大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 34.38

34.38

疏「謂同滿行海」下，二釋相也。於中有四：初通釋四義、二結成同異、三引證同異、四別彰果同。今初。一「同滿行海」者，二利行也。二「將此同因」下，辨異因相，亦用上來二利行也。然法相宗，自受用身及受用土，自利行成。若他受用變化身土，利他行招。然則利他亦能隨機而取異果，諸佛皆爾，亦得言同。若法性宗，二利皆成同因異因。利他不圓，安得真報？自利不足，豈能利他？故隨二行並成自果俱能利他，但隨所宜化類差別，故取異果耳。

Regarding the Commentary's statement starting with "Meaning that they identically fulfill the ocean of practices": second, it explains the characteristics. Within this there are four parts: first, a general explanation of the four meanings; second, concluding the identity and difference; third, citing proof for identity and difference; fourth, specifically displaying the identity of the fruits. Now, the first: first, "identically fulfilling the ocean of practices" refers to the practices of the two benefits [self-benefit and benefiting others]. Second, from "taking this identical cause" onward, it distinguishes the characteristics of different causes, which also make use of the aforementioned practices of the two benefits. However, in the Faxiang school, the self-enjoyment body and the enjoyment land are accomplished by the practices of self-benefit; while the other-enjoyment and transformation bodies and lands are summoned by the practices of benefiting others. Thus, benefiting others can also follow faculties to appropriate different fruits; all Buddhas are like this, so one may also speak of identity. In the Faxing school, both of the two benefits accomplish the identical cause and the different causes. If benefiting others is not complete, how could one attain the true retribution? If self-benefit is insufficient, how could one benefit others? Therefore, along with the two practices, they jointly accomplish one's own fruit and are both able to benefit others; it is merely that in accordance with the differences in the types to be transformed as appropriate, they take on different fruits.