大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 74.20

74.20

疏「一亦不為一故無相」者，即《法句經》云「森羅及萬像，一法之所印。云何一法中，而當有差別？」即上一相也。次云「一亦不為一，為欲破諸數。淺智著諸法，見一以為一。」即下句意。疏「有無皆法待對故無」者，釋非無非有。謂有即有法、無即無法，故云「有無皆法」。言「待對故無」者，三論初章中，偈云「若有有可有，則有無可無。今無有可有，亦無無可無。」謂因無立有，有假無生故非有；因有說無，無因有立故非無。若躡上起，上云無相即是無義；今非彼無相，故云非無。無尚不存，有安得立？故云非無非有，皆待對故無也。

As for the commentary's statement, "'One' is also not taken as 'one', and therefore there is no-characteristic": this is as the Dharmapada says: "The manifold array of all phenomena / Is sealed by a single phenomenon. / How could there be differentiation / Within a single phenomenon?" This corresponds to the preceding "single characteristic". Next it says: "'One' is also not taken as 'one', / In order to destroy all numbers. / Those of shallow wisdom cling to phenomena, / Seeing 'one' and taking it to be 'one'." This is the meaning of the latter line. As for the commentary's statement, "Existence and nonexistence are both phenomena, and are nonexistent due to mutual dependence": this explains "neither nonexistent nor existent". That is, existence is an existent phenomenon and nonexistence is a nonexistent phenomenon; hence it says "existence and nonexistence are both phenomena". Regarding "nonexistent due to mutual dependence": in the introductory chapter of the Sanlun [texts], a verse states: "If there were an existent that could exist, / Then there would be a nonexistent that could not-exist. / Now there is no existent that can exist, / Nor is there any nonexistent that can not-exist." That is, existence is established on the basis of nonexistence; since existence is conventionally produced from nonexistence, it is not existent. Nonexistence is spoken of on the basis of existence; since nonexistence is established due to existence, it is not nonexistent. If one picks up from the preceding: above it says that "no-characteristic" is precisely the meaning of nonexistence; now, negating that "no-characteristic", it therefore says "neither nonexistent". Nonexistence itself does not remain; how could existence be established? Hence it says "neither nonexistent nor existent", both being nonexistent because they are mutually dependent.