法華義疏 3.197

3.197

以此文責光宅，既明別有偏行六度菩薩，足二乘為三者，何故不明菩薩疑耶？若言略故不說者，菩薩正為偏執之大，何故略大而存小耶？又下三周中皆明三根聲聞得悟，不明菩薩受解，以此推之，知無偏行六度之人也。今所明者，二乘人昔有自保究竟之執，忽聞三非究竟是故生疑，所以此中列之。菩薩之人無有此執，是故今文不列菩薩疑也。

Using this text to reproach Guangzhai: since he asserts that there are separately bodhisattvas who exclusively practice the six perfections, complementing the two vehicles to make three, why does it not clarify the doubt of the bodhisattvas? If one says that it is omitted for brevity and not stated, the bodhisattvas are precisely the greatest of those with biased attachment; why would he omit the great and preserve the small? Furthermore, in the three cycles below, all clarify the awakening of śrāvakas of the three faculties, and do not clarify bodhisattvas receiving understanding. Deducing from this, we know there are no persons who exclusively practice the six perfections. What is clarified now is that persons of the two vehicles formerly had the attachment of holding themselves to be ultimate; suddenly hearing that the three are not ultimate, they therefore gave rise to doubt, which is why they are listed here. Persons who are bodhisattvas do not have this attachment; therefore the present text does not list the doubt of bodhisattvas.