大般涅槃經義記 2.176

2.176

第三總結，釋中有四：一問、二答、三難、四通。就初問中，為彰如來善解隨機漸化因緣，反責如來經不頓說、律不頓制。「如有四眾」假舉問人，「來問我」下假舉問辭。辭中有二：一責如來經不頓說、二「或名犯」下呵責如來律不頓制。經中初先責不頓說。「或說深」下呵其漸說，責不頓中。「如是義」者，謂佛常義。「如來初出，何不即為波斯匿王說是深義」責不頓說。佛初出時，波斯匿王其母命終，王甚憂惱，佛為開解，說佛緣覺及弟子眾皆悉無常。故今對之，責不頓說。「或時說深、或時說淺」，呵其漸說，昔為波斯說佛無常名之為淺、今日說常以之為深。

The third section is a summary conclusion; within the explanation there are four parts: first, a question; second, an answer; third, an objection; fourth, a resolution. Within the initial question, in order to make clear that the Tathāgata understands well the causes and conditions for gradually transforming [beings] in accordance with their capacities, it turns around to reprove the Tathāgata for not having expounded the sūtras suddenly and not having established the Vinaya suddenly. 'If there were four assemblies...' hypothetically introduces the questioners; from 'came to ask me' downward hypothetically introduces the words of the question. Within the words there are two parts: first, reproving the Tathāgata for not expounding the sūtras suddenly; second, from 'Or called an infraction' downward reproving the Tathāgata for not establishing the Vinaya suddenly. In the sūtra, it first reproves him for not expounding suddenly. From 'Or expounding the deep' downward reproves his gradual expounding. Within the reproof for not expounding suddenly: 'Such meaning' refers to the meaning of the Buddha being permanent. 'When the Tathāgata first appeared, why did he not immediately expound this deep meaning for King Prasenajit?' reproves him for not expounding suddenly. When the Buddha first appeared, King Prasenajit's mother died, and the king was deeply distressed; the Buddha opened his understanding and explained that the Buddhas, pratyekabuddhas, and assembly of disciples are all impermanent. Therefore, facing this now, it reproves him for not expounding suddenly. 'At times expounding the deep, at times expounding the shallow' reproves his gradual expounding: in the past, speaking of the Buddha's impermanence for Prasenajit was called 'shallow', while today speaking of permanence is regarded as 'deep'.