大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 37.37

37.37

疏「則不壞於盡」者，此有二意：一者拂上有為；二者上來雙遣，今則雙存。自性無盡則有無盡，有難思盡則有盡矣。以泯不礙存，故存亡無二方曰難思。而向言拂上有為者，謂盡則無盡，故非盡矣。上來盡即無盡，意雖暗拂，而以其性如空，別示無為，故今方說拂有為耳。疏「但除上病」者，即側用《淨名》第二「但除其病而不除法」。「二空之體」者，以法性宗二空即真如空。「及所顯圓成」者，以法相宗二空非真如，二空所顯為真如故。真如即是圓成，然空有無礙，故雙存兩宗。

As for the commentary's phrase “then it does not destroy exhaustion,” this has two meanings: First, it brushes away the aforementioned conditioned. Second, whereas the preceding eliminated both, now both are preserved. If the intrinsic nature is inexhaustible, then there is inexhaustibility; if there is an inconceivable exhaustion, then there is exhaustion. Because elimination does not obstruct preservation, preservation and negation being non-dual is precisely what is termed inconceivable. Now, when it was said earlier that it brushes away the conditioned, this means that exhaustion is inexhaustibility, and hence not exhaustion. Although the preceding statement that exhaustion is precisely inexhaustibility implicitly brushed it away, because its nature is like space, it separately indicated the unconditioned; hence only now does it speak of brushing away the conditioned. As for the commentary's phrase “only removing the above illness,” it allusively uses Chapter 2 of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: “only remove the illness, but do not remove the dharma.” As for “the essence of the two emptineses,” according to the Dharmatā school, the two emptineses are precisely the emptiness of tathatā. As for “and the consummate nature revealed thereby,” according to the Dharmalakṣaṇa school, the two emptineses are not tathatā, because what is revealed by the two emptineses is tathatā. Tathatā is precisely the consummate nature; however, since emptiness and existence are unobstructed, both schools are preserved.