瑜伽師地論略纂 12.36

12.36

論云「如是諸法，非如愚夫言說串習」下，總結上來明依他、圓成有，遍計無也。約勝義離言自性，此二性非無所有，存二性也。　「由此方便悟入道理，一切諸法非有非無，猶如幻夢，其性無二」者，此結上三性。言遍計亦非有非無，非有，同兔角也；非無，有妄情也。依他亦爾，非有，如遍計也；非無，有假夢也。圓成亦爾，非有，同遍計；非無，勝義有也。　「不取少分，不捨少分」等者，不取遍計，不捨二性，不作損減二性，不作增益遍計有也，名無失壞。

The treatise says, "Such dharmas are not like the verbal habits of foolish ordinary beings..." Downward from here, it summarizes the preceding explanation that the other-dependent and fully accomplished natures exist, while the imagined nature does not. In terms of the ineffable intrinsic nature of the ultimate truth, these two natures are not non-existent, preserving both natures. "Through this skillful means, one awakens to and enters the principle that all dharmas are neither existent nor non-existent, like an illusion or a dream, their nature non-dual": this summarizes the three natures above. Saying that the imagined [nature] is also neither existent nor non-existent means: "not existent" because it is like a hare's horn; "not non-existent" because deluded sentiment exists. The other-dependent is also like this: "not existent" because it is not like the imagined; "not non-existent" because a nominal dream exists. The fully accomplished is also like this: "not existent" as it is not the imagined; "not non-existent" because it exists in the ultimate sense. "Neither grasping the slightest part nor abandoning the slightest part," and so forth: neither grasping the imagined nor abandoning the two natures, neither depreciating the two natures nor superimposing existence upon the imagined; this is called being free from ruin.