十不二門指要鈔 2.146

2.146

答：「名總三別，少分可然，以教相為符文，全不允當，況餘四章前文已例，不須更示，令依《記》文云：『所以釋題不可率爾，題下別釋理非容易。』豈非以題為總、以文為別？」

Answer: "The name being general and the three being specific is acceptable in small part, but taking doctrinal classifications to tally with the text is entirely inappropriate. Furthermore, the remaining four chapters were already analogized in the preceding text and do not need to be shown again. One is made to rely on the text of the Commentary, which says: 'Therefore, explaining the title must not be done lightly; the specific explanation beneath the title is in principle not easy.' Is this not taking the title as general and the text as specific?"