大般涅槃經義記 5.211

5.211

就初對中，先破第一我之用具，具謂六根，六中前五是其色法，意是心法，故今就其色心以破總一切法。「謂色、非色」略舉二法。下就破我，於中先明色法非我，初舉，次釋，「以是」下結。下明心法，「非色、非我」略以標舉，「何以」下辯，心從緣生，是故非我。「以專念」下超破第四我之作業，「是中如來不當所執」題以正破，取彼常中專念憶想破我作業，何故而然？專念憶想通亦是其我作業故。於中先就專念破我，初舉直非念、性非我，「若以專念為我性」下舉妄徵破。下復就其憶想破我，「若以憶想知有我者」舉其所立，「無憶知無」反其所立，「如說」已下廣舉無憶破其有我，先舉世人相問之事，下明破我，有我不問，問故無我。

Within the first pair, it first refutes the first, the instruments of the self. "Instruments" refers to the six sense faculties; among the six, the first five are physical dharmas, and the mind is a mental dharma; therefore it now refutes all dharmas in general in terms of form and mind. "Meaning form and non-form" briefly presents the two dharmas. Below, it proceeds to refute the self. Therein, it first explains that physical dharmas are non-self: first presenting it, next explaining it, and concluding from "by this" onward. Next, it explains mental dharmas: "non-form is non-self" briefly presents the thesis, and from "why" onward explains it: the mind arises from conditions, and therefore is non-self. From "By single-minded mindfulness" onward, it skips to refuting the fourth, the karma of the self: "Therein the Tathāgata does not accept what they hold" marks the topic to directly refute it, taking their [notion of] single-minded mindfulness and recollection from the context of permanence to refute the karma of the self. Why is this so? Because single-minded mindfulness and recollection generally are also the karma of the self. Therein, it first refutes the self in terms of single-minded mindfulness: first presenting a direct denial that mindfulness and its nature are the self; from "If single-minded mindfulness is taken as the nature of the self" onward, it raises the error to examine and refute it. Next, it again refutes the self in terms of recollection: "If through recollection one knows there is a self" raises what they assert; "lack of recollection knows non-existence" reverses what they assert. From "As it is said" onward, it extensively adduces the lack of recollection to refute their [notion of] an existing self: first raising the matter of worldly people asking one another, and below explaining the refutation of the self: if there were a self, one would not ask; because one asks, there is no self.