楞伽阿跋多羅寶經註解 4.24

4.24

經中言不生不滅者非一，其所詮之旨不無同異，如云「修多羅攝受不生不滅。」攝受者，謂舍攝其理。又云「此是如來異名。」大慧以為不生不滅是無性義，云何言是異名，豈如來亦無性耶？佛答以不生不滅是離有無，故曰「有無品不現」。此以一答酬其二請。大慧又以為不現是不生，若一切法不生，豈是如來異名？若是異名，於名字中豈亦有不生法義，故又致請。答中言非無性者，謂如來非是無法，亦非攝取不生不滅，亦不待生滅之緣而非不生不滅。言亦非無義者，起後正答也。

In the sūtras, mentions of 'neither arising nor cessation' are not one; the principles they explain are not without similarities and differences, as in saying, 'The sūtras embrace neither arising nor cessation.' 'Embrace' means to contain its principle. And it also says, 'This is an alternative name for the Tathāgata.' Mahāmati took 'neither arising nor cessation' to mean naturelessness, asking why it is called an alternative name—could the Tathāgata also be natureless? The Buddha replied that 'neither arising nor cessation' is being free from existence and nonexistence, hence saying 'the category of existence and nonexistence does not manifest.' With this one answer, he addressed both of his questions. Mahāmati again took 'not manifesting' to mean non-arising: if all dharmas do not arise, how could it be an alternative name for the Tathāgata? If it is an alternative name, could there also be an unarisen dharma-meaning within names? Thus he asked again. In the reply, saying 'not natureless' means that the Tathāgata is not a non-dharma, nor does it grasp neither arising nor cessation, nor does it depend on the conditions of arising and cessation to be neither arising nor cessation. Saying 'nor is it meaningless' introduces the subsequent direct reply.