法華玄贊義決 1.219

1.219

有二解。一云談本說權本為凡夫，今以喻顯故言為具足煩惱性，即談昔意故不相違。二云准聲聞請，正為無學、傍備有學，據傍云凡夫，無學文顯，論略不釋。不爾、此經宗明一乘，如何〈藥草品〉云令知乘異，說種種乘故，約內有學聲聞令趣於大，文顯可知，故具不引。

There are two explanations. One says: In speaking of the origin and teaching the provisional, their origin was as ordinary persons (pṛthagjana), and now in order to illustrate through the parable, it says they are 'possessed of the nature of defilements'; this refers to their past state, and thus there is no contradiction. The second says: Judging by the śrāvakas' request, it was primarily for those beyond training and secondarily provided for those in training; based on the secondary aspect it speaks of ordinary persons, and since the text concerning those beyond training is obvious, the treatise omitted commenting on it. Otherwise, the central tenet of this sūtra is to illuminate the ekayāna; why then does the 'Chapter on Medicinal Herbs' say that in order to make them know the differences of the vehicles, various vehicles were taught? It is with reference to the internal śrāvakas in training to cause them to proceed toward the Great [Vehicle]; the text is obvious and understandable, so it is not cited in full.