大般涅槃經義記 3.228

3.228

前問答中，先明不犯，「若有不能作如是說」下明其有犯。不犯有三：一說有不犯、二「譬如有人說大海」下說無不犯、三「有外道」下宣說非有非無不犯。初中先問，問因何生？因於向前九部經中不說性生。上說一切眾生有性，九部經中未曾說性，如其說有乖違聖教，云何不犯波羅夷罪？下佛答之，經雖不說，所言當理，是故不犯。

In the former question and answer, it first clarifies non-transgression; from "If someone is unable to speak in this manner" below, it clarifies what constitutes an infraction. Non-transgression has three [aspects]: first, preaching existence is non-transgression; second, from "For example, if a person speaks of the great ocean" below, preaching non-existence is non-transgression; third, from "There are non-Buddhists" below, proclaiming neither existence nor non-existence is non-transgression. In the first part, it first asks. How does the question arise? It arises because the nature was not taught in the aforementioned ninefold canon. Above, it was said that all sentient beings have the nature, yet the nature was never taught in the ninefold canon; if one preaches that it exists, this would contradict the holy teachings—how then is it not an infraction of a pārājika offense? Below, the Buddha answers it: although the sūtras did not preach it, what is stated accords with reality; therefore, it is not an infraction.