妙法蓮華經文句 5.67

5.67

從「於意云何」下，第四，不虛譬，譬法王不妄：一問、二答、三述歎。問如文。「舍利弗言」下，第二，答，為二：一、免難不虛，亦名以重奪輕不虛；二、不乖本心不虛，亦云過本望不虛。各為三，謂標章、解釋、況結。標免難，如文。「何以故」下，第二，釋者，命重身輕全身免火，已得大寶濟于重命，豈應有虛？結，免八苦之火、全五分之身，已是大寶，況二萬佛所大乘慧命圓因，成就佛知見開，寧是虛妄？次「世尊若是」下，第二，不乖本心，初標不乖本心章，本知無三，意令不謗，不謗者已不乖本心。釋云，本知無小，意令不毀墮惡，既無毀因不墮惡果，不與小車不乖本意。結云，自知財富無量，欲饒益其子，與一大車過本所望，是故不虛。結前章云方便救濟，似譬斷德神通之力；結後章云財富無量，似譬智德辯說之力。前是子等故不虛，後是財等故不虛。「佛告舍利」下，第三，歎述，有二「善哉」者，述其二不虛也。

From "What do you think?" below is the fourth, the parable of not being false, illustrating that the Dharma King does not lie: first, a question; second, an answer; third, an endorsement with praise. The question is as in the text.
From "Śāriputra said" below, the second part, the answer, has two points: first, it is not false because they escaped disaster, also called not being false because the heavy supersedes the light; second, it is not false because it does not contradict his original intention, also called not being false because it exceeded their original hopes. Each has three aspects: stating the heading, explaining, and drawing a comparison to conclude. Stating the escape from disaster is as in the text.
From "Why is this?" below, the second part, the explanation, states that life is heavy while the body is light; preserving the body whole and escaping the fire, they have already gained a great treasure that saves their precious lives; how could there be any falsehood? In conclusion, escaping the fire of the eight sufferings and preserving whole the body of the five dharmakāya attributes is already a great treasure; how much more so the perfect cause of the Mahāyāna life of wisdom under twenty thousand buddhas, bringing about the opening of the buddha knowledge and vision—how could it be false?
Next, "World-Honoured One, even if..." below is the second [point], not contradicting his original intention. First, it states the heading of not contradicting his original intention: he originally knew there were not three, his intention being to keep them from slandering; not slandering already does not contradict his original intention. In explanation, it says he originally knew there was no small [vehicle], intending to keep them from slandering and falling into evil [destinies]; having no cause for slander and not falling into evil results, not giving the small carriages does not contradict his original intention. In conclusion, it says he knew his wealth was immeasurable, and wishing to benefit his children, gave them a single great carriage that exceeded their original hopes, and therefore it is not false. Concluding the previous heading says he saved them through expedient means, resembling an illustration of the power of the spiritual transformations of the virtue of severance; concluding the latter heading says his wealth is immeasurable, resembling an illustration of the power of eloquent speech of the virtue of wisdom. The former is not false because of the equality of the children; the latter is not false because of the equality of the wealth.
From "The Buddha said to Śāriputra" below, the third part, praise and endorsement, having two instances of "Excellent!", endorses the two reasons it is not false.