維摩經略疏垂裕記 10.10

10.10

二、明所詮佛性與《大經》無殊，七：初、明方等亦明佛性，二：初、引古明非問。二、準經示謗答。荊溪云：今此方等等者，兼斥古也。今此經中部無十二，豈無佛性？意明大乘無有不具廣問記者。此意正明有三定大、無三定小，不必十二方乃名大。唯《涅槃》、《法華》具而復大，自餘諸部盈縮不常。

Second, explaining that the expressed Buddha-nature is no different from that in the Great Sūtra, in seven parts: first, explaining that the Vaipulya also clarifies Buddha-nature, with two parts: first, citing ancients to clarify error as a question; second, conforming to the sūtra to show slander as an answer. Jingxi says: "In 'Now this Vaipulya,' etc., it simultaneously refutes the ancients. In the present sūtra, the division does not possess the twelve [genres]; does it therefore lack Buddha-nature? The intention is to clarify that there is no Mahāyāna that does not possess extensive questions and prophecies. This intention properly clarifies that if it possesses the three, it is definitely Mahāyāna, and if it lacks the three, it is definitely Hīnayāna; it does not require all twelve genres to be called Mahāyāna. Only the Nirvāṇa and Lotus Sūtras are complete and also great; all other divisions expand and contract without regularity."