四明十義書 2.182

2.182

此由上人不知說法由緒故也。明起五心，乃是先立正釋之意。及至七科正文觀心釋中，何曾不待陰境。五里之觀全依陰心，故云心如幻炎。一心成觀，轉教餘心。一陰屬色，四陰屬心，三界無別法，唯是一心作等。立於陰境如此分明，那得起五心中作不待陰境消之耶？以此驗之，上人全不解看讀，因何輒欲議論教觀廢立之意耶？

This is because your Reverence does not know the origin and progression of the exposition of the Dharma. Clarifying the giving rise to the five minds is merely establishing beforehand the intent of the main explanation. When it comes to the main text of the seven headings in the explanation of contemplating the mind, when did it ever not wait for the object of the aggregates? The contemplation of the five leagues relies entirely on the mind of the aggregates, hence it says: 'The mind is like an illusory flame. One mind completes the contemplation, and successively transforms the remaining minds. One aggregate belongs to form, and four aggregates belong to mind; in the triple realm there are no separate dharmas, they are created solely by the one mind,' and so forth. The establishment of the object of the aggregates being so clear, how could one construe 'giving rise to the five minds' as 'without waiting for the object of the aggregates'? Proved by this, your Reverence does not understand how to read texts at all; why would you rashly attempt to debate the intention behind establishing and abolishing teaching and contemplation?