大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 69.61

69.61

疏「謂因法智殊顯三乘別」者，智法有殊，故三乘異。亦以三乘明法智，故二皆是淨。言「義兼理空」者，無量周遍等皆兼於理，亦由此故為二所依。疏「云何法智虛空得為自身」者，此假問也。法中理法，理法無形。智體虛空，皆無形質。不可作身，云何言作？答意云：智證於法，自然應現，即是作義。亦猶體理成智，理寂無相而成有知故。「令於虛空」下，通虛空作自。此三作自既爾，自作此三亦然，冥同理智及虛空故。

Regarding the Commentary's statement, "This means that differences in phenomena and cognition reveal the distinctions among the three vehicles": because phenomena and cognition have differences, the three vehicles differ. Also, because the three vehicles clarify phenomena and cognition, both are pure. When it says, "The meaning also encompasses principle and space": being immeasurable and pervasive all encompass principle; it is also due to this that [principle] serves as the basis for both. Regarding the Commentary's statement, "How can phenomena, cognition, and empty space become one's own body?": this is a rhetorical question. Among phenomena, the phenomenon of principle is without form. The essence of cognition and empty space are both without form or physical substance. They cannot form a body, so how can one speak of "forming"? The intent of the answer is: when cognition realizes principle, it naturally manifests responsively; this is precisely the meaning of "forming". It is also like embodying principle to become cognition: principle is quiescent and formless, yet it becomes possessed of knowing. From "enabling [it] in empty space" onward, it clarifies how empty space forms oneself. Since these three forming oneself are thus, oneself forming these three is likewise so, for they are secretly identical with principle, cognition, and empty space.