注維摩詰經 3.131

3.131

[Kumāra]jīva says: If one removes the self and has non-self, one is still not free from the self. How do we know this? Whenever one speaks of a self, it is a master. The sūtra says there are twenty-two faculties; the twenty-two faculties are also twenty-two masters. Although one says there is no true ruler, there are masters of function and operation; this is still abolishing a master while establishing a master. Therefore, only when one is non-dual with regard to self and non-self is it non-self.

[Seng]zhao says: The Hīnayāna takes clinging to the self as an encumbrance, and therefore esteems non-self. Once non-self is esteemed, it forms a duality with the self. The Mahāyāna equalises the purports of right and wrong, the two being not distinct, as the meaning of non-self.

[Dao]sheng says: Since the principle does not obey the self and is empty, how could there be a self that can control it? Then there is non-self. Non-self originally meant having no self within saṃsāra, not that there is no self of the buddha-nature.