大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.65

79.65

疏「若依後義」下，明法性宗妨。於中二：先奪、後縱。前中亦二：先明違義，以空礙有故云損減；二「亦不能通」下明其違文。文中既言智無量，故知如來心。不言知如來智，明知假智知心，心則有矣。何得言無？

Regarding the commentary's statement from "If one relies on the latter meaning" downward: this shows the flaws of the Dharma-nature school. Within this are two: first, direct refutation; second, concessionary refutation. In the first are also two: first, showing the contradiction in meaning, because emptiness obstructing existence is termed the error of denigration (apavāda); second, from "Nor can it account for..." downward, showing its contradiction with the text. Since the text already says that cognition is immeasurable, one thereby knows the Tathāgata's mind. It does not say knowing the Tathāgata's cognition; this makes clear that by means of cognition one knows mind, so mind exists. How can one say it is absent?