四明十義書 1.208

1.208

及被詰難書取《辨訛》前後明文，驗其自前不知理具三千非外境事造，實不能分內外二境事理二造。故被難曰：若分二境，何故將外依正難內心觀法？若分二造，何故將內心具色破事造報色耶（以《扶宗》云：若不觀色，恐心外向，乃是未歷事造報色，非不觀內心理具妙色也）。

When you were confronted by my Letter of Cross-examination, which took the clear passages before and after in your Bian'e to prove that previously you did not know that the three thousand inherently possessed in principle are not the phenomenal making of external objects, and that you truly could not distinguish the two objects of internal and external or the two makings of phenomena and principle, you were then challenged: 'If you distinguish the two objects, why did you use external primary and secondary retributions to object to the contemplation method of the internal mind? If you distinguish the two makings, why did you use the form inherently possessed within the mind to refute the retribution form of phenomenal making?' (This is because the Fuzong says: 'If one does not contemplate form for fear that the mind will turn outward, this means not yet traversing the retribution form of phenomenal making, not that one does not contemplate the wonderful form inherently possessed in principle within the mind.')