肇論新疏 1.32

1.32

First, this is explained in terms of refuting attachments. The third fascicle of the Foxing lun says: "All views do not go beyond the two kinds, existence and non-existence. Due to the view of existence, one grasps permanence; within the view of non-existence there are again two kinds: first, deviant views, which claim that everything lacks cause and effect, denying all three times; second, the view of annihilation, which claims that there is only the present, disbelieving in the future." Following this, from existence arises permanence, and from non-existence arise the two of deviant view and annihilation; hence the treatise describes both. In the sūtras, to refute these views, it says "neither existent nor non-existent". The treatise states: "It is not like the view grasping existence which is the existence of the view of permanence, hence it is called 'not existent'; it is not like the view grasping non-existence which is the non-existence of deviant views and the view of annihilation, hence it is called 'not non-existent'." The two words "not like" govern both deviant view and annihilation below.