大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 37.54

37.54

疏「後偈拂前無二之跡」者，即無中無有二。偈初句牒前無二之跡，次句遣之。「言無二者」，牒初句也。「非謂有無二」下，正釋第二句，而是反釋。若謂有無二，即執藥成病。「若存無二」下，出謂有無二之過。從「遣之又遣之」下，拂跡。若不得意，千重遣之未免於二。何者？謂有人聞無二亦復無，謂無無二為是，亦有所著。故《中論》云「諸佛說空法，為離諸有見。若復見有空，諸佛所不化」。以楔出楔、以賊逐賊，無有已時。心無所著，當法即絕故，故至於無遣。若以無遣為是，亦有著矣。此亦借《老子》「損之又損之，以至於無為」之言。

Regarding the commentary stating, "The latter verse sweeps away the preceding trace of non-duality": that is, within nothingness there is no duality. The first line of the verse cites the preceding trace of non-duality, and the next line dismisses it. "Stating non-duality" cites the first line. From "does not mean there is non-duality" onward, it directly explains the second line, doing so by converse explanation. If one says there is non-duality, that is grasping the medicine and making it a disease. From "if non-duality is preserved" onward, it points out the fault of asserting that there is non-duality. From "dismissing it and further dismissing it" onward, it sweeps away the traces. If one misses the point, dismissing it a thousand times still fails to avoid duality. Why? Because someone who hears that non-duality is also non-existent might take the non-existence of non-duality to be correct, and thus also have an attachment. Hence the Madhyamakaśāstra says: "The Buddhas teach the Dharma of emptiness to eliminate all views of existence; if one further sees that there is emptiness, such a person cannot be transformed by the Buddhas." Taking out a wedge with a wedge, or chasing a thief with a thief, has no end. When the mind has no attachment, right in the phenomenon it is severed; therefore it arrives at non-dismissal. If one takes non-dismissal to be correct, there is also attachment. This also borrows the words of Laozi: "Decrease it and further decrease it, until one arrives at non-action."