華嚴法界玄鏡 2.39

2.39

釋曰：文有三：一正釋、二結例、三融通。今初，由上一事含於理故，餘一切事與所含理體不異故，隨所含理皆在一事中，而言與理非一者，前門與理非異、同理而遍。此門亦是如理而含，則亦不異。由不壞一相方有能含，對前非異，故言非一。下通局中，則顯第二亦不壞相。如一微塵其相下，出事含相。二如一塵下，結例。三此事理下，融通。就廣容門有此四句，此中能含所含不出一多，交絡成四。為能含邊，皆具與理非一非異義。由非一故，有體為能含；由非異故，有用方能含。為所含邊，但約與理非異義耳。如初一中一者，上一不壞相故，有能含體而與下一理非異，故便能包含下一。而下一由與上一理非異故，隨所含理在上一中，以離理無事故。二、一切中一者，以一切不壞相故有能含體，與下之一理不異故能含於下一。下之一與上一切理不異故，隨下自一之理在上一切中。三、一中一切者，由一不壞相故得為能含，而與下一切理不異故能含一切，所含一切與上一理不異故，隨自一切之理在上一中。四、一切中一切者，由上一切不壞相故有能含體，與下一切理非異故含下一切，下之一切與上一切理非異故，隨下一切之理在上一切之中，是故結云各有所由。前第二門是廣遍義，此第三門是含容義，已具此觀之總名矣。此下之七門，並皆不離廣遍、含容之二義也。

The Explanation states: The text has three parts: first, the direct explanation; second, concluding with the analogy; third, mutual resonance and unobstructedness. Now, regarding the first: because the preceding single phenomenon contains principle, and all other phenomena are not different in essence from the principle that is contained, they are all within the single phenomenon in accordance with the principle that is contained. As for saying 'not identical with principle', in the previous gate it was not different from principle and, identical with principle, it pervaded. In this gate, it also contains in conformity with principle, so it is likewise not different. Because the characteristic of the one is not destroyed, there can be that which contains; in contrast to the preceding 'not different', it is therefore said to be 'not identical'. Below, in the section on universal and restricted, it reveals that the second [gate] also does not destroy characteristics. From 'For example, a single fine dust particle…' onward, it brings out the characteristics of a phenomenon containing. Second, from 'As with a single dust particle…' onward, it concludes with the analogy. Third, from 'Because these phenomena and principle…' onward, is the mutual resonance and unobstructedness. In terms of the gate of broad containment, there are these four propositions; here, that which contains and that which is contained do not go beyond the one and the many, intertwining to form four. On the side of that which contains, all possess the meanings of being neither identical with nor different from principle: because of being not identical, it has an essence that serves as that which contains; because of being not different, it has a function that is able to contain. On the side of that which is contained, it is considered solely in terms of the meaning of being not different from principle. For instance, in the first, 'one within one': because the prior 'one' does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the subsequent 'one', it can then contain the subsequent 'one'. And because the subsequent 'one' is not different from the principle of the prior 'one', it is within the prior 'one' in accordance with the principle that is contained, because apart from principle there are no phenomena. Second, 'one within all': because the 'all' does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'one' below, it can contain the 'one' below. Because the 'one' below is not different from the principle of the 'all' above, it is within the 'all' above in accordance with the principle of its own 'one' below. Third, 'all within one': because the 'one' does not destroy characteristics, it can serve as that which contains, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'all' below, it can contain all; because the 'all' that is contained is not different from the principle of the 'one' above, it is within the 'one' above in accordance with the principle of its own 'all'. Fourth, 'all within all': because the 'all' above does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'all' below, it contains the 'all' below; because the 'all' below is not different from the principle of the 'all' above, it is within the 'all' above in accordance with the principle of the 'all' below. Therefore it concludes: 'Each has its reason.' The preceding second gate is the meaning of broad pervasion, and this third gate is the meaning of total inclusion; the general title of this contemplation is already complete in them. The seven gates below are none of them separate from these two meanings of broad pervasion and total inclusion.