[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) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 10.46 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 10.46 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 10.46 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [10.46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10.46) 疏「互攝亦然」者，後例辯相攝也。上之四句但明入義。今攝亦四：第一句一攝一切者：謂以一華普攝一切諸法。第二句一切攝一者：謂以餘一切華攝此一華等。第三句一攝一者，即以一華但攝一佛等。第四句一切攝一切者，即以多華多佛等攝餘多華多佛等也。此二種四句相隱，故疏說之。隨一四句中，復應更有具四絕五，皆以成六句。例前可思，故略不顯。然相入門，《刊定記》主德相不立，謂業用則有，德相之中即有相在。此公意謂：相入相在二相別故。今明入即在義，如一鏡影在多鏡中，豈非入耶？若常相入，即屬德相。今見相入即是業用，曾何大殊。 > Where the Commentary says, “Mutual containment is likewise so,” this is afterwards to distinguish mutual containment by analogy. The four propositions above only explained the meaning of entering. Now containment also has four: The first proposition, the one contains all, means taking one flower to universally contain all phenomena. The second proposition, all contains the one, means taking all the remaining flowers to contain this one flower, and so forth. The third proposition, the one contains the one, means taking one flower to contain only one Buddha, and so forth. The fourth proposition, all contains all, means taking many flowers, many Buddhas, and so forth to contain the remaining many flowers, many Buddhas, and so forth. Because the characteristics of these two kinds of four propositions are subtle and hidden, the Commentary explains them. Within either set of four propositions, there should also be \[propositions that\] possess the four and cut off the five, all together forming six propositions. This can be understood by analogy with the previous, so it is omitted and not displayed. However, regarding the door of mutual entrance, the author of the Kandingji did not establish it in terms of qualities and characteristics, claiming that it exists in functional operations, whereas in qualities and characteristics there is mutual presence. This master’s meaning was that the two characteristics of mutual entrance and mutual presence are distinct. Now, it is made clear that entrance is just the meaning of presence: just as the reflection of one mirror is present in many mirrors, how could this not be entering? If there is constant mutual entrance, this pertains to qualities and characteristics. If one now views mutual entrance, that is simply functional operations; how could there ever be any great difference? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 10.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10.45) - [Next: 10.47](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10.47) - [Up: 10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.10.46) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10.46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.10.46) · Pramāṇa