四明尊者教行錄 3.24

3.24

十五問：子云別理無住能造諸法，只是理能造事，乃偏一之義者，豈非但有隨緣義，無不變義。子元不知不變則終教、分教同詮，隨緣則獨在終教。故明不變未必隨緣，若說隨緣必有不變，以是真如性隨緣故。若隨緣時改變，則不名性也。

The fifteenth query: You say that the non-abiding principle of the separate teaching being able to create the myriad dharmas is merely that principle can create phenomena, which is a one-sided meaning—is that not having only the meaning of according with conditions, without the meaning of unchanging? You fundamentally do not know that unchanging is expounded in common by both the final and the differentiated teachings, whereas according with conditions belongs exclusively to the final teaching. Therefore it is explained that unchanging does not necessarily accord with conditions, but if one speaks of according with conditions, there must be unchanging, because it is the nature of true thusness that accords with conditions. If it altered when according with conditions, it would not be called 'nature'.