大般涅槃經義記 6.29

6.29

就「性空」中，初問起發，次辯，後結。辯中，「菩薩觀一切法本性皆空」總以標舉，「謂陰」下別，謂陰界入無常、苦等舉有為法。常樂我淨舉無為法，常樂我淨有其二種：一是方便常樂我淨，從緣修生，本無自性；二者自體常樂我淨，性出自古。今就初門宣說性空，後門即是大空所攝，今此不論。「如是等法不見本性」總就明空，從緣始集本無自性是以不見，此等即說法體無性，不同前六法中無人，雖說性空，未空因緣假名之相，故不同後無所有空。

Regarding "emptiness of intrinsic nature": first the question raises it, next it is explained, and finally concluded. In the explanation, "The bodhisattva observes that all dharmas are in their original nature empty" presents the topic in general. "Namely, the aggregates..." and below distinguishes it: stating that the aggregates, realms, and entrances are impermanent, suffering, and so forth brings up conditioned dharmas; permanence, bliss, self, and purity brings up unconditioned dharmas. There are two kinds of permanence, bliss, self, and purity: the first is the permanence, bliss, self, and purity of expedient means, which is cultivated and produced from conditions and originally lacks self-nature; the second is the permanence, bliss, self, and purity of the self-essence, whose nature has emerged from antiquity. Now it is in terms of the first approach that emptiness of intrinsic nature is expounded; the latter approach is subsumed by the great emptiness and is not discussed here. "Regarding such dharmas, one does not see their original nature" explains their emptiness in general: being first assembled from conditions, they originally lack self-nature, and hence are not seen. These statements explain that the essence of dharmas lacks nature; they are not like the previous six, which [spoke of] the absence of a person within dharmas. Although emptiness of nature is spoken of, the marks of conditionally arisen nominal designations have not yet been emptied, and so it is not the same as the subsequent emptiness of non-existence.