大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 58.39

58.39

疏「三不雜染勝」者，論唯有標名，下便以經帖合。「謂證真」下，疏先通釋；後「以即邊」下，別釋無中邊言。遠公釋有二義：一約染淨事法辨、二約有無法理辨。今初。然論經云「無中邊」，此公云：「生死此邊，涅槃彼邊，聖道為中。」今觀生死本性不有，即無此邊，涅槃如故，亦無彼邊；兩邊既無，聖道亦寂，無有中間。二約有無法理辨，云有為此邊，無為彼邊，非有非無說以為中。有即非有，故無此邊；無即非無，故無彼邊；兩邊盡泯，中間亦亡，故無中間。然此二釋，約法小異，義旨皆同。二邊中道三法皆立，以為所遣，以性空遣二邊，相待遣中道。今之所釋，略有二異：一者中邊語通，則有無染淨、一異斷常、生死涅槃、若離若合，皆是二邊，中隨二邊亦有多義。二者以中遣邊、以邊遣中，待絕雙亡，故皆本無。餘如前說。疏「亦是三輪化益」者，智地意業。說即口業。力即身業，身威力故。

Regarding the Commentary's statement, "Third, the superiority of unmixed purity," the Śāstra merely provides the label, and below immediately matches it with the sūtra. From "That is, realizing the true" onward, the Commentary first explains generally; afterward, from "Because being identical to an extreme" onward, it specifically explains the words "free from middle and extremes." Master Huiyuan's explanation has two meanings: first, distinguishing according to defiled and pure phenomena; second, distinguishing according to the principle of existence and non-existence. Now, regarding the first: the Śāstra's sūtra text says "free from middle and extremes"; this master says, "Saṃsāra is this extreme, nirvāṇa is that extreme, and the noble path is the middle." Now, observing that the original nature of saṃsāra does not exist, there is no 'this extreme'; since nirvāṇa is suchness, there is also no 'that extreme'. The two extremes being absent, the noble path is also quiescent, having no middle. Second, distinguishing according to the principle of existence and non-existence, it says existence is this extreme, the unconditioned is that extreme, and neither-existence-nor-non-existence is spoken of as the middle. Existence is non-existence, hence there is no 'this extreme'; non-existence is non-non-existence, hence there is no 'that extreme'. Both extremes being completely effaced, the middle is also eliminated; hence there is no middle. However, these two explanations differ slightly in terms of phenomena, but their essential intent is identical. The two extremes and the middle path—all three dharmas are established and taken as what is negated: through essential emptiness the two extremes are negated, and through mutual dependence the middle path is negated. What is explained now has two slight differences: first, the expression 'middle and extremes' is general, so existence and non-existence, defilement and purity, identity and difference, annihilation and eternity, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, whether separated or combined, are all two extremes; the middle also has many meanings in accordance with the two extremes. Second, using the middle to negate the extremes, and using the extremes to negate the middle, when mutual dependence ceases both are eliminated; hence fundamentally neither exists. The rest is as explained previously. Regarding the Commentary's statement, "It is also the beneficial transformation of the three wheels," the ground of cognition is the mental karma. Preaching is the verbal karma. Power is the physical karma, due to physical majesty.