大般涅槃經義記 9.241

9.241

「是義不然」總非前說，下隨救辭廣以破之。於中，先就鹽喻以破，後就種子四大以破。前中，初言「不醎之物先有醎性」牒其救辭。「鹽亦應有微不醎性」舉鹽類徵。「是鹽若有如是二」下，破鹽二性。恐人被徵立鹽二性，故須遮破。於中初舉，「何緣」下徵，「是故知」下結鹽無二。「如鹽」以下，以鹽無二，類破餘物。鹽中既無微不醎性，不醎物中云何有醎。

"This meaning is not correct" generally negates the preceding assertion; below, it refutes it in detail following the words of the defense. Within this, it first refutes it with respect to the salt analogy, and afterwards refutes it with respect to the four great elements of the seed. In the former, the initial statement "non-salty things previously have the nature of saltiness" cites their defensive assertion. "Salt should also have a subtle non-salty nature" raises salt to probe by analogy. From "if this salt has two such natures" onwards, it refutes the two natures of salt. Fearing that someone, upon being questioned, might establish two natures for salt, it is necessary to preclude and refute it. Within this, it first presents it; from "for what reason" onwards it questions it; from "therefore it should be known" onwards it concludes that salt does not have two [natures]. From "just as salt" onwards, by salt having no two [natures], it refutes other things by analogy: since there is no subtle non-salty nature in salt, how could there be saltiness in non-salty things?