四明尊者教行錄 4.24

4.24

三問：〈化城喻品〉疏云：問：如上塵數多許時節，今始得羅漢，當知無生法忍何易可階。答：一云：大聖善巧，依四悉檀作如是說。對治厭道長者說短，於道生輕易想者說長。當知言如許劫方今得羅漢者，此是如來權行四悉檀，引諸實行令入道耳。近代疑者云：泛爾說佛道長短，或可是善巧四悉。然大通塵數劫猶是指實事，若不爾者，則何勞展轉摩重重土，莫不徒費言詞耶。是事若非實，諸所言說權實難辨。加之，疏第一許久遠為種、過去為熟、近世為脫者，記判之為本眷屬也。此何言始得羅漢者是權行四悉檀耶？

Question 3: The commentary on the chapter 'The Parable of the Conjured City' says: Question: If it required such an immense span of time as the number of dust particles mentioned above, and only now have they attained arhatship, one should know that the forbearance of the unarisen Dharma is by no means easily stepped upon. Answer: One explanation says: The Great Sage, being skillful, expounded this based on the four siddhāntas. As an antidote to those who grow weary of the Path, he speaks of it as short; to those who give rise to thoughts of the Path as light and easy, he speaks of it as long. One should know that stating that they only now attain arhatship after so many kalpas is the Tathāgata's provisional practice of the four siddhāntas, leading those of genuine practice to enter the Path. Recent doubters say: Speaking broadly of the length of the Buddha-Path might indeed be the skillful four siddhāntas. However, the dust-particle kalpas of Mahābhijñā-jñānābhibhū are still an indication of actual facts. If it were not so, why take the trouble to repeatedly grind layer upon layer of lands? Would this not be a futile waste of words? If this matter were not real, it would be difficult to distinguish between the provisional and the real in all that is said. In addition, when the commentary regards the immensely distant past as planting [the seed], the past as ripening, and the recent age as liberation, the subcommentary evaluates them as the original retinue. Why does this say that only now attaining arhatship is the provisional practice of the four siddhāntas?