大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 81.37

81.37

疏「此中不隔餘處，何有重會之義」，即第二顯難，重會不成妨。先難、後「若約次第」下答。答有二意：一約行布不壞相邊，約時明重。如人前於此講，續前再講，豈非重耶？二「若約圓融」下，就圓融門約義明重。於中有三：初標；二「故不動前二」下，反難以成；三以喻別顯。二中，謂汝向問意云：第二至第七中隔四會，故得名重。第七第八中無有隔，何得名重？今謂第二望七亦不隔越。何者？既不起覺樹而昇四天，四天覺樹定是一時。第六他化天後即說第七，曾何隔越？則二七不隔亦得名重，今七八不隔，何不名重？「明知約義」者，結成七八重會，皆是約義。而言「不動前二」者，文中雖云不起覺樹，以普光近覺樹，故不別言之。實則不起前二，頓昇四天也。

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Here there is no separation by any other place; how can there be the meaning of a reconvened assembly?", this is the second explicit objection, namely the objection that reconvening is not established. First comes the objection; second, from "If in terms of sequence..." onwards, comes the answer. The answer has two meanings: First, in terms of gradual progression not destroying appearances, it clarifies reconvening in terms of time. Just as when a person lectures here earlier and subsequently lectures again following the former, how could it not be reconvening? Second, from "If in terms of perfect interfusion..." onwards, it approaches the gate of perfect interfusion and clarifies reconvening in terms of meaning. Within this there are three parts: first, identifying it; second, from "Therefore, without moving from the previous two..." onwards, establishing it through a counter-challenge; third, illustrating it distinctly with metaphors. In the second part, it addresses your earlier inquiry: 'Between the second and the seventh there intervened four assemblies, and therefore it can be called reconvening. Between the seventh and eighth there is no separation; how can it be called reconvening?' Now I say that looking from the second to the seventh, there is also no intervening gap. Why? Since [the Buddha] did not rise from the Bodhi tree and ascended to the four heavens, the four heavens and the Bodhi tree are definitely simultaneous. Right after the sixth [assembly] in the Paranimmitavasavatti Heaven, the seventh was spoken; when was there any intervening gap? Thus, the second and seventh have no separation and are yet called reconvening; why should the seventh and eighth, having no separation, not be called reconvening? "Clearly knowing it is in terms of meaning" concludes that the reconvening of the seventh and eighth is entirely in terms of meaning. As for saying "not moving from the previous two", although the text says 'not rising from the Bodhi tree', because Universal Light is adjacent to the Bodhi tree, it does not mention it separately. In reality, without rising from the first two, he頓 suddenly ascended to the four heavens.