大般涅槃經義記 5.176

5.176

明一道中，文殊先問，「如佛所說一道無二」牒佛前言，「外道亦說一道無二，若言一」下相對為問，「若言一道與外何別」責其差別，「若無差」下難破無別，若內與外無差別者是則內、外二道清淨，云何上言一道清淨？下佛答之，先明外道但有苦、集，而無滅、道，「於非滅」下釋無所以，妄生憶想是故實無。於中，先明外道之人非滅道中生滅道想、四空非滅妄生滅想，彼因非道妄生道想，餘亦如是。次明外道非因果中生因果想，果猶是滅，因是道也。「以是義」下結彼外道實無一道清淨之義。

Regarding the explanation of the single path, Mañjuśrī first asks: 'As the Buddha has spoken, the single path is without duality' takes up the Buddha's earlier words; 'the non-Buddhists also say that the single path is without duality; if it is said to be one' onward poses questions in contrast; 'if it is said to be the single path, what is the difference from non-Buddhists?' demands their distinction; from 'if there is no difference' onward, he challenges and refutes there being no distinction: if there were no distinction between internal and external, then both internal and external paths would be pure; why did you say above that the single path is pure? Below, the Buddha answers him: first, explaining that non-Buddhists only have suffering and origin, but lack cessation and the path; from 'regarding what is not cessation' onward, explaining the reason why they lack them: because they falsely generate conceptualizations, these are truly nonexistent. Herein, it first explains that non-Buddhist persons falsely generate the idea of cessation and the path regarding what is not cessation and the path; regarding the four formless [attainments] which are not cessation, they falsely generate the idea of cessation, and regarding their cause which is not the path, they falsely generate the idea of the path, and the rest are likewise. Next, it explains that non-Buddhists falsely generate the idea of cause and fruit regarding what is not cause and fruit; fruit is just cessation, and cause is the path. From 'by this meaning' onward, it concludes that those non-Buddhists truly have no meaning of the single path being pure.