大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 67.45

67.45

Under 'Third, the contemplation of the cognition of all aspects' and so forth in the commentary, the words 'this has two intents' mean: in terms of conventional [truth] it is the intent of Xianshou; in terms of ultimate [truth] it is the intent of Master Yuan. In the former, the statement 'samsara is without boundary' is from the Madhyamakaśāstra, Chapter on the Prior Extremity: 'What has been spoken by the Great Sage / Is that the prior extremity cannot be attained. / Samsara has no beginning, / Nor furthermore does it have an end. / If it has neither beginning nor end, / How could there be a middle? / Therefore, herein, / Priority, posteriority, and simultaneity are also absent.' Explanation: According to this, in the two verses above, the former is the beginninglessness of the conventional truth, and the latter verse enters the ultimate truth. But 'the conventional truth is without end' is spoken with respect to multiple persons. Now, directly clarifying in terms of phenomena, there is only beginninglessness. As for the latter intent: if in terms of ultimate truth both beginning and end are absent, why does it only say beginningless? Now we say: ignorance arises from emptiness, and therefore it only says beginningless. Below it cites the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa to mutually substantiate the two meanings. The root of non-abiding is the ultimate truth. Establishing all dharmas is the conventional truth. The conventional is established in reliance on the ultimate; since the ultimate is beginningless, the conventional is also beginningless. But the treatise names it only beginningless, which causes the two masters to have divergent views. Now the commentary integrates them with the principle, taking both views of the two masters in full.