成唯識論演祕 1.775

1.775

此論主言：汝雖前解我，今後責「有無恒齊」，汝今何方能遣我難？或有無齊，論主何方能遣外難？前解為本。有義：若勝論救有法，有有難令無無，亦應汝色等非無，待因故有；龜毛非有，待因故無。既許有法從因而有，無不待無；我亦有法由有故有，無法不假無法方無。

These words of the treatise master mean: "Although you earlier offered an explanation to me, now I reprimand you: 'Being and non-being are consistently equal.' By what means can you now dispel my objection?" Alternatively, [it means]: "Being and non-being are equal; by what means can the treatise master dispel the opponent's objection?" The former explanation is primary. One opinion states: If the Vaiśeṣika defends the category of being [by saying] that being has being, and objects that non-being would thus lack non-being, then by the same token your form and the like would not be non-existent because they await causes to exist; and a hare's horn would not be existent because it awaits causes to be non-existent. Since you accept that existent things exist dependent on causes, while non-being does not await non-being [to be non-existent], I too [hold that] existent things exist on account of being, while non-existent things do not require non-being in order to be non-existent.