[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [華嚴經探玄記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733) › 1.115 # 華嚴經探玄記 1.115 華嚴經探玄記 1.115 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.115](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1.115) 四異門相入義，謂諸緣力用互相依持互形奪故，各有全力無全力義，緣起方成。如論云「因不生，緣生故。緣不生，自因生故。」若各唯有力無無力，即有多果過，一一各生故。若各唯無力，無有力，即有無果過，以同非緣俱不生故。是故緣起要互相依，具力無力。如闕一緣，一切不成，餘亦如是。是故一能持多，一是有力能攝多；多依於一，多是無力潛入一。由一有力，必不得與多有力俱，是故無有一而不攝多也；由多無力，必不得與一無力俱，是故無有多而不入一也。如一持多依既爾，多持一依亦然，反上思之。是即亦無多不攝一、一無不入多者也。如一望多有依有持，全力無力常全多在己中、潛己在多中，同時無礙。多望於一，當知亦爾。俱存雙泯二句無礙，思准之。 > Fourth is the meaning of mutual entry among different gates: because the power and function of the various conditions mutually depend and support, mutually define and deprive each other, they each have the meaning of having full power and having no power, and only then is dependent origination established. As a treatise says: "The cause does not produce \[the effect\], because the conditions produce it; the conditions do not produce \[the effect\], because its own cause produces it." If each had only power and lacked powerlessness, there would be the fault of having multiple fruits, because each would produce \[the fruit\] individually. If each had only powerlessness and lacked power, there would be the fault of having no fruit, because like non-conditions, they would all fail to produce. Therefore, dependent origination must rely on mutual dependence, possessing both power and powerlessness. Just as when a single condition is missing all fail to be established, the rest are also like this. Therefore, when the one can support the many, the one has power and can gather the many; when the many depend on the one, the many are powerless and secretly enter into the one. Because the one has power, it cannot coexist with the power of the many; therefore, there is no one that does not gather the many. Because the many are powerless, they cannot coexist with the powerlessness of the one; therefore, there are no many that do not enter into the one. Just as this is true of one supporting and many depending, so too it is true of many supporting and one depending, as can be understood by reversing the above. Thus, there are also no many that do not gather the one, and no one that does not enter into the many. As the one, viewed against the many, has both depending and supporting, full power and powerlessness, the whole of the many is constantly within itself, and itself is secretly within the many, simultaneously without obstruction. When the many are viewed against the one, one should know that it is also like this. The two propositions of both coexisting and both being obliterated are unobstructed, which should be judged by considering this. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.114](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1.114) - [Next: 1.116](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1.116) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733~en-mt.1.115) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1.115](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.1.115) · Pramāṇa