T45n1883_華嚴法界玄鏡
大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1883 華嚴法界玄鏡
No. 1883
華嚴法界玄鏡捲上
唐清涼山大華嚴寺沙門澄觀述
余覃思大經薄修此觀。羅其旨趣已在疏文。恐墮業于深經。少贊演茲玄要。精誠之者時一發揚。數子懇求叩餘一闡。咸言注想訪友尋源。或學或傳遍求眾釋。積歲疑滯今方煥焉。夕惕勤勤愿釋深旨。顧以西垂之歲。風燭難期。恐妙觀之淪湑。使枝辭之亂轍。乃順誠請略析幽微。名法界玄鏡。冀將來道友。見古賢之深衷矣。
觀曰。修大方廣佛華嚴法界觀門。略有三重。終南山釋法順俗姓杜氏。
釋曰。大等六字所依之經。略無經字。法界觀下能依之觀。今先略釋經名。大方廣者。一切如來所證法也。佛華嚴者。契合法界能證人也。法分體相用。人有因果。大者體大也。則深法界。諸佛眾生之心體也。曠包如空湛寂常住強稱為大。故經云。法性遍在一切處。一切眾生及國土三世悉在無有餘。亦無形相而可得。即大義也。方廣者。相用周遍即體之相。相德之法無邊即相之用。業用廣而無盡。三無障礙舉一全收。聖智所緣為所證之法界也。佛者果也。萬德圓明。華喻因也。眾行榮曜。嚴通能所。而有二重。一華因能嚴。佛果所嚴。以十度因成十身果。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《華嚴法界玄鏡》捲上 唐朝清涼山大華嚴寺沙門澄觀 述 我深入思考《大方廣佛華嚴經》，並略微修習此觀法。其主要旨趣已在疏文中闡述。但恐怕自己對深奧的經典理解不夠透徹，所以略微讚揚演說此玄妙精要。有幾位誠心求法的人懇切請求我闡述一番。他們都說，爲了學習此觀法，他們四處拜訪朋友，尋找源頭，或學習或傳抄，廣泛地尋求各種解釋。多年來積壓的疑惑，今天才得以煥然冰釋。我日夜警惕，勤奮不懈，希望能解釋清楚這深奧的旨意。考慮到自己年事已高，如西山的殘陽，風中之燭，難以預料何時會熄滅，恐怕這精妙的觀法會湮沒，使膚淺的言辭擾亂了正確的方向。因此，我順應他們的誠懇請求，略微分析這幽深微妙之處，命名為《法界玄鏡》，希望將來的道友，能從中窺見古代賢聖的深刻用心。 觀法說：修習《大方廣佛華嚴法界觀門》，略有三重。這是終南山的釋法順（俗姓杜）所傳。 解釋說：『大』等六個字是這部經所依據的經典，這裡省略了『經』字。『法界觀』以下是能依據的觀法。現在先簡略地解釋經名。『大方廣』是指一切如來所證悟的法。『佛華嚴』是指契合法界、能證悟的人。法有體、相、用三個方面，人有因、果兩個方面。『大』是指體大，也就是深邃的法界，諸佛和眾生的心體。它廣闊包容如虛空，湛然寂靜，恒常不變，所以勉強稱之為『大』。所以經中說：『法性遍在一切處，一切眾生及國土，三世悉在無有餘，亦無形相而可得。』這就是『大』的含義。『方廣』是指相和用周遍，也就是體的相。相的功德之法無邊無際，也就是相的作用。業用廣大而沒有窮盡，三者之間沒有障礙，舉一則全收。聖智所緣的境界，就是所證悟的法界。『佛』是指果，萬德圓滿光明。『華』比喻因，眾行榮盛光耀。『嚴』通於能嚴和所嚴，有兩重含義。一是華因能嚴，佛果所嚴，以十度之因成就十身之果。
【English Translation】 English version: The Avatamsaka Dharma Realm Profound Mirror, Volume 1 Composed by Śramaṇa Chengguan of the Great Avatamsaka Monastery on Qingliang Mountain, Tang Dynasty I have deeply contemplated the Great Extensive Buddha Avatamsaka Sutra and have slightly cultivated this contemplation. Its main points have already been elaborated in the commentary. However, fearing that my understanding of the profound sutra is insufficient, I will briefly praise and expound on this profound essence. Several sincere seekers have earnestly requested me to explain it. They all say that in order to learn this contemplation, they have visited friends everywhere, sought the source, either learning or transcribing, and widely sought various explanations. The doubts accumulated over the years have only now been dispelled. I am vigilant day and night, diligent and tireless, hoping to explain this profound meaning clearly. Considering that I am old, like the setting sun in the west, a candle in the wind, it is difficult to predict when it will be extinguished, and I fear that this subtle contemplation will be submerged, causing superficial words to disturb the correct direction. Therefore, I comply with their sincere request and briefly analyze this profound subtlety, naming it 'The Dharma Realm Profound Mirror', hoping that future fellow practitioners will be able to glimpse the profound intentions of the ancient sages. The contemplation says: Cultivating the Great Extensive Buddha Avatamsaka Dharma Realm Contemplation Gate has roughly three levels. This was transmitted by Śramaṇa Fashun (釋法順) (lay surname Du 杜), of Zhongnan Mountain. The explanation says: 'Great (大, Dà)' and the other five characters are the sutra on which this scripture is based; here the character 'sutra' (經, Jīng) is omitted. 'Dharma Realm Contemplation (法界觀, Fǎjiè Guān)' and below is the contemplation that can be relied upon. Now, I will briefly explain the name of the sutra first. 'Great Extensive (大方廣, Dàfāngguǎng)' refers to the Dharma realized by all Tathagatas. 