肇論新疏 1.78

1.78

初句舉經，但解動靜以例去來。動即遷也，靜即不遷。豈釋下，會釋。次二句明不捨事動而求靜理。然動靜多體，且約心境略示。境者，真諦理性故靜，俗諦事法故動。二諦相即，故云不捨。意云：要證真諦之靜，不離俗動。心者，實智向真故靜，權智應俗故動。二智無礙故，亦不捨權動也。後四句躡前，以明即靜而動。亦通心境，以不捨事動而入靜，故正靜時正動。論中正唯理事，既云求靜不捨等，故兼二智。

The first sentence cites the sūtra, but explains motion and rest to exemplify going and coming. Motion is flux, and rest is immutability. From 'how could it be that it sets aside' downward, it harmonizes and explains them. The next two sentences clarify not abandoning the motion of phenomena to seek the rest of principle. However, motion and rest have multiple aspects; for now they are briefly indicated in terms of mind and objective realm. As for the objective realm: the ultimate principle of the ultimate truth is restful, while the phenomenal dharmas of the conventional truth are active. The two truths are mutually identical, hence it says 'not abandoning'. The meaning is: if one wants to realize the rest of the ultimate truth, it is not separated from the conventional motion. As for the mind: tattva-jñāna faces the ultimate and is therefore restful, while upāya-jñāna responds to the conventional and is therefore active. Because the two kinds of wisdom are unimpeded, it also does not abandon conventional motion. The last four sentences pick up on what precedes them to clarify that motion is identical with rest. This also applies to both mind and objective realm: because one enters rest without abandoning phenomenal motion, the very moment of rest is precisely the moment of motion. In the treatise it is strictly just principle and phenomena, but since it says 'seeking rest without abandoning' and so forth, it concurrently encompasses the two kinds of wisdom.