無量壽經連義述文贊 2.165

2.165

經曰「住空無相」至「觀法如化」者，述云：此第三、行成證修也。有說：住貪瞋癡故意業不調，今住空無相無願故能調意業。貪是皮故，入空調伏；嗔是肉故，無願調伏；癡是心故，無相調伏。諸法相中皆無此理，誰勞彈斥？故今即我法實無故云空，假相亦無故名無相。於二中此無可希願故云無願。有說：即於此三無果可作故云無作，無因可生故云無起。良恐非也。作既作用，詎不名因？起亦生起，可名果故。今即因無實用故云無作，即《維摩》云「雖行無作」也。果無真體故云無起，即彼經云「雖行無起」也。既無實體用，故觀之如化。總而言之，無作無起故非有，觀法如化故非無，非無非有即中道之理，所謂證會也。

Regarding the passage from "abiding in emptiness, signlessness" to "contemplating dharmas as like an illusion": The commentary states: This third part is the cultivation of realizing the accomplished practice. Some say: abiding in greed, hatred, and ignorance, mental karma is not attuned; now, abiding in emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, he is able to attune mental karma. Greed is the skin, so one enters emptiness to subdue it; hatred is the flesh, so wishlessness subdues it; ignorance is the mind, so signlessness subdues it. None of the characteristics of dharmas contain this principle, so who would bother to refute it? Thus, now: because the self and dharmas are truly non-existent, it is called emptiness; because provisional characteristics are also non-existent, it is named signlessness; between the two, because there is nothing to be wished for, it is called wishlessness. Some say: precisely with regard to these three, having no fruit to produce, it is called "non-action" (akaraṇa); having no cause to arise, it is called "non-arising" (anutpāda). It is truly to be feared that this is incorrect. Since "action" is function, how could it not be called cause? And "arising" is also generation, so it can be called fruit. Now, because causes have no real function, it says "non-action"; this is what the Vimalakīrti-sūtra calls "though practicing non-action." Because fruits have no real essence, it says "non-arising"; this is what that sūtra calls "though practicing non-arising." Since they have no real essence or function, he therefore contemplates them as like an illusion. In summary, because they are without action and without arising, they are not existent; because he contemplates dharmas as like an illusion, they are not non-existent. Neither non-existent nor existent is precisely the principle of the Middle Way—what is called realization and union.