'Buddha Avatamsaka (佛華嚴, Fó Huáyán)' refers to the person who accords with the Dharma Realm and can realize it. Dharma has three aspects: essence, characteristics, and function; people have two aspects: cause and effect. 'Great' refers to the greatness of the essence, which is the profound Dharma Realm, the mind-essence of all Buddhas and sentient beings. It is vast and inclusive like space, serene and still, constant and unchanging, so it is reluctantly called 'Great'. Therefore, the sutra says: 'The Dharma-nature pervades everywhere, all sentient beings and lands, the three times are all contained without remainder, and it is also without form and can be obtained.' This is the meaning of 'Great'. 'Extensive (方廣, Fāngguǎng)' refers to the pervasiveness of characteristics and function, which is the characteristic of the essence. The Dharma of the merit of characteristics is boundless, which is the function of the characteristics. The karmic function is vast and endless, there is no obstacle between the three, and taking one includes all. The realm that is the object of the holy wisdom is the Dharma Realm that is realized. 'Buddha (佛, Fó)' refers to the effect, the perfect and bright myriad virtues. 'Avatamsaka (華嚴, Huáyán)' is a metaphor for the cause, the flourishing and radiant myriad practices. 'Adornment (嚴, Yán)' applies to both the adorner and the adorned, and has two meanings. First, the cause of Avatamsaka can adorn, and the effect of Buddha is adorned, using the cause of the ten perfections to achieve the effect of the ten bodies.
無行不備。無德不圓。二華為能嚴。大方廣者則所嚴也。嚴體相用成佛三德。稱體而嚴顯真常德。如相而嚴辯修成德。依用修嚴成大用德。遍嚴如德成德無邊之華嚴也。故一總題有體相用。人有因果。人法雙題。法喻齊舉。一經三大皆大方廣。五週因果並佛華嚴。一題七字各有十義。今當略釋。大十義者。則七字皆大。一大者體大。法界常遍故。二方者相大。性德無際故。三廣者用大。稱體用周故。四佛者果大。十身皆悉遍法界故。五華者因大。普賢行愿自體遍故。六嚴者智大。佛智如空能為嚴故。七經者教大。竭海墨不能書一句故。八者義大。上六字所證皆稱性故。九者境大。總斯七字普以眾生為所緣故。十者業大。以斯教旨橫遍豎窮無休息故。具十無盡故稱大也。方廣十義者。如體之相稱體之用。即十方法十大用也。佛十義者。一大者法身。佛以法為身。佛身充滿於法界故。二方者。智身智如法故。三廣者。具於二身。一者化身。一身普周為無量故。二者意生身。一多隨意無不周故。佛者含五六身。一菩提身。覺樹道成故。二者威勢身。初成正覺映菩薩故。華者。含七八身。七福德身。三世所行眾福。大海因不可盡故。八者愿身。毗盧愿因周法界故。嚴者。第九相好莊嚴身。十蓮華藏相好嚴故。經者。第十力持身
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『無行不備』，是指沒有哪種修行是不完備的。『無德不圓』，是指沒有哪種功德是不圓滿的。『二華』（二花）是能莊嚴的，而『大方廣』則是所莊嚴的。莊嚴體、相、用，成就佛的三德。依照本體而莊嚴，彰顯真常德；如實觀照法相而莊嚴，闡明修成德；依隨妙用而修持莊嚴，成就大用德。普遍地莊嚴，如功德般成就無邊的華嚴。所以，一個總題目就包含了體、相、用，人有因、果，人法雙題，法喻並舉。一部經的三大特點都是『大方廣』，五週因果都與佛和華嚴相關。一個題目七個字，每個字都有十種含義，現在我來簡要解釋。 『大』的十種含義是：七個字都體現了『大』。第一，『大』是體大，因為法界是常遍的。第二，『方』是相大，因為自性功德是無邊無際的。第三，『廣』是用大，因為妙用周遍一切。第四，『佛』是果大，因為十身都普遍存在於法界。第五，『華』是因大，因為普賢（Samantabhadra）的行愿自體周遍一切。第六，『嚴』是智大，因為佛的智慧如虛空般能夠作為莊嚴。第七，『經』是教大，即使用盡大海之水磨成墨也無法寫出一句經文。第八，『義』是義大，因為前面六個字所證悟的都與自性相符。第九，『境』是境大，總括這七個字，普遍地以眾生為所緣。第十，『業』是業大，因為以這部經的教旨橫遍十方，豎窮三際，沒有止息。具備這十種無盡，所以稱為『大』。 『方廣』的十種含義是：如本體的法相，符合本體的妙用，就是十方法界（ten directions）的十大妙用。 『佛』的十種含義是：第一，『大』是法身（Dharmakaya），佛以法為身，佛身充滿於法界。第二，『方』是智身，智慧如法。第三，『廣』是具備兩種身，一是化身（Nirmanakaya），一身普遍周遍無量；二是意生身（Manomayakaya），一多隨意，無不周遍。『佛』包含五種或六種身：一是菩提身（Bodhikaya），在菩提樹下成就道果；二是威勢身，初成正覺時映照菩薩（Bodhisattva）。『華』包含七種或八種身：七是福德身，三世所修行的眾多福德，如大海般因果不可窮盡；八是愿身，毗盧遮那佛（Vairocana）的愿因周遍法界。『嚴』是第九種相好莊嚴身，第十是蓮華藏相好莊嚴。『經』是第十種力持身。
