大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 16.36

16.36

As for the commentary's "Fourth, principle and practice are both obliterated": this proposition is easy to understand. However, in the mutual fusion above, practice fuses with principle while practice remains, and principle fuses with practice while principle persists; therefore, they are "not two yet two." Here, principle and practice mutually negate each other; thus it is said to be "two yet not two." Regarding the commentary from "The four propositions of mutual identity" downward: this is simply explained by analogy to the preceding. If power and function mutually penetrate, that is called mutual assistance. If there is essence or no essence, that is called mutual identity. If formulated completely: first, solely principle, because nothing is not real; second, solely practice, because principle sets itself aside; third, both harmoniously fused, practice being immediately principle, forming a single flavor; fourth, both obliterated, principle being immediately practice and therefore not principle, practice being immediately principle and therefore not practice, so both are extinguished. When it speaks of "the mutual reflection of dharma and metaphor": it is like using the image of a person adorning a statue with flowers as a metaphor, which symbolizes adorning the Buddha with causal practices.