肇論新疏 2.350

2.350

初句顯體，下皆正責。有無不羈，何云有知？動靜不乖，何云心異？已上答前二智體殊。此下方答二智有知，亦正答有知、潛答心異。以第一難中顯難心異、潛難無知，故答中亦顯答心異、潛答有知。難中以相次而起，答中亦相次而答也。

The first line reveals the substance; the lines below are all direct reprovals. Being and non-being are unconstrained, so why speak of having knowledge? Movement and quietude do not contradict each other, so why speak of the mind being different? The above answered the previous objection that the substances of the two knowledges are distinct. From here downward, it only then answers the two knowledges having knowledge; it also directly answers having knowledge and implicitly answers the mind being different. Because in the first objection it explicitly objected to the mind being different and implicitly objected to lacking knowledge, in the answer it also explicitly answers the mind being different and implicitly answers having knowledge. Just as they arose sequentially in the objection, they are answered sequentially in the reply.