大般涅槃經義記 2.182

2.182

In the fourth [part], the resolution, in response to the previous two objections there are likewise two explanations. First, in response to the first section, [addressing the concern that] he might have caused sentient beings to enter the Avīci Hell, he exonerates himself of fault; from "just as a king" onward, in response to the latter objection, he clarifies that for the sake of sentient beings they could not be instituted beforehand. In the former, he explains it with respect to the three karmas. "If it is said that the Tathāgata is able to speak the ten good actions, this means he regards sentient beings as [he does] Rāhula; how can you object, saying: 'could it be that he wished to cause sentient beings to enter the Avīci Hell?'" takes up the phrasing of the previous question, clarifying that his own verbal karma benefits sentient beings, and therefore he does not wish to cause sentient beings to enter hell. From "if I see a single person falling into Avīci" onward, it clarifies that his own bodily karma abides for a long time to benefit beings, and therefore he does not wish to cause sentient beings to enter hell. From "I have great compassion for sentient beings" onward, it clarifies that his own internal mind compassionately benefits sentient beings, and therefore he does not wish to cause sentient beings to enter hell.