大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 66.4

66.4

疏「今此半門」下，第三別釋，中二：初出論意、後科文。今初，觀因緣有分為染者，此論自釋「何者是染分？分即支義。」從「而此染」下，釋染依止，此即論主生起之文。而論但云「因緣有分依止一心」，疏開釋之。次論云「此是二諦差別」者，是論解經。具云「此是二諦差別，一心雜染和合因緣集觀。」疏文略耳。從「以純真不生」下，疏釋。疏「後釋中論無別解」下，疏文分三：初略彈古釋；二「今謂說主」下，標示正義；三「是以此門」下，總顯包含。於中三：初約體攝二、二約義攝五、三約時攝六。今初，一「自性緣起」者，即二取習氣。二「愛非愛緣起」，即諸業習氣。全同《唯識》「由諸業習氣、二取習氣俱，前異熟既盡，復生餘異熟」也。

As for the Commentary's "Now, in this half-door" and so on, this is the third [section], the detailed explanation, containing two parts: first, setting forth the Śāstra's intent, and next, structuring the text into headings. Now regarding the first: examining conditioned arising's existence-constituents as defilement—the treatise itself explains, "What is the defiled part? Part has the meaning of 'branch'." From "And as for this defilement" onward, it explains the support of defilement; this is precisely the treatise master's text of origination. Yet the treatise merely says, "Conditioned arising's existence-constituents depend on the one mind," and the Commentary unpacks and explains it. Next, the treatise says, "This is the distinction of the two truths"; this is the treatise interpreting the sūtra. In full, it says: "This is the distinction of the two truths, the contemplation of the arising of causes and conditions in the commingling and harmony of one mind and miscellaneous defilements." The Commentary's text is merely abridged. From "Because the purely real does not generate" onward, the Commentary explains it. As for the Commentary's "In the subsequent explanation, the treatise has no separate interpretation" and so on, the text of the Commentary is divided into three: first, it briefly criticizes older explanations; second, from "Now I maintain that the speaker" onward, it marks and indicates the orthodox meaning; third, from "Therefore this doorway" onward, it comprehensively shows its inclusiveness. Within this there are three: first, subsuming two in terms of essence; second, subsuming five in terms of meaning; third, subsuming six in terms of time. Now regarding the first: first, "conditioned arising by self-nature" is the habit-energy of the two graspings. Second, "conditioned arising of the liked and unliked" is the habit-energy of various karmas. This is completely identical to the Vijñaptimātratā: "Due to the presence of both habit-energies of various karmas and habit-energies of the two graspings, once the former maturation is exhausted, further other maturations are produced."