肇論新疏 2.210

2.210

此中具有四句，但文隱難見，今具出之令無餘惑。初句承前，雙標心境為寂用同異所依之法體。心境法也，寂用義也，同異但料簡寂用爾。言心境者，即智而如，境也；即如而智，心也。不二而二，體用恒殊；二而不二，心境一觀。《華嚴．迴向》說：「未有如外智能證於如，未有智外如為智所證。」今論中言寂，即如也；言用，即智也。正由如智同源、體用一致，故得同異自在。四句全現體用，非異曰同、非一曰異，已知大義。言用下，第一句，即同而異者，謂即體起用，用與體殊。下躡釋云，異故不失於照功。言寂下，第二句，即異而同者，謂攝用歸體，體與用一。下躡釋云，同故無心於彼此。彼此，目心境也。是以下，第三俱句，雙攬前二成此第三爾。是以辨同者，牒前同句，具云是以辨異而同者，以其但同於異故。云異而同，蓋即異而同也。辨異者，牒初異句，可準前說，亦即同而異也，二句同時。斯則下，第四非句，承前第三而成。以同於異故非同、異於同故非異。具云不可得乎異而同、同而異也。下寂用各辨中，但敘前二句，以後二句從前生故。

Here all four propositions are present, but the text is hidden and difficult to see; now they are fully presented to leave no remaining doubt. The first phrase follows the preceding, jointly setting forth mind and object as the substantial entities on which stillness, function, identity, and difference rely. Mind and object are dharmas; stillness and function are principles; identity and difference merely evaluate stillness and function. Speaking of mind and object: approaching wisdom as tathatā is the object; approaching tathatā as wisdom is the mind. Non-dual yet dual, substance and function are ever distinct; dual yet non-dual, mind and object are one contemplation. The Parīṇāmanā chapter of the Avataṃsaka says: "There has never been wisdom outside of tathatā that can realize tathatā, nor has there been tathatā outside of wisdom that is realized by wisdom." Now in this treatise, speaking of stillness refers to tathatā; speaking of function refers to wisdom. Precisely because tathatā and wisdom share the same source, and substance and function are a single unity, identity and difference are freely unhindered. The four propositions fully manifest substance and function: non-difference is called identity; non-oneness is called difference; the main meaning is already understood. From "spoken of in terms of function" onward, the first proposition, "identical yet distinct," means arising into function based on substance, where function differs from substance. Following below, the explanation says, "because they are distinct, they do not lose the efficacy of illumination." From "spoken of in terms of stillness" onward, the second proposition, "distinct yet identical," means gathering function back into substance, where substance and function are one. Following below, the explanation says, "because they are identical, there is no mind toward this or that." "This or that" refers to mind and object. From "Therefore" onward, the third, both-clause, gathers both of the previous two to form this third. "Therefore, discerning identity" takes up the previous identity phrase, fully meaning: therefore, discerning what is distinct yet identical, because it is merely identical in difference. Saying "distinct yet identical" means being identical precisely within difference. "Discerning difference" takes up the initial difference phrase, which can be understood in line with the above, also being identical yet distinct; the two phrases are simultaneous. From "Thus they" onward, the fourth, neither-clause, succeeds the preceding third and is formed: because it is identical in difference it is not identical, and because it is different in identity it is not different. Fully stated, they cannot be made to be different yet identical, nor identical yet distinct. Below, in distinguishing stillness and function separately, only the first two phrases are recounted, because the latter two phrases are produced from the former.