大般涅槃經集解 20.26

20.26

案僧亮曰：已說理中無偏，偏執是諍，不偏即了真也。僧宗曰：一等四執，皆有過咎也。即色之過，如僧伽也。離色之過，如衛世師也。計一神我不一不異，如犢子道人也。斷見外道，計一切無，復與前反，皆諍訟也。但求了知者，所執即耶。但當求實相理，豈可輕生執耶？

Sengliang comments: It has already been explained that within the principle there is no bias; biased grasping is dispute, while non-bias is understanding the real. Sengzong says: The four equivalent types of grasping all have faults. The fault of identifying with matter (rūpa) is like the Sāṃkhya. The fault of separating from matter is like the Vaiśeṣika. Grasping a single conscious soul (ātman) as neither identical nor different is like the Vātsīputrīya renunciants. The annihilationist non-Buddhists grasp everything as non-existent, which is opposite to the former; all these are disputes. Merely seeking understanding while what one grasps is erroneous—one should only seek the principle of the true mark; how could one lightly give rise to grasping?