of the one there are the many, yet the many lacks its own capacity and is sustained by the one; because of the many there is the one, yet the one lacks its own capacity and is sustained by the many.
Regarding “Seventh, mutual absence of awareness”: because the two are mutually dependent, both lack essence and function, and thus do not know each other. Bodhisattva Jñānaprabha said: “All dharmas lack functional action, nor do they possess essential nature. Therefore, all of them do not know each other individually.”
Regarding “Eighth, complete interpenetration of capacity and function”: this refers to the previous [statement of] understanding the immeasurable within the one and understanding the one within the immeasurable.
Regarding “Ninth, lack of intrinsic nature”: they arise mutually as cause and condition, so their entire essence is fundamentally empty.
Regarding “Tenth, ultimate ineffability”: one cannot say “one”; one cannot say “not one”; one cannot say “both one and not one”; one cannot say “neither one nor not one.” One cannot speak of mutual identity, because they mutually enter; one cannot speak of mutual entering, because they are mutually identical. One cannot speak of identity and entering, because their characteristics are not destroyed; one cannot speak of neither identity nor entering, because they mutually interpenetrate. The mouth would explain, but words fail; the mind would grasp conditions, but thoughts vanish. Only through realization is it known, for it is one with the ocean of the fruit. As it is with one and many, so it is without exception for all dharmas, defiled or pure.