大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 61.39

61.39

疏「二禪雖離」下，通難。難云：初禪離欲惡，即名為離生；二禪離覺觀，亦合名離生。故為此通。通云：初禪離欲惡，無定名離生；二禪離覺觀，有定名定生。然其設難，唯難前解。及通難云：初禪有定，二解俱成。欲界無定為所背故，即成前解；初禪有定為所背故，即通後解。

Regarding the commentary's "Although the second dhyāna is separated" downward: it resolves a difficulty. The difficulty says: If the first dhyāna leaves desire and evils and is thus called 'born of separation', the second dhyāna leaves vitarka and vicāra and should also appropriately be called 'born of separation'. Therefore it resolves this. The resolution says: The first dhyāna leaves desire and evil and, having no concentration [prior to it], is called 'born of separation'; the second dhyāna leaves vitarka and vicāra and, having concentration [prior to it], is called 'born of concentration'. However, raising this difficulty only challenges the previous interpretation. And in resolving the difficulty, it says: The first dhyāna having concentration, both interpretations are established. Since the desire realm has no concentration to be turned away from, that establishes the previous interpretation; since the first dhyāna has concentration to be turned away from, that resolves the latter interpretation.