大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 75.41

75.41

疏「文中初明俱非」下，第二釋文。於中，疏文有三：一總彰文意以成四句、二重釋、三引證。疏「然此四句皆由以是夢故」下，第二重釋。於中，此上二句標、「謂一以是」下釋。於中有二：先釋有無二句、後釋雙非。前中又二：先正釋、後「然語有」下揀濫。於中又二：先舉正、後揀非。今初舉正。謂有無交徹，即夢事而性虛、即性虛是夢事。約法，即性空是幻有、即幻有為性空。若是定有，不得為空；若是斷空，不得為有。既無性故，有即全攝無而為有也；既緣生故，空則全攝有而為無。故結云「非有二相」。

Under the Commentary's statement, "In the text, first clarifying that both are negated," is the second part, explaining the text. Within it, the Commentary's text has three parts: first, summarizing the text's meaning to establish four propositions; second, re-explaining; and third, adducing scriptural proof. Under the Commentary's statement, "However, these four propositions all arise because this is a dream," is the second part, re-explaining. Within it, the two lines above state the proposition, and from "namely, first, because this is" onward explains it. Within this there are two parts: first, explaining the two propositions of existence and non-existence, and then explaining the double negation. In the former, there are also two parts: first, directly explaining, and under "However, the words have..." distinguishing confusion. Within this there are again two parts: first, presenting the correct view, and then setting aside the incorrect. Now, first presenting the correct view: namely, existence and non-existence interpenetrate, such that the dream event is itself empty of nature, and this emptiness of nature is itself the dream event. In terms of doctrine, nature-emptiness is itself illusory existence, and illusory existence is itself nature-emptiness. If it were definitely existent, it could not be empty; if it were an annihilated emptiness, it could not be existent. Since it lacks nature, existence fully subsumes non-existence to become existent; since it arises from conditions, emptiness fully subsumes existence to become non-existent. Therefore, he concludes saying, "there are not two characteristics."