大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 37.39

37.39

疏「又二互相待故俱空」等者，謂上約因緣，因他立稱，故無真實，不融二體。今明雙融，此有三意：一相待、二相即、三相奪。今初。相待俱空，即相待門。謂因涅槃方說生死，要因生死方說涅槃，若高下相形，若無有高則無有下，若離涅槃則生死不存，若離生死則涅槃不立，故俱空也。次言「二互相奪故皆寂」者，此有二意：一者相即門，生死實性即是涅槃，則涅槃之相假說生死，如波與水舉一全收，故生死即涅槃、涅槃即生死。二由相即故便互相奪，生死即涅槃即無生死，涅槃即生死則無涅槃，故涅槃非寂靜、生死亦非喧，故皆寂也。

As for the commentary's phrase “furthermore, because the two are mutually dependent, both are empty,” and so forth: previously, based on causes and conditions, designations were established dependent on the other; hence there was no real actuality, and the two essences were not interfused. Now it clarifies their dual interfusion, which has three aspects: first, mutual dependence; second, mutual identity; third, mutual negation. Now to address the first: that through mutual dependence both are empty is the gateway of mutual dependence. That is to say, only because of nirvāṇa is saṃsāra spoken of, and it is necessary to rely on saṃsāra to speak of nirvāṇa; it is like high and low giving shape to each other—if there were no high, there would be no low; if one departs from nirvāṇa, saṃsāra does not persist; if one departs from saṃsāra, nirvāṇa is not established. Hence both are empty. Next, the statement that “because the two mutually negate each other, both are quiescent” has two meanings: First, the gateway of mutual identity: the real nature of saṃsāra is precisely nirvāṇa, and then the characteristic of nirvāṇa is provisionally spoken of as saṃsāra, just as with waves and water, raising one completely encompasses the other; therefore, saṃsāra is precisely nirvāṇa, and nirvāṇa is precisely saṃsāra. Second, because of mutual identity, they then mutually negate each other: if saṃsāra is precisely nirvāṇa, then there is no saṃsāra; if nirvāṇa is precisely saṃsāra, then there is no nirvāṇa. Therefore, nirvāṇa is not quiescent, and saṃsāra is also not clamorous; hence both are quiescent.