肇論新疏 2.224

2.224

初二句相即顯一，次二句釋成非異。正因相即，所以非異。同出下，語借老氏。亦非寂用復有同出之源，但論主巧用彼。又不可隨文取義。後二句謂即用之寂與用為體，豈有用外單寂而來主於用邪？主猶體也。亦合云又無無寂之用以賓於寂，約體用重輕假分賓主。

The first two sentences show their unity through mutual identity; the next two sentences explain and establish their non-difference. It is precisely because they are mutually identical that they are not different. From "have the same source" onward, the wording is borrowed from Laozi. It is not that quiescence and function actually have another shared origin from which they arise; rather, the treatise master skillfully employs Laozi's words. Again, one must not adhere literally to the phrasing to grasp the meaning. The final two sentences mean that the quiescence identical to function serves as the substance for function; how could there be a solitary quiescence outside of function that comes to govern function? "Govern" is like substance. It could also appropriately be said that there is also no function devoid of quiescence to serve as guest to quiescence; this tentatively distinguishes guest and host in terms of the primacy of substance and function.