大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 57.10

57.10

疏「此不同相由得前同」下，第二總結會通。於中二：先結會同義、後「論中」下但結不同。今初，應有問云：若解脫如空，則本來無礙，何異同相？故為此會。同約體空，此約契空，悟本無縛名真解脫，故云「由得前同成斯不同」。彼能成斯、斯能顯彼，能所不一也。結不同中但結五句者，解脫是總，於諸趣是脫處，故不結之。言「謂如是觀而觀等」者，謂應如是契實而觀，莫作餘不契之觀。而云等者，等取依止解脫，謂應如是依止於常，莫依無常；應如是雙離二障解脫，莫同聲聞。言「後三對妄顯真」者，一般若云：不同聲聞依聲而悟；二法身云：非如無常意識智依止無常因緣；三解脫云；不同聲聞猶有智障。故牒於真以結此三，令依於真不依於妄故。亦可後三即涅槃故，前二不離三故，已如上說。論中此後會六相云「如是說已，於中自體空是總，三種智空是別。」釋曰：此會同相。論又云「解脫是總，五種解脫是別。」釋曰：此會同不同相也。但會總別，同異成壞略可知故。

Regarding the commentary's "These different characteristics are obtained from the previous identity" and so forth, this secondly generally concludes and harmonizes. Within it are two: first concluding and harmonizing the meaning of identity, and afterwards from "In the treatise" merely concluding difference. Now, as for the first: there should be a question saying, "If liberation is like empty space, it is fundamentally unobstructed; how does it differ from the characteristic of identity?" Therefore this harmonization is made. Identity concerns essential emptiness; this concerns matching emptiness. Awakening to fundamental bondage-free nature is named true liberation; hence it says "obtaining the previous identity accomplishes these differences." That can accomplish this, and this can reveal that; the accomplisher and accomplished are not one. In concluding the differences, only five phrases are concluded, because liberation is the general, and among the various destinies it is the place of liberation, so it is not concluded. Saying "contemplating in this way and contemplating, etc." means one should contemplate by thus matching reality, not making other contemplations that do not match. Saying "etc." inclusively takes the liberation of reliance, meaning one should rely on the permanent in this way, and not rely on the impermanent; one should doubly depart from the liberation of the two obstacles in this way, and not be like the śrāvakas. Saying "the latter three reveal the real in contrast to the false": first, prajñā says it is not like the śrāvaka relying on sound to awaken; second, the dharmakāya says it is not like the wisdom of impermanent mental consciousness relying on impermanent causes and conditions; third, liberation says it is not like the śrāvakas who still have the obstacle of the knowable. Hence it cites the real to conclude these three, causing one to rely on the real and not on the false. It may also be that the latter three are just nirvāṇa, because the former two are not separate from the three, as already explained above. In the treatise, after this, it harmonizes the six characteristics, saying: "Having spoken thus, among them essential emptiness is the general, and the three kinds of wisdom-emptiness are the particulars." The explanation says: this harmonizes the characteristic of identity. The treatise further says: "Liberation is the general, and the five kinds of liberation are the particulars." The explanation says: this harmonizes the characteristics of identity and difference. It only harmonizes the general and particular, because identity, difference, formation, and disintegration can be briefly known.