維摩經略疏垂裕記 8.176

8.176

問：就方等部有通相觀者，何以大師獨於此說？如《光明》、《觀經》等悉屬方等，彼疏何不明耶？答：《華嚴》、《般若》悉應有之，豈止方等諸部。有義：此經有文。彼既無文，故於諸疏置而不說。此經六品文義雙具，豈得不論？庶幾後賢再思此義，厥或文理有會，則夷塗共遊；失旨乖轍，請從良導。

Question: If there is contemplation in its common aspect in the Vaipulya division, why did the Great Master speak of it exclusively here? As texts like the Suvarṇaprabhāsa and the Guan jing all belong to the Vaipulya, why do those commentaries not clarify it? Answer: The Avataṃsaka and Prajñāpāramitā should all have it, so why limit it to the various texts of the Vaipulya? There is a reason: this sūtra has the text. Since those [others] lack the text, in those commentaries it was set aside and not spoken of. This sūtra possesses both the text and the meaning across six chapters, so how could it not be discussed? May later worthies reconsider this meaning; if the text and principle happen to converge, then we may travel the level path together; if the purport is lost and departs from the track, please follow good guides.