【English Translation】 English version 'No practice is incomplete' means that there is no practice that is not comprehensive. 'No virtue is imperfect' means that there is no merit that is not complete. 'Two Flowers' are what can adorn, while 'Great, Expansive, and Vast' is what is adorned. Adorning the essence, form, and function, accomplishing the three virtues of the Buddha. Adorning according to the essence, manifesting the virtue of true permanence; adorning according to the form, elucidating the virtue of cultivation; relying on the function to cultivate adornment, accomplishing the virtue of great function. Universally adorning, like virtue, accomplishing the boundless Avatamsaka (Flower Garland). Therefore, a general title contains essence, form, and function; people have cause and effect; people and Dharma are titled together; Dharma and metaphor are mentioned together. The three great characteristics of a sutra are all 'Great, Expansive, and Vast'; the five periods of cause and effect are all related to the Buddha and the Avatamsaka. One title with seven characters, each character has ten meanings, now I will briefly explain. The ten meanings of 'Great' are: all seven characters embody 'Great'. First, 'Great' is the greatness of essence, because the Dharmadhatu (realm of Dharma) is constant and pervasive. Second, 'Expansive' is the greatness of form, because the inherent virtues are boundless. Third, 'Vast' is the greatness of function, because the wonderful function pervades everything. Fourth, 'Buddha' is the greatness of fruit, because the ten bodies are all universally present in the Dharmadhatu. Fifth, 'Flower' is the greatness of cause, because the inherent nature of Samantabhadra's vows pervades everything. Sixth, 'Adornment' is the greatness of wisdom, because the Buddha's wisdom is like the void and can serve as adornment. Seventh, 'Sutra' is the greatness of teaching, even if all the water in the sea were used to make ink, it would not be enough to write a single sentence of the sutra. Eighth, 'Meaning' is the greatness of meaning, because what is realized by the previous six characters is in accordance with the inherent nature. Ninth, 'Realm' is the greatness of realm, encompassing these seven characters, universally taking sentient beings as the object of focus. Tenth, 'Karma' is the greatness of karma, because with the teachings of this sutra, it pervades the ten directions horizontally and exhausts the three periods of time vertically, without ceasing. Possessing these ten inexhaustible qualities, therefore it is called 'Great'. The ten meanings of 'Expansive and Vast' are: like the form of the essence, in accordance with the function of the essence, which are the ten great functions of the ten directions. The ten meanings of 'Buddha' are: First, 'Great' is the Dharmakaya (Dharma body), the Buddha takes Dharma as the body, the Buddha's body fills the Dharmadhatu. Second, 'Expansive' is the wisdom body, wisdom is like Dharma. Third, 'Vast' possesses two bodies, one is the Nirmanakaya (transformation body), one body universally pervades the immeasurable; the other is the Manomayakaya (mind-made body), one and many are at will, without not pervading. 'Buddha' contains five or six bodies: one is the Bodhikaya (enlightenment body), achieving the path under the Bodhi tree; the other is the majestic body, illuminating the Bodhisattvas when first attaining enlightenment. 'Flower' contains seven or eight bodies: seven is the body of merit, the numerous merits cultivated in the three periods of time, like the great ocean, the cause and effect are inexhaustible; eight is the body of vows, Vairocana Buddha's vows pervade the Dharmadhatu. 'Adornment' is the ninth body of adorned marks and characteristics, the tenth is the adorned marks and characteristics of the Lotus Treasury. 'Sutra' is the tenth body of sustained power.
