大般涅槃經義記 4.20

4.20

Question: What is the difference between speaking here of neither existence nor non-existence and the refutation of existence and non-existence in the third section above, such that it is repeated again? Explanation: The former was to refute emotional views, whereas what is discussed here is to clarify the principle. Furthermore, the former refuted definitive existence and non-existence with regard to the dharmas of causes and conditions in conventional truth, whereas this [section] directly reveals the meaning that the nature of the tathāgatagarbha is neither existent nor non-existent; being different from the former, it is therefore analyzed again.