法苑珠林 10.141

10.141

如十二游經增一阿含長阿含等並云。二十九出家。增一阿含。二十年在外道法中。今推大例如來在世七十九年。若二十九出家。三十五成道所可化物。唯應四十五年。而禪要經云。釋迦一身化眾生。三十九年。諸經多十九出家應以為正。故未曾有經云。耶輸陀羅言。如來取我未過三年。既瑞應經云。太子年十七納妃。便證十九出家是正也。若二十九出家三十五成道。經中益少。且云二十年外道中學。便是五十方始成道。足知誤矣。良由眾生根行不同見有同異。

For instance, texts such as the Shi'er you jing, the Ekottarika-āgama, and the Dīrgha-āgama all state: "At twenty-nine he went forth from household life." The Ekottarika-āgama [also states] that he spent twenty years among non-Buddhist methods. Now, inferring according to the general principle, the Tathāgata was in the world for seventy-nine years. If he left household life at twenty-nine and attained the Way at thirty-five, the period in which he could transform living beings would have been only forty-five years. Yet the Chanyao jing states: "In Śākya's single lifetime, he transformed living beings for thirty-nine years." Many sūtras hold that he left household life at nineteen, which should be taken as correct. Thus the Weicengyou jing states: "Yaśodharā said: 'Not three years had passed since the Tathāgata took me.'" Since the Ruiying jing states: "At the age of seventeen, the prince took a consort," this confirms that his going forth at nineteen is correct. If he went forth at twenty-nine and attained the Way at thirty-five, fewer [years of teaching] would remain in the scriptures; furthermore, if it is said that he studied among non-Buddhists for twenty years, he would only have attained the Way at fifty, which is well known to be an error. This truly comes about because the faculties and practices of sentient beings are not the same, so what they perceive differs.