楞伽阿跋多羅寶經註解 4.195

4.195

答中先指其非。蓋諸佛數量過於恒沙，亦過世間心量所望，故非喻所喻，豈特恒沙而已？蓋凡設喻，義非一揆，如彼凡愚未受化者，生死無窮，佛則為說諸佛易見，非如曇華，令其不生退想，息其方便妄求，進求佛道，以難顯易，所以進之也。有時觀已受化者，為說佛之難值猶如曇華，令其欣慕向道，所以策之也。又云曇華之難見者，無已、今、當見之說，而如來於世人皆見之，故知說如來如曇華者，實起人難遭之想耳。然此二喻言難言易者，皆如來化用邊事，非如來自證境界。故云「不以建立自通」。若論自證，世間無等，非喻所及，一切凡愚莫能信受，亦非心、意、識所能知見。然有時而為建立化他，何咎之有？

In the reply, he first points out the error. The number of Buddhas exceeds the sands of the Ganges and also exceeds what can be expected by the worldly mental capacity; therefore, they are not what analogies can analogize—how could they merely be like the sands of the Ganges? Whenever analogies are set up, the principle is not uniform. For instance, for those foolish ones who have not yet been transformed and whose birth-and-death is endless, the Buddha speaks to them of Buddhas being easy to see and not like the udumbara flower, so that they do not generate thoughts of retreating, cease their expedient false seeking, and advance to seek the Buddha Way; using difficulty to show ease is the reason for urging them forward. At times, observing those who have already been transformed, he speaks of the Buddha being difficult to encounter like the udumbara flower, causing them to joyfully admire and turn toward the Way, which is the reason for spurring them on. Furthermore, saying that the udumbara flower is difficult to see means there is no talk of it having been seen, being seen now, or to be seen in the future; yet as for the Tathāgata, people in the world all see him. Therefore, we know that speaking of the Tathāgata as like the udumbara flower is actually to arouse in people the thought of him being rare to encounter. However, these two analogies speaking of difficulty and ease are both matters on the side of the Tathāgata's transformative function, not the realm of the Tathāgata's own realization. Hence it says, 'not on account of establishing his own realization.' If we discuss his own realization, it is unequaled in the world and beyond the reach of analogy; none of the foolish can believe or accept it, nor can it be known or seen by citta, manas, or vijñāna. Yet when at times he establishes it to transform others, what fault could there be?