大般涅槃經義記 6.233

6.233

自下第二寄就世王懺悔逆罪以顯菩薩治病之行。問曰：若此顯病行者，何故文中不舉不結？辨法有二：一當相直論、二寄事表法。當相論者須舉須結，寄事表者舉事便罷，今此文中寄事表法，故無舉結。文中雖不言是病行，治病之相快成顯著；若此非者，應有指斥，不應直爾。又問：若此顯病行者，何故與前章門不次？良以世王此處來故。又復此例上下非一，如前八種知見之中先開八門，後釋不次。又復如下第二德中先列五門，後解不次。此亦似彼，未足可怪。

From here below is the second section, which relies upon King Ajātaśatru's repentance of his heinous crime to reveal the bodhisattva's practice of curing illness. A question asks: If this reveals the practice regarding illness, why does the text neither introduce it [as such] nor conclude it? Discriminating the Dharma has two modes: first, discussing it directly according to its own marks; second, relying on an event to express the Dharma. One who discusses it according to its marks must introduce it and conclude it; one who expresses it through an event presents the event and then stops. Here in this text, it relies on an event to express the Dharma; hence there is neither introduction nor conclusion. Although the text does not say this is the practice regarding illness, the marks of curing illness are clearly established. If this were not the case, there should be a censure; it would not be simply like this. It is asked again: If this reveals the practice regarding illness, why is it out of sequence with the preceding chapter headings? It is simply because King Ajātaśatru arrives at this point. Furthermore, examples of this above and below are not singular: just as among the eight kinds of knowledge and vision earlier, eight gates were first opened, but afterwards the explanation was not in sequence; and again, as in the second virtue below, five gates are first listed, but afterwards the explanation is not in sequence. This is also like those; it is not at all surprising.