四明十義書 1.185

1.185

又上人今既堅將內觀為理、外觀為事。十法文中既不簡示陰入內心為境，又無十法成乘，何名純談理觀？若非理觀，安可廢附法觀耶？論宗既破，更欲何言。

Furthermore, you now insist on taking internal contemplation as principle and external contemplation as phenomena. Since the text on the ten dharmas neither selects the aggregates and sense-entrances of the internal mind as the object nor has the ten dharmas forming a vehicle, how can it be called a pure discourse on principle contemplation? If it is not principle contemplation, how can the contemplation appending to teachings be discarded? Since the foundational thesis of your argument has been refuted, what more do you wish to say?