法華玄贊義決 1.114

1.114

以有論云，謂若為說，謂大德舍利弗等我不應證等，故云說即有驚。又如疑心既有新舊，此悔亦爾，為欲斷改悔因更悔起。又先悔修小，今者為說，方悔不早修大，故釋無妨。今更一釋，或可疏本有誤，應云二：一說即有驚，二不說即無驚，以舍利弗云聞說未聞斷疑悔故。此釋有過，不順經論故。

Because there is a treatise stating: 'That is to say, if it is expounded for them, the venerable Śāriputra and others [think]: "I should not have realized..." and so on,' it therefore says that when it is expounded, there is alarm. Moreover, just as doubt has both new and old forms, so too does this regret; in order to sever the cause of regret, a further regret arises. Furthermore, previously they regretted cultivating the small; now, when it is expounded for them, only then do they regret not cultivating the great earlier. Therefore there is no fault in the commentary. Now another explanation: perhaps the copy of the commentary is erroneous, and it should say there are two: first, when it is expounded, there is alarm; second, when it is not expounded, there is no alarm; because Śāriputra says that upon hearing the expounding of what had not been heard before, doubt and regret were severed. This explanation has a fault, as it does not conform to the sūtra and the treatise.