。舍利圓音聲教無盡故。則經七字皆成佛也。華嚴十義者。以十度華嚴。於十身為嚴不同即十嚴故。略無經字。十義亦略。是攝是貫是常是法。並可知也。無盡教海不出七字。故依此教以成觀門。修法界觀門略有三重者。略標綱要。修之一字總貫一題止觀。熏修習學造詣也。言法界者。一經之玄宗。總以緣起法界不思議為宗故。然法界之相要唯有三。然總具四種。一事法界。二理法界。三理事無礙法界。四事事無礙法界。今是后三其事法界歷別難陳。一一事相。皆可成觀故略不明。總為三觀所依體。其事略有十對。一教義。二理事。三境智。四行位。五因果。六依正。七體用。八人法。九逆順。十感應。隨一一事皆為三觀所依之正體。其製作人名德行因緣。具如傳記。
觀曰。真空觀第一。理事無礙觀第二。周遍含容觀第三。
釋曰。此列三名。真空則理法界二如本名。三則事事無礙法界。言真空者。非斷滅空。非離色空。即有明空。亦無空相。故名真空。如文具之。二理事無礙者。理無形相全在相中。互奪存亡故云無礙。亦如文具。三週遍含容者。事本相礙大小等殊。理本包遍如空無礙。以理融事全事如理。乃至塵毛皆具包遍。此二相望成於十門亦如下說。然事法名界。界則分義。無盡差別之分齊。故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：舍利（Śāriputra，佛陀十大弟子之一）圓滿的聲音教法是無盡的，因此，《華嚴經》的七個字都可成佛。華嚴十義是指用十度（paramita，菩薩的十種修行）來莊嚴華嚴，在十身（佛的十種化身）上進行不同的莊嚴，不同即是十種莊嚴，所以省略了『經』字。十義也進行了省略，是攝、是貫、是常、是法，這些都可以理解。無盡的教海不出這七個字，所以依據此教來成就觀門。修法界觀門略有三重，這是略標綱要。『修』之一字總貫一題止觀，是熏修、習學、造詣的意思。說法界，是一經的玄妙宗旨，總以緣起法界不思議為宗旨。然而法界的相貌主要有三種，總共具有四種：一是事法界，二是理法界，三是理事無礙法界，四是事事無礙法界。現在說的是后三種，事法界歷歷分明難以陳述，每一件事相都可以成為觀的對象，所以略而不說明，總作為三觀所依的本體。其中事相略有十對：一教義，二理事，三境智，四行位，五因果，六依正，七體用，八人法，九逆順，十感應。隨著每一件事都成為三觀所依的正體。其製作人的名德、行因緣，都詳細記載在傳記中。 觀想方法說：真空觀第一，理事無礙觀第二，周遍含容觀第三。 解釋說：這裡列出三個名稱，真空就是理法界，和本來的名稱一樣。第三個是事事無礙法界。說真空，不是斷滅空，不是離開色（rūpa，物質現象）的空，是有即是空，也沒有空的相狀，所以名叫真空，如經文所說。二理事無礙，理沒有形相完全在相中，互相奪取存亡，所以說無礙，也如經文所說。三週遍含容，事物的本相互相妨礙，大小等各不相同，理的本性包容周遍如虛空沒有阻礙，以理來融攝事，整個事就如理，乃至塵埃毛髮都具有包容周遍的特性。這兩種相對照就形成了十門，也如下面所說。然而事法名為界，界就是分的意思，是無盡差別的分界。
【English Translation】 English version: Śāriputra's (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples) perfect sound teachings are inexhaustible, therefore, the seven characters of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra can all become Buddha. The ten meanings of Avataṃsaka refer to using the ten pāramitās (perfections, the ten practices of a Bodhisattva) to adorn Avataṃsaka, and performing different adornments on the ten bodies (the ten forms of the Buddha). Different means the ten adornments, so the character 'Sūtra' is omitted. The ten meanings are also abbreviated, being 'to gather', 'to penetrate', 'to be constant', 'to be Dharma', which can all be understood. The inexhaustible sea of teachings does not go beyond these seven characters, so based on this teaching, the gate of contemplation is achieved. The gate of cultivating the Dharmadhātu (realm of reality) contemplation is roughly threefold, which is a brief outline of the key points. The character 'cultivate' encompasses the entire topic of cessation and contemplation, meaning cultivation, learning, and attainment. Speaking of Dharmadhātu, it is the profound essence of the sūtra, generally taking the inconceivable dependent origination Dharmadhātu as its essence. However, the appearance of Dharmadhātu mainly has three aspects, and in total has four: first, the realm of phenomena; second, the realm of principle; third, the realm of non-obstruction between principle and phenomena; and fourth, the