四明十義書 1.86

1.86

又如《輔行》消丈尺寸喻，先將三科中唯取識陰對之，後復云若探取不思議境合此喻者，則以一念十界三科為丈等釋之。既云探取不思議意對喻，故知不思議境是次科之意也。定境之時未合正論三千妙法也。若不爾者，何故名探取不思議耶？又十境不出三障四魔，今之定境報障陰魔，因何未論破障降魔之法，便自說三千耶？

Furthermore, as when the Fuxing interprets the analogy of the chang, the foot, and the inch, it first matches it by taking only the aggregate of consciousness among the three categories, and afterwards again states: 'If one reaches ahead to take the inconceivable object to match this analogy, then one explains it taking a single thought-moment, the ten realms, and the three categories as the chang, etc.' Since it says 'reaching ahead to take the sense of the inconceivable' to match the analogy, we know that the inconceivable object is the sense of the subsequent category. At the time of determining the object, it is not yet appropriate to properly discuss the wondrous dharma of the three thousand. If this were not so, why would it be called 'reaching ahead to take the inconceivable'? Furthermore, the ten objects do not go beyond the three obstacles and four māras; the present determination of the object is the obstacle of retribution and the aggregate-māra—why, without discussing the method for destroying obstacles and subduing māras, would one spontaneously speak of the three thousand?