涅槃經遊意 1.252

1.252

次皆漸知不可者，明理若有分，可得分知；理既通同無分，那可分知？又責初地見真，為已稱理，為不稱理？若已稱理，與二地何異？若未稱理，何謂見理？

Next, as for both being cognized gradually being unacceptable: we explain that if the principle had divisions, it could be cognized by parts; since the principle is pervasive, identical, and without divisions, how could it be cognized by parts? Furthermore, we examine the seeing of the ultimate at the first bhūmi: does it already accord with the principle, or does it not accord with the principle? If it already accords with the principle, how does it differ from the second bhūmi? If it does not yet accord with the principle, how can it be called seeing the principle?