四明尊者教行錄 4.23

4.23

答：若常程別教，皆云初住斷見，更不起諸重過也。況見惑名數雖多乃一位頓斷，思惑乃經諸位方盡。此常所談別教分齊也。今記主見云身子六住尚退復起重罪，遂以義求，恐有教門見思俱斷，至六心時思猶未盡、見亦餘殘，所以能牽惡道也。此是記主約義斟酌之詞，不可將現行別教難也。若據《起信》，唯云不退，乃克就圓人辨之。若論示迹，亦須示其階位、約惑分齊，方有退義。

Answer: If it is the standard separate teaching, it consistently says that at the first abode views are severed, and one no longer gives rise to major transgressions. Moreover, although the categories of view defilements are many, they are severed all at once at a single stage; thought defilements are only exhausted by passing through various stages. This is the conventional boundary discussed in the separate teaching. Now, the author of the subcommentary, seeing it stated that Śāriputra still retrogressed at the sixth abode and again committed major offenses, sought it through meaning, [suggesting that] perhaps there is a doctrinal teaching wherein view and thought are both severed, yet by the time of the sixth mind thought is not yet exhausted and a remnant of views also remains, which is therefore able to pull one into the evil destinies. These are words of deliberation according to meaning by the author of the subcommentary; they cannot be used as an objection against the standard separate teaching. If we rely on the Awakening of Faith, it only speaks of non-retrogression, strictly determining it with respect to persons of the perfect [teaching]. If we consider the manifestation of traces, one must also manifest their stages and delineate them according to afflictions; only then is there the meaning of retrogression.