大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.13

7.13

疏「此教」下，辯所詮，略無無作四諦之言。言「不思議因緣二諦中道」者，即論第四句，亦是中道義。而言不思議者，佛性中道故。又因緣即空故，不可作因緣思；即假故，不可作空思；即中道故，不可作二思。即一而三、即三而一，為不思議。因緣二諦即真俗二諦，中道即第一義諦，三諦義也。又融二諦即是中道，不似通教多約真諦、別教多約俗諦。言「事理具足」者，通多約理、別多約事，圓中舉事乃是即理之事、舉理乃是即事之理，無理不明、無事不具。言「不偏不別」者，不偏謂非偏真，不滯一邊故。不別者謂不歷別，必須融攝故。餘如大意合離中辯。

Regarding the Commentary's passage starting with "This teaching": determining what is expounded; it omits the words 'inconsequential [uncreated] four truths'. "The inconceivable middle way of the two truths of causes and conditions" is the fourth line of the treatise, which is also the meaning of the middle way. Why is it called "inconceivable"? Because it is the middle way of Buddha-nature. Furthermore, because causes and conditions are identical to emptiness, they cannot be conceived of as causes and conditions; because they are identical to the nominal, they cannot be conceived of as empty; because they are identical to the middle way, they cannot be conceived of as two. One is three and three are one; this is the inconceivable. The two truths of causes and conditions are the true and conventional truths; the middle way is the truth of ultimate meaning—these are the meanings of the three truths. Furthermore, interfusing the two truths is itself the middle way, unlike the shared teaching which mostly treats the true truth, or the separate teaching which mostly treats the conventional truth. As for "phenomena and principle are fully complete": the shared mostly treats principle, and the separate mostly treats phenomena; in the complete, to bring up phenomena is precisely phenomena identical to principle, and to bring up principle is precisely principle identical to phenomena; no principle is unilluminated, and no phenomenon is incomplete. As for "neither one-sided nor separate": "not one-sided" means not one-sided truth, not being stuck in one extreme; "not separate" means not sequential, necessarily interfusing and subsuming. The rest is as analyzed in the section on the synthesis and differentiation of the general meaning.