十不二門指要鈔 1.112

1.112

初、互融。三法體性各具三千本來相攝，前雖解了心攝一切，今觀稱性包攝灼然，故是則下，先明內心融於外法。既云互攝，生佛亦然，故十方下，次明若生若佛各自遍融。又此性體非謂一性，蓋三千性也。以佛具三千方攝心生，生具三千方融心佛。心具三千，豈隔生佛？若心無佛性，豈能攝佛？佛無生性，何能攝生？故性體無殊之語有誰不知，一切咸遍之言須思深致。他解唯論融外歸內名不二者，一何局哉！一切咸遍，如何銷之？況餘九門皆歸一邊，全傷大體。

First, mutual fusion. The substances and natures of the three dharmas each possess the three thousand and originally subsume one another. Although it was previously understood that the mind subsumes everything, now when contemplation accords with the nature, its embracement and subsumption are clear and evident; hence from 'This being so...' onward, it first clarifies that the internal mind fuses with external dharmas. Since it says 'mutually subsuming', this is also true of sentient beings and Buddhas; hence from 'the ten directions...' onward, it next clarifies that sentient beings and Buddhas each pervade and fuse. Furthermore, this substance of nature does not mean a single nature, but rather the nature of the three thousand. Only because the Buddha possesses the three thousand does he subsume the mind and sentient beings; only because sentient beings possess the three thousand do they fuse with the mind and the Buddha. When the mind possesses the three thousand, how could it be separated from sentient beings and the Buddha? If the mind lacked the Buddha-nature, how could it subsume the Buddha? If the Buddha lacked the nature of sentient beings, how could he subsume sentient beings? Therefore, as for the statement that 'the substance of nature is without distinction', who does not know it? But the words 'all pervade everything' require deep reflection on their profound import. The other explanation, which solely discusses fusing the external to return to the internal and names this 'nondual'—how narrow it is! How could they account for 'all pervade everything'? Moreover, the remaining nine gates would all fall to one side, completely damaging the overall framework."