大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.103

79.103

疏「亦非理先智後」者，二揀理智兩別。若唯理性為先有者，則第一義空不名智慧，理智異故。無漏智性本自有之，不應理故。大智光明非本有故，智後生者，果無常故，能證所證成二體故。

Regarding the Commentary's statement, "Nor is principle first and wisdom later," this secondly distinguishes the dichotomy between principle and wisdom. If only the nature of principle were pre-existent, then supreme emptiness would not be called wisdom, because principle and wisdom would differ. That the nature of uncontaminated wisdom originally exists of itself would not accord with principle. Because the radiance of great wisdom would not be originally existent, if wisdom were produced later, the fruit would be impermanent, and that which realizes and that which is realized would become two separate essences.