成唯識論了義燈 7.18

7.18

《論》：「雖依他起非勝義故」等者。云「非」者，無也。無無分別智所緣之義故，故名「勝義無性」。故《顯揚》十六云「由無勝義性故」，此意：依他名勝義無自性性者，有二義：一由依他體非勝義性故，名勝義無性性；「無」者，非也。一由依他無自然生性，亦名無自性性。

Regarding the Śāstra's statement: "Although the dependent nature is not the ultimate," and so forth: "not" means non-existence. Because it lacks the principle/meaning that is the object of non-conceptual wisdom, it is called "ultimate naturelessness" (paramārtha-niḥsvabhāvatā). Therefore the Prakaraṇāryavācā (fascicle 16) states: "Due to lacking an ultimate nature." The meaning here is: the dependent being called ultimate naturelessness has two meanings. First, because the entity of the dependent is not of an ultimate nature, it is called ultimate naturelessness; "lacking" means not being. Second, because the dependent lacks a nature of spontaneous arising, it is also called naturelessness.