大般涅槃經義記 6.45

6.45

Next, clarifying the distinction in how knowledge and vision apprehend dharmas: specifically, there are three kinds: First, knowing but not seeing, as the text below says: "knowing that sentient beings practice deviant dharmas, yet not seeing that those persons attain the fruit of liberation," and so on for all such cases. Second, both seeing and knowing, as the text below says: "seeing beings commit evil and fall into the evil destinies; knowing beings cultivate good, are born among devas and humans, and attain liberation," and so on for all such cases. Third, both seeing and knowing, and neither seeing nor knowing, as the text below says: "conforming to conventional speech, there are men, women, and so forth that can be seen and known; if conforming to the words of the holy one's secret treasury, there are no men, women, houses, or the like that cannot be seen or known," and so on for all such cases. Why is "seeing but not knowing" not mentioned? Knowing is easy, while seeing is difficult; wherever there is seeing, there is always knowing, which is why it is not mentioned. There is this distinction in how knowledge and vision apprehend dharmas; here in the general section, it brings up what is essential, and therefore simply says "both seeing and knowing."