維摩經略疏垂裕記 3.70

3.70

六、釋一名解脫非關佛國難，二：初、問難。問意者，此經既以佛國為宗，若立異名應名佛國；既云解脫則佛國義乖。荊溪云：此經雖即人法雙題，恐單人名表法猶濫，故從法稱以為其問。二、答釋。答意者，此經通名不思議解脫經，中別品有不思議，名義相符，既明依報則佛國義顯。荊溪云：答中還從別名以答，故不思議最顯佛國。但今意明不思議義有總有別，總對一部故名為通，以法對人亦復如是，是故人法二意不殊。

Sixth, resolving the objection that the single title [Inconceivable] Liberation is unrelated to the Buddha-land, in two [parts]: First, the objection. The meaning of the question is: since this sūtra takes the Buddha-land as its essential doctrine, if an alternative title is established, it ought to be named "Buddha-land"; yet since it is called "Liberation," this contradicts the meaning of the Buddha-land. Jingxi says: Although this sūtra's [main] title couples both person and Dharma, fearing that a singular personal name might still be too ambiguous to express the Dharma, the question is raised based on the Dharma title. Second, the reply. The meaning of the reply is: the general title of this sūtra is the *Inconceivable Liberation Sūtra*, and within it, an individual chapter is titled "Inconceivable." The name and the meaning tally; once the circumstantial [reward] is clarified, the meaning of the Buddha-land becomes evident. Jingxi says: The reply in turn answers based on the individual title; hence, "Inconceivable" most clearly reveals the Buddha-land. However, the present intent clarifies that the meaning of "Inconceivable" has both general and specific aspects: being general in contrast to the whole work, it is called general; contrasting the Dharma with the person is likewise so. Therefore, the two meanings of person and Dharma are not different.