註華嚴法界觀門 1.381

1.381

雖似八句，二二合故。問：既總上二門，何得但云攝入，不言遍容？答：前約一多相望義別，故分二門名殊；今同時互即，故遍即是入、容即是攝。若更開遍容四句，即文義成重；若句句云攝容一切、遍入一切等，即文句繁雜。故但云攝入，即是遍容也。問：若一多相即，何得此還標云一望一切，後門云一切望一？答：雖且舉一為首，而亦同時迴互，故釋中初句一望一切云攝入，次句一切望一云攝入，三即一望一，四即一切望一切，文昭然也。二門且相對各舉一例，其實一一迴互自具，故第十門總之名溥融也。然二門義不重者，至後門當示。

Although they seem like eight propositions, they are combined two by two. Question: Since this synthesizes the two preceding gates, why does it only say 'subsuming and entering' and not speak of 'pervasion and containment'? Answer: Previously, in terms of viewing one and many reciprocally the meanings differed, so they were divided into two gates with distinct names; now they are simultaneously identical, so pervasion is immediately entering, and containment is immediately subsuming. If one were to further open four propositions of pervasion and containment, the text and meaning would become redundant; if in proposition after proposition one were to say 'subsuming and containing all', 'pervading and entering all', etc., the phrases would become complicated and confusing. Therefore, merely saying 'subsuming and entering' is immediately pervasion and containment. Question: If one and many are mutually identical, why does this still state 'one viewed with respect to all', while the subsequent gate says 'all viewed with respect to one'? Answer: Although for now one is taken as the head, they also simultaneously alternate; thus in the explanation, the first proposition takes one viewing all as subsuming and entering, the second proposition takes all viewing one as subsuming and entering, the third is one viewing one, and the fourth is all viewing all, which is clear in the text. For now, the two gates take each as a corresponding example, but in fact each and every one alternates and is intrinsically possessed; therefore, the tenth gate sums them up with the name 'universal interfusion'. However, the reason the meanings of the two gates are not redundant will be shown in the subsequent gate.