注大乘入楞伽經 3.260

3.260

This challenges the Tathāgata: if he teaches the meaning of the tathāgatagarbha, this contradicts the statement above that all sūtras should teach emptiness, and becomes identical with non-Buddhists asserting an ātman. Now, their conception of the self has three meanings: first, its substance is eternal, called the agent; second, although within the five aggregates, it is free from the guṇas; third, it universally traverses all realms of existence, truly without arising or ceasing. Now teaching the meaning of the garbha, is this not identical with the non-Buddhist self?