華嚴法界玄鏡 1.55

1.55

釋曰：第三料揀上二門也。於中三：初標難喻、二寄喻別顯、三問答解釋。今初也。言難見者，以道理深故，有本云「離見」，離見即超情義耳。言難見者，容有見理，故下寄喻以明難言，世喻難喻耳。言難喻者，事理相殊而互相遍，理遍事故，無相全在相中；事遍理故，一塵便無涯分。一塵既無涯分，何有法之當情？無相全在相中，至理何曾懸遠？即相無相，五目難覩，其容全理之事，世法何能為喻？故經云：「譬如法界遍一切，不可見取為一切。」又云：「三界有無一切法，不能與此為譬喻。」顯下海喻亦分喻耳。

Explanation: The third [part] categorizes the above two gates. Within it there are three: first, stating that it is difficult to illustrate; second, using a metaphor to explain it distinctively; third, questions, answers, and explanations. Now this is the first. Regarding "difficult to see": because the principle is profound; some editions say "separated from views," where being separated from views simply means transcending ordinary comprehension. As for saying "difficult to see": it is conceivable to see the principle, so below a metaphor is applied to explain what is hard to speak of, meaning worldly metaphors can hardly illustrate it. Regarding "hard to illustrate": phenomena and principle are distinct yet mutually pervade. Because principle pervades phenomena, the signless is entirely present within signs; because phenomena pervade principle, a single dust particle has no boundary or division. Since a single dust particle has no boundary or division, how could any dharma conform to ordinary perception? Since the signless is entirely present within signs, when was the ultimate principle ever distant? Identical to signs yet signless, it is difficult to behold even with the five eyes; as for a phenomenon containing the complete principle, how could worldly dharmas serve as a metaphor? Therefore the sūtra states: "Just as the dharmadhātu pervades everything, it cannot be seen or grasped as everything." It also states: "All dharmas of existence and non-existence in the three realms cannot serve as metaphors for this." This shows that the ocean metaphor below is also only a partial metaphor.