楞伽阿跋多羅寶經註解 3.190

3.190

This reveals the true teaching. First, Mahāmati asks in objection whether what the Tathāgata speaks is also identical to worldly treatises; there are two challenges in all, as shown in the text. For instance, when broadly expounding various dharmas for the assemblies of gods and humans from other directions, these are spoken in accordance with the minds of others; would this not also be lacking the meaning of self-realization? How would it differ from the discourse of the worldly intellect of tīrthikas? In the reply, he first brushes aside the first objection, saying, 'I do not speak worldly treatises.' This is because worldly treatises speak of going and coming, whereas the Buddha speaks only of non-going and non-coming. 'Coming' being described as 'the assembly, convergence, and birth into destinies' means that with coming, causes and conditions harmonize and arise. 'Going' being described as 'dispersal and destruction' means that with going, conditions disperse and cease. What the Buddha speaks differs from this, saying that non-going and non-coming is non-arising and non-ceasing, which is what I have realized. In replying to the second challenge, 'does not fall into the category of the false conceptualizations of worldly treatises' refers to the tīrthikas' discriminations of existence and nonexistence being the category of false conceptualization. He again raises a question and explains it, stating that one does not cling to the two extremes; because of not clinging, the false conceptualizations of existence and nonexistence cannot turn it. This is truly because the realm of specific characteristics lacks self-nature; lacking self-nature, it is empty—how could there be any turning? Furthermore, in speaking of 'recognizing that it is the appearance of one's own mind,' etc.: once one understands that all dharmas are mind-only, how could false conceptualizations arise again? Because they do not arise, one enters the three doors of liberation: 'emptiness' is emptiness of nature, 'signlessness' is emptiness of characteristics, and 'wishlessness' means that both nature and characteristics are empty and the mind initiates nothing. Wishlessness (無作) is also called absence of vows (無願), meaning having no wishes or desires.