Fazang’s (法藏, 643–712) purpose in composing the Fanwangjing pusa jieben shu (梵網經菩薩戒本疏) remains unclear. Yoshizu Yoshihide and others argue that he classifies the Fanwangjing as a precept teaching (制敎), as opposed to a transformative teaching (化敎), so that it serves to showcase the Huayanjing, while criticizing the Yogācāra readings of Seungjang and Uijeok; but they have not examined how this operates within each category. This article compares Fazang’s commentary with Seungjang’s Beommanggyeong bosal gyebon sulgi (梵網經菩薩戒本述記) in relation to gotra, buddha nature, the essence of the teaching, and the buddha body, with reference to Uijeok and Fazang’s other works. Fazang’s responses cannot be reduced to rejection; they are better understood as reorganization. The evidence is uneven and identifies a type of operation rather than demonstrating dependence on Seungjang. In the first three categories, an absorptive reordering (攝 取的再配置) retains Seungjang’s terms while lowering their position. His delimitation of the intended audience (對機) becomes provisional teaching (權敎), subordinate to a real teaching (實敎) that embraces all five gotras; nevertheless, the proper recipients remain bodhisattvas of the initial resolve and the ten stages of faith (十信). The expansion is thus a placement, not an opening of the precepts. The precept essence (戒體) and the possibility of buddhahood, which Seungjang had separated, Fazang recombines as essence and function (體用), leaving no place for Seungjang’s “partial all” (少分一切). Suchness, first among Seungjang’s four approaches (四門), falls to eighth among Fazang’s ten (十門). Regarding the buddha body, Fazang rejects Seungjang’s assignments but retains the three-body framework, returning the two scriptural bases that Seungjang had joined to their respective rungs. This constitutes a redetermination of gradation (階梯), distinguished by the fact that the Yogācāra framework is not demoted. Both operations reorganize Yogācāra interpretation within Fazang’s hierarchy rather than excluding it, in the same way that he places the Fanwangjing beneath the Huayanjing. This article proposes appropriation and overcoming (攝取·超克), rather than fusion, as a possible intention behind the commentary.