大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 32.6

32.6

疏「幻有即是不有有」下，第二立中道義。此中有三中道：一幻有上自為中道，謂有與不有此二無礙故為中道，故云有是不有有。言不有者，舉體全空，無所有故。重言有者，亦名非不有，謂不待破差別相故。故《大品》云「諸法無所有如是有」，故非有非不有名為中道，是幻有義。二言「真空是不空空」者，即真空上以明中道，謂不空與空無障礙故。言不空者，以空無空相故。重言空者，亦名非不空，謂餘一切相無不盡故。是故非空非不空名為中道，是真空義。經云「空不空不可說，名為真空。」《中論》云「無性法亦無，一切法空故。」重言不空空，故名不真空。「不有有故名非實有」者，傍會異義，意不殊前。即通會肇公《不真空論》。康公云：「萬法不真故空。」不得肇意；達公云：「不遷當俗，俗則不生。不真為真，真但名說。」却得肇意。此中真空非是前文對妙有之真空，此中真空是所破病人，謂真諦一向無物為真空義。是故肇公以不不之，云不一向是無物，故云不真空。謂即萬有之無性名為真諦，何曾一向是空？故云不真空也。此不真空，即前真空。「不有有故名非實有」者，對上不真空，故為此揀。真空實有並是二邊，不真非實即為正理。

Regarding the Commentary's line beginning with "Illusory existence is precisely the existence that is non-existence": this is the second [section], establishing the meaning of the middle way. Here there are three middle ways: First, illusory existence is in itself the middle way: that is, because existence and non-existence are unobstructed with each other, they constitute the middle way; hence it is said that existence is the existence that is non-existence. Speaking of "non-existence", its entire essence is completely empty, because there is nothing possessed. Speaking of "existence" again, it is also called "not non-existence", meaning that it does not depend on destroying differentiated characteristics. Hence the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā states: "All dharmas, having nothing possessed, exist in this manner"; therefore, being neither existent nor non-existent is called the middle way; this is the meaning of illusory existence. Second, the statement "True emptiness is the emptiness that is not empty" explains the middle way upon true emptiness itself: that is, because non-emptiness and emptiness are unimpeded. Speaking of "not empty", it is because emptiness has no characteristic of emptiness. Speaking of "empty" again, it is also called "not non-empty", meaning that all other characteristics without exception are exhausted. Therefore, being neither empty nor non-empty is called the middle way; this is the meaning of true emptiness. A sūtra says: "Emptiness and non-emptiness cannot be spoken of; it is called true emptiness." The Madhyamakaśāstra says: "The dharma devoid of nature is also nonexistent, because all dharmas are empty." Reiterating the emptiness that is not empty, it is therefore called "unreal emptiness". Regarding "Because it is an existence that is non-existence, it is called non-real existence": this incidentally reconciles a differing interpretation, its intent being no different from the preceding. That is, it comprehensively reconciles Master Zhao's Treatise on Unreal Emptiness. Master Kang said: "Because the ten thousand dharmas are not real, they are empty"—this failed to grasp Zhao's intention. Master Da said: "Non-motion pertains to the conventional; the conventional does not arise. Unreal constitutes the ultimate; the ultimate is merely a nominal designation"—this indeed grasped Zhao's intention. Here, "true emptiness" is not the true emptiness spoken of previously in contrast to subtle existence; here, "true emptiness" is the object to be refuted in the diseased person, referring to the view that the ultimate truth is categorically devoid of entity as the meaning of true emptiness. Therefore Master Zhao negated it with "not", saying that it is not categorically devoid of entity; hence he called it "unreal emptiness". That is to say, the very absence of intrinsic nature in the ten thousand existents is termed the ultimate truth—how could it ever be categorically empty? Therefore he called it "unreal emptiness". This unreal emptiness is precisely the true emptiness mentioned before. Regarding "Because it is an existence that is non-existence, it is called non-real existence": this is distinguished in contrast to the "unreal emptiness" above. True emptiness and real existence are both the two extremes; unreal and non-real are precisely the correct principle.