realm of non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena. What is being discussed now are the latter three. The realm of phenomena is distinct and difficult to describe, and every phenomenon can become an object of contemplation, so it is briefly omitted, and is generally taken as the basis of the three contemplations. Among them, the phenomena are roughly in ten pairs: first, teaching and meaning; second, principle and phenomena; third, realm and wisdom; fourth, practice and position; fifth, cause and effect; sixth, reliance and correctness; seventh, essence and function; eighth, person and Dharma; ninth, opposition and compliance; tenth, influence and response. With each phenomenon becoming the correct basis of the three contemplations. The names, virtues, conduct, causes, and conditions of the creators are all recorded in detail in the biographies. The contemplation methods say: first, contemplation of true emptiness; second, contemplation of non-obstruction between principle and phenomena; third, contemplation of universal containment and accommodation. The explanation says: Here are listed three names, true emptiness is the realm of principle, the same as the original name. The third is the realm of non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena. Speaking of true emptiness, it is not annihilation emptiness, not emptiness apart from rūpa (form, material phenomena), it is that existence is emptiness, and there is no appearance of emptiness, so it is called true emptiness, as the sūtra says. Second, non-obstruction between principle and phenomena, principle has no form and is entirely within phenomena, mutually taking away existence and extinction, so it is said to be non-obstructing, also as the sūtra says. Third, universal containment and accommodation, the original appearances of things obstruct each other, sizes and so on are different, the original nature of principle encompasses universally like empty space without obstruction, using principle to integrate phenomena, the entire phenomenon is like principle, even dust and hair have the characteristic of encompassing universally. These two in contrast form the ten gates, also as described below. However, the phenomena are named realm, realm means division, it is the boundary of endless differences.
理法名界。界即性義。無盡事法同一性故。無礙法界具性分義。不壞事理而無礙。故第四法界亦具二義。性融於事。一一事法不壞其相。如性融通重重無盡故。
觀曰。第一真空觀法。于中略作四句十門。
釋曰。此標章也。前二各四。加第三四故為十門。
觀曰。一會色歸空觀。二明空即色觀。三空色無礙觀。四泯絕無寄觀。
釋曰。此列名也。
觀曰。就初門中為四。一色不即空。以即空故。何以故。以色不即斷空故。不是空也。以色舉體是真空也。故云以即空故。良由即是真空故非斷空也。是故言由是空故不是空也。
釋曰。四觀皆有三段。謂標釋結。然準下文前三以法揀情。第四正顯法理揀情。三句標名則同釋義則異。今先總明三句所揀。所揀有三。一揀即離。二揀亂意。三揀形顯。初中就通相說三句皆揀。即離從多分說。初句明空不離色。以揀離色。次句明空不即色。以揀太即。第三句雙明不即不離。揀具即離。由揀三情故。第四句顯其正理。第二揀亂意者。謂寶性論。明地前菩薩有三種空亂意。以不了知真如來藏。生死涅槃二際平等執三種空。一謂斷滅故空。初句揀之。二取色外空。第三句揀之。三者謂空為有。第二句揀之。既揀三種不正之空故。第四句說真空也
