廣弘明集 21.27

21.27

Faxuan of Xinghuang Temple inquired, saying: "The doctrinal purport states: 'The conventional truth is existence and is non-existence; hence it takes arisen phenomena as its substance.' I do not know: an existent phenomenon has substance and may be designated 'arisen'; non-existence is a non-existent phenomenon—how can it have the meaning of arising?"
The Prince's decree replied, saying: "In the conventional truth, existence and non-existence are established in mutual dependence. Since they are mutually dependent, both may be designated 'arisen'."
He further inquired: "If both phenomena, existence and non-existence, are together designated 'arisen', and the meaning of arising is unitary, then existence and non-existence would have no difference."
The decree replied: "Because both are what worldlings perceive, the meaning of arising is the same. As one is existence and the other is non-existence, how could they not be different?"
He further inquired: "If existence and non-existence are indeed distinct, there should be arising and non-arising."
The decree replied: "Since their names are established in mutual dependence, they share the single meaning of arising."