四明十義書 2.41

2.41

《妙玄》本顯心等三法理則俱理、事則俱事，就理則高下無差、就事則高下差別，故云佛定在果、生通因果、心定在因。此之圓滿之義，被《珠指》殘缺解之。何者？以彼謂生佛屬事，是因是果；心法屬理，乃非因非果。若元知俱事俱理，何不三法俱就事釋，何得曲改聖教、抑就我心，作二事一理解耶？若元知三法皆即事是理、即妄而真，何不三法作俱事俱理而釋耶？

The *Miaoxuan* originally revealed that with respect to the three dharmas of mind and the rest, in terms of principle they are all principle, and in terms of phenomena they are all phenomena; in terms of principle there is no distinction of higher or lower, while in terms of phenomena there are distinctions of higher and lower. Therefore it says that the Buddha is definitively in the fruit, sentient beings pertain to both cause and fruit, and the mind is definitively in the cause. This complete and perfect meaning was explained in a truncated manner by the *Zhu zhi*. Why? Because it claimed that sentient beings and Buddhas belong to phenomena and are cause and fruit, whereas the mind-dharma belongs to principle and is neither cause nor fruit. If you had originally known that they are all phenomena and all principle, why did you not interpret all three dharmas in terms of phenomena? Why distort the sacred teaching and depress it to fit your own mind, interpreting them as two phenomenal and one principle? If you had originally known that all three dharmas are identical to phenomena and therefore principle, identical to delusion and therefore true, why did you not explain all three dharmas as being both all phenomena and all principle?