維摩經略疏垂裕記 5.133

5.133

二、隨文釋義，二：初、訶不知根緣。「如來知根」者，知眾生根鈍，即說藏教析空，故云故聲聞經等。今居士根利，應說通教體空，何以反說三藏乎？故荊溪云：文中但作藏通相對以論利鈍，亦且寄通一往而已。今亦可云一切利鈍皆悉不知，目連但汎對他以說拙教而已。既不知小鈍，亦不知大利，況十六門六十四悉之利鈍耶。故利鈍之言有通有別，通約十六，別但衍門；與而言之，亦可容知三藏十六。故今所以斥小被大，三空悉然，故須曉此。二、訶知見有滯。

Second, explaining the meaning following the text, in two parts: first, reproaching not knowing faculties and conditions. Regarding 'The Tathāgata knows faculties', knowing that sentient beings' faculties are dull, he speaks the Tripiṭaka teaching's analytical emptiness; hence it says 'therefore the śrāvaka sūtras', and so on. Now the householders' faculties are sharp, so he ought to speak the Shared Teaching's embodied emptiness; why instead speak the Tripiṭaka? Hence Jingxi says: "In the text, it is only discussed as sharp and dull in terms of the Tripiṭaka facing the Shared, and this is also just provisionally following the Shared for the time being. Now one could also say that he is completely unaware of all sharp and dull [faculties]; Maudgalyāyana merely speaks the clumsy teaching generally toward others. He neither knows the minor dullness nor knows the great sharpness, so how much less the sharpness and dullness of the sixteen gates and sixty-four siddhāntas? Therefore the words 'sharp and dull' have common and distinct [meanings]: the common relates to the sixteen, while the distinct is solely the Mahāyāna gate; if conceded, he might also conceivably know the sixteen of the Tripiṭaka. Hence, the reason he now refutes the small to bestow the great is that all three emptinesses are like this; thus one must comprehend this." Second, reproaching attachment in knowledge and vision.