維摩經略疏垂裕記 4.122

4.122

二、料簡，二：初番，荊溪云：從問答下重顯其失，而辨大小得名少殊即正釋也。然須得其正釋之旨，兼為欲折見見。攝大乘師以內外塵沙與無明合說，今言二乘與諸菩薩同有內外無為緣集。既分出已即見見，二乘須從著於無為立名。菩薩不著，唯觀自體及以法界，故別得名，名為法界。法界非緣，以緣與彼法界體合，從所障說，故云自體法界緣集。以是應須並置塵沙從無明立，以塵沙惑並不牽於界內外生，故且置之不從其立。所以文云「名別體同」。故例學人與凡夫同有三界思惑。文為二：初、問。二、答，二：初、正答。二、「如凡」下，引例。

Second, evaluation, in two: the first round, Jingxi says: "From the question and answer downward, it again reveals its fault, and distinguishing the slight difference in designation between Great and Small is precisely the proper explanation. However, one must grasp the intent of its proper explanation, which concurrently seeks to break views. The masters of the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* expounded the internal and external [defilements as numerous as] sands of the Ganges together with ignorance. Now it is said that the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas alike have the accumulation of conditions of internal and external unconditioned conditions. Since they have been distinguished, the two vehicles must take their name from attachment to the unconditioned. Bodhisattvas are unattached, contemplating only their own substance and the dharmadhātu; hence they obtain a distinct name, called the dharmadhātu. The dharmadhātu is not a condition; because conditions unite with that dharmadhātu substance, spoken from the perspective of what is obstructed, it is called the accumulation of conditions of one's own substance and dharmadhātu. For this reason, one should set aside the sands of the Ganges and establish it from ignorance; since the delusion of the sands of the Ganges does not draw forth birth within or outside the realms, it is tentatively set aside and not established based upon it. Therefore, the text says: 'The names differ, but the substance is the same.' Hence, by analogy, trainees and ordinary beings alike have the thought delusions of the three realms." The text has two parts: first, question; second, answer, in two parts: first, direct answer; second, below "Like an ordinary person," citing an analogy.