大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 71.23

71.23

疏「二相應不相應」中，初取論意立名；「唯與」下，疏釋相應等相。「故論云」下，引證約界言之。從「無色惑微」下，疏釋論文下中上言。等取色界惑中、欲界惑上，此約惑體。遠公云：「欲界為下等，約界勝劣。」從「雖則隨眠」下，通妨難。謂有問言：隨在一界皆成三界所有隨眠。如生上界，下界惑種亦皆成就。如何云有相應及與不相應耶？故今答云：就其現惑說種相應，非生上界失下界種等。然今案經，但有相應不相應言，故為此釋。若準論經云「相應不相應不離相」，則現惑有相應不相應，而隨眠常不離也。

In the commentary's "Second, associated and unassociated": first it takes the treatise's intention to establish the names; below "Only with...", the commentary explains the characteristics of association, and so forth. Below "Hence the treatise says...", it quotes evidence to speak of them in terms of the realms. From "defilements of the formless realm are subtle" onward, the commentary explains the treatise's words "lower, middle, and upper": by inclusion taking the defilements of the form realm as middle, and the defilements of the desire realm as upper; this is in terms of the defilement-entities themselves. Master Yuan says: "Taking the desire realm as lower, etc., is in terms of the superiority or inferiority of the realms." From "Although latent defilements..." onward, it resolves an objection. That is, someone asks: in whichever single realm one resides, one possesses all latent defilements belonging to the three realms. For instance, when born in an upper realm, the defilement-seeds of the lower realm are also fully possessed. How can it be said that there are associated and unassociated? Therefore it now replies: the association of seeds is spoken of in terms of their active defilements, not that being born in an upper realm causes one to lose the seeds of the lower realm, and so on. However, examining the sūtra now, there are only the words "associated and unassociated," which is why this explanation is made. If following the sūtra text of the treatise, which says "the characteristic of being associated, unassociated, and not separated," then active defilements have association and non-association, while latent defilements are never separated.