大般涅槃經義記 8.268

8.268

第二師子乘言救有，如來難破。師子初言「以有性故故須緣因」總立有義。「何以」下釋，為欲明見故須緣因。初先法說、次以喻顯。喻別有三。「乳中」下合，「是故」下結。「是故雖有要須了因」結明須了，「以是義故先有酪性」結成有酪。下佛破之，文別有二：一約性酪，徵立性了；二「若是了因復何須」下，難破性了，成無性酪。前中，初言「若使乳中有酪性者」牒其所立，「即是了因」徵立性了。乳中既得有其性酪，酪由了有，明知乳中即有性了。

In the second round, Siṃhanāda seizes upon the words to rescue [the thesis of] existence, and the Tathāgata challenges and refutes it. Siṃhanāda first says, "Because the nature exists, it requires conditioning causes," summarily establishing the meaning of existence. From "Why?" below, he explains: in order to see it clearly, it requires conditioning causes. First, he speaks in terms of doctrine, and next, illustrates it through analogies. There are three separate analogies. From "Within milk" below, he applies them; from "Therefore" below, he concludes. "Therefore, although it exists, it must require a clarifying cause" concludes by clarifying that it must require a clarifier; "for this reason, the curd-nature was present beforehand" concludes by establishing that there are curds. Below, the Buddha refutes this; the text has two distinct parts: first, based on the nature-curd, he interrogates and posits the nature-clarifier; second, from "If it is a clarifying cause, why again is there a need..." below, he challenges and refutes the nature-clarifier, establishing the absence of the nature-curd. In the former, he first says, "If milk has the curd-nature," reiterating what was posited; "then it is the clarifying cause" interrogates and posits the nature-clarifier. Since milk can have its nature-curd, and curds exist on account of the clarifier, it is clearly known that milk immediately has the nature-clarifier.