金剛般若經贊述 2.331

2.331

The commentary states: This is the second part, the answer. It means that fundamentally in all dharmas there is neither self nor dharmas, yet the deluded passions of sentient beings cling to them as real existents; in order to break their clinging, the Buddha accords with their dispositions, addresses their understanding, and speaks of a self and dharmas. It is not that verbal designations have real substances; even though the mind apprehends them, how does that compromise the absence of reality? In the doctrine of the Mahāyāna, the mind can arise taking non-existence as its object, and verbal designations do not correspond to reality; therefore, it means that the Bhagavat, according with dispositions and following understanding, conventionally speaks of a self and a person; it is not that there is a real substance as they cling. Therefore, it says: 'They are not the view of a self, the view of a person', and so on. 'They are named the view of a self', and so on, means that they are conventionally spoken of by the Tathāgata.