大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 75.27

75.27

Regarding the commentary's statement from "Third, taking the root into which the branch is subsumed and returned" onward: this proposition combines the preceding two propositions so that they are unobstructed, forming this single proposition; this is the non-difference resulting from the mutual accomplishment of emptiness of essence identical to differentiation and concordance with conditions identical to being unchanging. The phrase "the root into which the branch is subsumed and returned" refers to the emptiness of essence identical to differentiation. This is the previous second proposition where emptiness of essence is the root and differentiation is the branch; this is the root blending into the branch, causing the branch to be identical to the root, so that differentiation is precisely emptiness of essence. The phrase "and the branch from which the root is subsumed and followed" refers to concordance with conditions identical to being unchanging; this is the previous first proposition, wherein because the unchanging in its entirety concords with conditions to form differentiation, the branch blends into the root, causing the root to be identical to the branch. Therefore it says that these two are mutually blended. Because the unchanging in its entirety concords with conditions, the root does not obstruct the branch; because differentiation is precisely emptiness of essence, the branch does not obstruct the root; hence it is called "unobstructed." It is specifically because the dharmakāya forms sentient beings that one obtains that sentient beings are precisely tathatā; and it is because sentient beings are precisely tathatā that one realizes that the dharmakāya transmigrates in the five destinies to become sentient beings. Thus in the first proposition the root is equal to the branch, and in the second proposition the branch is equal to the root; hence it says "root and branch are equal." At the very time the root is equal to the branch, the branch is equal to the root, so the above two sūtras also do not contradict each other. Hence it says "because the texts of the preceding two sūtras are not separated from one another." Having combined the preceding two propositions to mutually accomplish the third proposition, the preceding two sūtras are used to testify to this proposition.