金剛三昧經論 3.131

3.131

論曰：此下第二決〈真性空品〉中起疑。彼言「我說法者，以汝眾生，在生說故，是故說之。」依此疑云：若依彼文佛有說法，其所說法從佛心生，云何而言法無生耶？為遣此疑即有二重：一者直遣、二者重決。此即直遣。言是心所生法是法能所取者，今汝所計心所生法，直是妄心能取所取，如醉酒眼所見空華。是法然非彼者，是汝所計心所生法，如彼空華；是法亦然，非彼所說法，同汝所計生。此意正明汝所計法空無所有，是所取故，猶如空華；我所說法離言絕慮，所取能取皆不可言。

The treatise states: From here down is the second [part], resolving the doubt arising from the 'Chapter on the Emptiness of True Nature.' That [chapter] says, 'When I expound the Dharma, it is because you sentient beings are within arising that I expound it; therefore I expound it.' Relying on this, the doubt states: If, according to that text, the Buddha has expounded Dharma, and that expounded Dharma arises from the Buddha's mind, why is it said that dharmas are unarisen? To dispel this doubt there are two layers: first, directly dispelling; second, resolving again. This is directly dispelling. Saying 'These mind-produced dharmas / Are dharmas of grasper and grasped' means that what you now conceptualize as mind-produced dharmas are merely the grasper and grasped of the deluded mind, like sky-flowers seen by eyes drunk with wine. 'These dharmas are so, not that' means that what you conceptualize as mind-produced dharmas are like those sky-flowers; these dharmas are also thus, not the expounded Dharma arising in the same way as what you conceptualize. The core meaning directly clarifies that the dharmas you conceptualize are empty and nonexistent, because they are grasped objects, just like sky-flowers; whereas the Dharma expounded by me is free from speech and beyond conceptualization, and grasped and grasper are both inexpressible.