大般涅槃經義記 7.123

7.123

問曰：何故不釋此四，非有、非無、非名、非說？此三種門解釋非常、非非常中其義具顯，為是不釋。其非如來與非眾生、非非眾生，其義大同，故亦不論。非漏、無漏，以何義故迴之在後？以其義廣，故在後釋。

Question: For what reason does it not explain these four: neither existent, nor nonexistent, neither name, and nor speech? In the explanation of neither permanent nor impermanent, the meanings of these three kinds of headings are fully revealed; for this reason they are not explained. As for "not Tathāgata," its meaning is largely the same as "neither sentient being nor non-sentient being"; hence it is also not discussed. For what reason is "neither with-outflows nor without-outflows" placed back at the end? Because its meaning is extensive, it is therefore explained at the end.