成唯識論了義燈 7.18

7.18

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.