華嚴經明法品內立三寶章 2.6

2.6

初、緣起互異門者，謂於無盡大緣起中，諸緣相望，體用各別，不相參雜，故云異也。依持義者，一能持多，一有力，是故能攝多；多依一故，多無力，是故潛入一。此即無有不容多之一，以無不能持故；無有不入一之多，以無不能依一。如多依一持既爾，一依多持亦然。是故亦無不攝一之多，亦無不入多之一。是故由一望多，有持有依，全力無力，故能攝能入，無有障礙；多望於一，有依有持，無力全力，故能入能攝，亦無有障礙。俱存、雙泯二句無礙，亦准思之。相入義竟。二、諸緣相奪體無體者，多緣無性，為一所成，是故多即一。由一有體能攝多，由多無性潛同一，故無不多之一、亦無不一之多。一無性為多所成，多有一空即多亦爾。是故一望於多，有有體無體故，能攝他同己、廢己同他，無有障礙。多望於一，有無體有體，亦能廢己同他、攝他同己，亦無障礙。亦同他己、亦同己他，非同他己、非同己他，二句無礙，圓融自在，思之可見。相即義竟。三、體用雙融有無門者，有六句：一、以體無不用，故舉體全用，即唯用而無體，但有相入，無相即故；二、以用無不體，故全用歸體，唯體而無用，但有相即，無相入也；三、歸體之用不礙其用，全用之體不失其體，是故體用不礙雙存，即亦入亦即，無有障礙，鎔融自在；四、全用之體體泯，全體之用用亡，是則體用交徹，形奪兩非，即入同源，圓融一味；五、合前四句，同一緣起，無礙俱存；六、泯前五句，絕待離言，應可去情，如理思攝。緣起異體門竟。

First, regarding the gate of the mutual difference of dependent origination: within the boundless, great dependent origination, when the various conditions are viewed in relation to one another, their essences and functions are distinct and do not intermingle; hence they are said to be different. As for the meaning of reliance and sustaining: the one can sustain the many; the one has force, and therefore can gather the many. Because the many rely on the one, the many are without force, and therefore implicitly enter the one. Thus there is no one that does not contain the many, because none cannot sustain; there is no many that does not enter the one, because none cannot rely on the one. Just as it is when the many rely on the one's sustaining, so it is when the one relies on the many's sustaining. Therefore there is also no many that does not gather the one, and there is also no one that does not enter the many. Thus, when looking from the one to the many, there are sustaining and relying, complete force and no force, and therefore there are the capacity to gather and the capacity to enter without obstruction. When looking from the many to the one, there are relying and sustaining, no force and complete force, and therefore there are the capacity to enter and the capacity to gather, also without obstruction. That the two propositions of both preserved and both eliminated are unobstructed should also be contemplated accordingly. The meaning of mutual interpenetration is concluded. Second, regarding the various conditions mutually depriving, with essence and without essence: the many conditions lack self-nature and are established by the one; therefore, the many are identical to the one. Because the one has essence, it can gather the many; because the many lack self-nature, they implicitly identify with the one. Thus there is no one that is not the many, and there is no many that is not the one. That the one lacks self-nature and is established by the many, and that the many have one emptiness which is identical to the many, is also like this. Therefore, looking from the one to the many, because there are having essence and lacking essence, it can gather the other into identity with oneself, and abolish oneself into identity with the other, without obstruction. Looking from the many to the one, having no essence and having essence can also abolish oneself into identity with the other, and gather the other into identity with oneself, also without obstruction. Also identifying with other and self, also identifying with self and other; neither identifying with other and self, nor identifying with self and other: that these two propositions are unobstructed, perfectly interpenetrating and sovereign, can be seen upon contemplating it. The meaning of mutual identification is concluded. Third, regarding the gate of the dual interpenetration of essence and function, existence and non-existence, there are six propositions: (1) Because essence is never without function, when essence is completely brought forth it is fully function; that is, there is only function and no essence, having only mutual interpenetration and no mutual identification. (2) Because function is never without essence, when function is completely brought forth it reverts to essence; that is, there is only essence and no function, having only mutual identification and no mutual interpenetration. (3) Function that reverts to essence does not obstruct its function; essence that is fully function does not lose its essence. Therefore, essence and function both remain without obstructing one another; that is, there are both interpenetration and identification without obstruction, melted and sovereign. (4) The essence of that which is fully function is eliminated as essence; the function of that which is fully essence vanishes as function. Then essence and function interpenetrate, and shaping and depriving render both negated; identification and interpenetration share the same source, perfectly interpenetrating into one flavor. (5) Combining the preceding four propositions, they are the same dependent origination, unobstructed and co-existing. (6) Eliminating the preceding five propositions, it is absolute and beyond speech; one should cast off emotional notions and contemplate and encompass in accordance with principle. The gate of different essences in dependent origination is concluded.