大般涅槃經疏 20.15

20.15

「爾時琉光」下，第二彼菩薩正來。非彼佛不能答，示佛道同。欲生此土善、滅此土惡，令見性得道，是故遣來。問：若諸佛道同，彼土遣來，此應遣往。答：亦應遣往，但略不說。又隨化主所舉，此佛舉彼菩薩故菩薩來，彼亦應舉此，但略不舉。問：迦葉好世不說此經，今佛惡世對治無常故說常經。滿月如來亦出好世，何以說之？問難皆與德王同耶？答：常治無常，其土應無。若逗常機任理而說，是故云同。並云昔所不聞而今得聞，可非對治。又迦葉如來亦有常機，何故不說？今解不爾。彼土雖無對治之說，亦二悉說，迦葉亦爾。

From "At that time, Liúguāng..." downward is the second [part], that bodhisattva actually coming. It is not that that Buddha was unable to answer; it shows that the path of the Buddhas is identical. Wishing to generate good in this land and eliminate evil in this land, causing them to see the nature and attain the Way, he was therefore sent to come. Question: If the path of all Buddhas is identical, and that land sent [him] to come, this [land] should also send [someone] to go. Answer: [Someone] should also have been sent to go, but it is merely omitted and not stated. Furthermore, it depends on what the transforming master brings forward: this Buddha brought forward that bodhisattva, hence the bodhisattva came; that [Buddha] should also have brought forward this one, but it is merely omitted and not brought forward. Question: Kāśyapa [Buddha] did not preach this sūtra in a good age; now the Buddha preaches the sūtra on permanence in an evil age as an antidote to impermanence. The Tathāgata Pūrṇacandra also appeared in a good age; why did he preach it? Were his questions and challenges all identical to Déwáng's? Answer: Permanence remedies impermanence, which should not exist in that land. Yet if he adapted to capacities for permanence and spoke in accord with principle, it is therefore said to be identical. They both said, "What was previously unheard is now heard," which may not be an antidote. Furthermore, Kāśyapa Tathāgata also had capacities for permanence; why did he not preach it? Now it is explained that this is not so. Although that land lacked preaching as an antidote, it also spoke in terms of the two siddhāntas, and Kāśyapa did likewise.