大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 8.9

8.9

疏「況前引楞伽五性，自迷其文」等者，破其所引不曉經意。彼之所引證無性義，今釋其所引，還成有性，非無性也。何者？以彼經言「非焚燒一切善根者，常不入涅槃。」則有入義也。疏「此意則明」下，疏釋經意。疏「況經自」下，引經結成。疏「莊嚴論」下，引論重成。同前《楞伽》，非畢竟無性。

Regarding the commentary's passage "Moreover, earlier citing the five natures of the Laṅkāvatāra, they themselves were confused by its text" and so forth: this refutes their citation because they did not understand the intent of the sūtra. What they cited was to prove the meaning of lacking the nature; now, explaining what they cited turns out to establish that they have the nature, not that they lack the nature. Why? Because that sūtra states: "It is not that those who burn up all roots of goodness permanently do not enter nirvāṇa." Thus there is the meaning of their entering. Regarding the commentary from "This intention then clarifies" downward: the commentary explains the intent of the sūtra. From "Moreover, the sūtra itself" downward: it cites the sūtra to conclude the point. From "The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra" downward: it cites the treatise to reaffirm it. Consistent with the preceding Laṅkāvatāra, it is not an ultimate lack of the nature.