大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.11

7.11

Regarding the Commentary's passage starting with "Not named unshared": second, resolving objections. First, stating the doubt. An objection says: "Since 'separate' means unshared, this is precisely the unshared prajñā of the Dazhidulun. Why is it not named the unshared teaching?" The Commentary explains starting with "it also intends": because "separate" has two meanings: first, the meaning of not being shared with the two vehicles, as stated above; second, sequential differentiation without interpenetration; hence it is named "separate." If it were called "unshared," it would not include the latter meaning; hence it says "it also intends to eliminate what is not complete." Regarding the Commentary's passage starting with "By a single cause": presenting the characteristics of not being complete. "A single cause transcending far above" clarifies the separation in contrast to others; it is not like the shared teaching where the three vehicles cultivate in common. Here, a single path of deliverance transcends far above the two vehicles, and also departs from the two extremes to manifest the middle way. Starting with "A single fruit is not interfused": clarifying the separation regarding the dharma itself. "A single fruit is not interfused" means distinction in fruit: the three virtues and the three bodies are each not interfused, unable to have one virtue be all virtues, and so on. "Cultivated sequentially": clarifying the separation of cause in terms of the essence itself; when cultivating generosity it is not morality and so forth, and the first stage does not know the virtues of the second stage, etc. Regarding the Commentary's "unable to attain the perfect interfusion of cause and fruit": cause and fruit are not interfused with respect to each other, unable to have the cause encompass the ocean of fruit or the fruit penetrate the source of cause.