大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.41

7.41

疏「具說三性三無性」等者，此有兩重：一約三性，則初時約依他說有；二約遍計說空；三具說三性，則遍計是空、依圓是有以為中道。二者約三性皆有、約三無性皆空。第一時中說三性皆有，第二時中總說諸法皆悉無性者，約三無性密意說耳。故《唯識》云「即依此三性，立彼三無性。初則相無性，次無自然性，後由遠離前所執我法性故，佛密意說一切法無性。」謂若顯了說，則雙明三性三無性方是中道，故為盡理。

Regarding the commentary's "Fully expounded the three natures and three non-natures" and so forth: this has two levels. First, in terms of the three natures: in the first period, existence is taught in terms of the dependent [nature]; in the second, emptiness is taught in terms of the imagined [nature]; in the third, the three natures are fully expounded, such that the imagined is empty and the dependent and perfected are existent, which is considered the Middle Way. Second, in terms of the three natures all being existent and the three non-natures all being empty: in the first period, it is taught that the three natures are all existent; in the second period, it is generally taught that all phenomena are completely devoid of nature, which is an implicit teaching in terms of the three non-natures. Therefore, the Vijñaptimātratā says: "It is precisely by relying on these three natures that those three non-natures are established. The first is the non-nature of characteristics; the next is the non-nature of arising from nature; and the last, because it is far removed from the previously grasped nature of self and dharmas, is the Buddha's implicit teaching that all dharmas are devoid of nature." That is to say, if it is taught explicitly, only when both the three natures and three non-natures are clarified together is it the Middle Way; therefore, it is considered exhausting the principle.