大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 27.17

27.17

Regarding the Commentary's statement below: "However, although destruction [and preservation] are not simultaneous...", it explains and establishes the above meaning, concluding in the inconceivable; this is Master Rui's intent. One is destroyed and one is preserved, hence they are called "not simultaneous." Preservation is not apart from the place of destruction, hence it says "their arising must share the same place," just as a human sees water where a hungry ghost [sees] fire, and a hungry ghost sees fire where a human [sees] water.

As for "although they are said to share the same place, they constantly lack each other": within destruction there is no preservation, and within preservation there is no destruction, just as the palaces of rākṣasas and the palaces of humans, being in the same place, never see each other. The other-enjoyment land is also like this. If it is the self-enjoyment land, it is completely pervasive, neither identical to the three realms nor separate from the three realms. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "It is not like the three realms seeing the three realms." If it is the dharmatā land, arising and destruction are constantly thus.

Regarding the Commentary's statement: "Hence it is inconceivable": this concludes the explanation of the sūtra text's "the kalpa fire is inconceivable," meaning it cannot be conceived in terms of preservation or destruction, defilement or purity.

Regarding the Commentary's statement: "Worldly characteristics are not identical...", it contrasts the dharmatā land with the other-enjoyment and transformation lands.