法華玄贊義決 1.264

1.264

有二解。一云許自小乘與如來等，說如窮子以對治之，我與佛等，亦應當得此之意樂，即非對治。一云定性之人修不作佛故，但令得同體意樂；不定之人當應作佛，許與佛等，障不迴心故說。對治所望有別，故不相違。

There are two explanations. One says: admitting that one's own Hīnayāna is equal to the Tathāgata, it speaks of the impoverished son in order to counteract this; as for 'I am equal to the Buddha,' one also ought to attain this intention, so that is not what is counteracted. The other says: persons of determinate lineage do not become buddhas through practice, so it only causes them to attain the intention of sharing the same body; persons of indeterminate lineage will become buddhas in the future, and if they assume they are already equal to the Buddha, this hinders them from turning their minds, which is why it is counteracted. Because their perspectives differ, there is no contradiction.