As Daijokai was deemed at that time as commandments for secular people, not for Buddhist monks (even at present, Daijokai is not recognized as Buddhist precepts under Theravada Buddhism, such as Sri Lanka Theravada Buddhism), the refutation by Nanto (Nara) priests might be reasonable in light of the common sense that then prevailed.
当時大乗戒は俗人の戒とされ、僧侶の戒律とは考えられておらず（現在でもスリランカ上座部など南方仏教では大乗戒は戒律として認められていない）、南都の学僧が反論したことは当時の常識に照らして妥当なものと言えよう。