般若心經略疏連珠記 2.26

2.26

From "Furthermore, [from the delusion]" onward is the second part: truly speaking in terms of their respective natures. As for the nature of conceptual construction (parikalpita), its nature is originally non-existent of itself; how could there be arising and ceasing? Being conditioned in its arising, it is devoid of self-nature; being devoid of self-nature, it is empty; how could defilement and purity exist in it? When the empty ocean of awakened illumination becomes space, who could increase or decrease its equanimous original nature? Zhenguo says: "When treated separately within the three natures, each has three interpretations: first, speaking directly in terms of their respective natures; second, speaking in terms of the two meanings within their respective natures; third, speaking in contrast to the three non-natures. Now, to use just the first and last meanings to explicitly construct general and particular explanations—we have not yet seen the underlying rationale for doing so." The second part, synthesizing in summary, is clear.