說無垢稱經疏 3.172

3.172

贊曰：空理義云，動轉者形待義，戲論者虛妄分別。俗非不動，法有高下；真無動轉，何高何下？俗中戲論不斷故，是分別心之所行；真中戲論畢竟皆斷，故離一切分別所行。應理義云：依他隨真，無高無下，住不動故。亦離一切分別所行，分別戲論畢竟斷故。古云「法離一切觀行」，此言分別所行。分別，觀行也。應理義中，或二十句皆說真如勝義諦法，不如分別心之所執，亦不如彼所言說性皆說無，非真如體性亦成空。前且隨殊勝義說，不違理也。此二十句，應為十對。一一權思，恐厭文繁，故略而止。

The Commentary states: The exposition of the Principle of Emptiness says: movement and shifting mean relative dependence; conceptual proliferation (prapañca) means false discrimination. In the conventional, it is not unmoving, and dharmas have high and low; the ultimate has no movement or shifting—what high or low could there be? In the conventional, because conceptual proliferation is not severed, it is the domain of the discriminating mind; in the ultimate, conceptual proliferation is definitively severed, and therefore it is free from the domain of all discrimination. The exposition of the Reasonable Principle says: other-dependent [nature], conforming to the ultimate, has neither high nor low, because it abides unmoving. It is also free from the domain of all discrimination, because discriminating conceptual proliferation is definitively severed. The old [translation] says: 'The Dharma is free from all contemplation and practice.' Here it says 'the domain of discrimination.' Discrimination is indeed contemplation and practice. In the exposition of the Reasonable Principle, perhaps all twenty clauses speak of the ultimate truth of tathatā: not existent as grasped by the discriminating mind, nor existent as the nature expressed by words—all are said to be non-existent; it is not that the intrinsic nature of tathatā itself also becomes empty. The previous [discussion] tentatively expounded in accordance with the supreme ultimate truth without contradicting principle. These twenty clauses should form ten pairs. If one were to consider each one expediently, it is feared the text would become tedious, so it is briefly curtailed.