維摩經略疏 7.97

7.97

「唯舍利弗」下，四、別約四諦呵。所以更歷別呵者，恐身子未愜。若言四諦是戲論者，何得佛開以為種種利物之門？又解：為未悟者，故須別呵。即為四：初一番約苦、次兩番約集、次四番約滅、次二番約道。初呵苦諦，云「法名寂滅」者，陰等苦法本自不生、今則無滅，即真陰滅義。觀陰苦法是見生滅者乃斥生滅，豈見無生一實諦理。若不見理非求法者，如呵迦旃延「無以生滅心行說實相法」，既不得真無生，還招變易之苦。

From "Only, Śāriputra" below, fourth, is the specific rebuke with reference to the four truths. Why he further rebukes them individually: he fears Śāriputra is still not satisfied, thinking, "If the four truths are conceptual proliferations, why did the Buddha open them as various gates to benefit sentient beings?" Another interpretation: it is for the sake of those who have not yet awakened, so he must rebuke them individually. This comprises four parts: first, one round with reference to suffering; next, two rounds with reference to origin; next, four rounds with reference to cessation; next, two rounds with reference to the path. First, rebuking the truth of suffering, where it says "Dharma is called quiescence and extinction": suffering dharmas such as the aggregates are fundamentally unborn and now are without extinction, which is the meaning of the true extinction of the aggregates. Contemplating the suffering dharmas of the aggregates is seeing arising and ceasing, which he criticizes as arising and ceasing; how could it be seeing the principle of the unarisen single real truth? If one does not see the principle, one is not seeking the Dharma, just as he rebuked Kātyāyana: "Do not expound the Dharma of true reality with a mind that engages in arising and ceasing." Since he does not attain the true unarisen, he still incurs the suffering of transformative change.