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『理法名界』（Lifamingjie）：指的是從理性的角度來理解一切事物，這種理解就叫做『界』。『界』的意義在於認識到事物的本性。因為所有無窮無盡的事物和法則都具有相同的本性。『無礙法界』（Wu』ai Fajie）包含了事物本性和現象的各個方面。它不會破壞事物本身的規律和道理，並且沒有任何阻礙。因此，第四種法界也包含了這兩種意義：事物的本性融入到具體的事物中，每一個事物都保持著它原有的狀態。正如事物的本性相互融合，重重疊疊，沒有窮盡。
『觀』曰：第一是『真空觀法』（Zhenkong Guanfa），其中簡略地分為四個部分，共十個方面。
『釋』曰：這是標明章節。前面兩個各有四個部分，加上第三和第四個部分，所以共有十個方面。
『觀』曰：一是『會色歸空觀』（Huise Guikong Guan），二是『明空即色觀』（Mingkong Jise Guan），三是『空色無礙觀』（Kongse Wu』ai Guan），四是『泯絕無寄觀』（Minjue Wuji Guan）。
『釋』曰：這是列出名稱。
『觀』曰：就第一個方面來說，又分為四個部分。一是『色不即空』（Se bu ji kong），因為如果『色』就是『空』，為什麼呢？因為『色』不是斷滅的『空』。所以它不是『空』。因為『色』的整體就是『真空』（Zhenkong）。所以說『因為就是空』。正是因為它是『真空』，所以不是斷滅的『空』。因此說，『因為是空，所以不是空』。
『釋』曰：這四種觀法都有三個部分，分別是標明、解釋和總結。然而，根據下文，前三種觀法是用佛法來辨別凡夫的情執，第四種觀法是直接闡明佛法的道理，以此來辨別凡夫的情執。前三句是標明名稱，雖然相同，但解釋的意義卻不同。現在先總的說明這三句所要辨別的內容。所要辨別的有三種：一是辨別『即』和『離』（Ji and Li），二是辨別混亂的意念，三是辨別外在的形象。第一種辨別『即』和『離』，從普遍的角度來說，這三句都要辨別『即』和『離』，從大部分情況來說，第一句說明『空』不離『色』，以此來辨別離開『色』的觀點。第二句說明『空』不就是『色』，以此來辨別過於執著『即』的觀點。第三句同時說明不『即』也不『離』，以此來辨別同時執著『即』和『離』的觀點。因為要辨別這三種情執，所以第四句闡明了正確的道理。第二種辨別混亂的意念，指的是《寶性論》（Baoxing Lun）中說明的，地前菩薩有三種混亂的意念，因為不瞭解真如來藏（Zhenru Laizang），執著于生死和涅槃（Shengsi and Niepan）的兩種狀態是平等的，所以執著於三種『空』。一是認為『空』是斷滅的，第一句就是爲了辨別這種觀點。二是認為『空』在『色』之外，第三句就是爲了辨別這種觀點。三是認為『空』就是『有』，第二句就是爲了辨別這種觀點。既然要辨別這三種不正的『空』，所以第四句才闡述了『真空』的道理。
【English Translation】 English version 'Lifamingjie' (理法名界): Refers to understanding all things from a rational perspective, and this understanding is called '界' (jie, boundary/realm). The meaning of '界' lies in recognizing the nature of things. Because all endless things and laws have the same nature. 'Wu』ai Fajie' (無礙法界, Unobstructed Dharmadhatu) contains all aspects of the nature and phenomena of things. It does not destroy the laws and principles of things themselves and is unobstructed. Therefore, the fourth Dharmadhatu also contains these two meanings: the nature of things is integrated into specific things, and each thing maintains its original state. Just as the nature of things merges with each other, overlapping endlessly.
'Observation' says: The first is 'Zhenkong Guanfa' (真空觀法, Contemplation of True Emptiness), which is briefly divided into four parts, a total of ten aspects.
'Explanation' says: This marks the chapter. The first two each have four parts, plus the third and fourth parts, so there are ten aspects in total.
'Observation' says: The first is 'Huise Guikong Guan' (會色歸空觀, Contemplation of Converging Form into Emptiness), the second is 'Mingkong Jise Guan' (明空即色觀, Contemplation of Emptiness Being Form), the third is 'Kongse Wu』ai Guan' (空色無礙觀, Contemplation of the Unobstructedness of Emptiness and Form), and the fourth is 'Minjue Wuji Guan' (泯絕無寄觀, Contemplation of Complete Extinction and Non-reliance).
'Explanation' says: This lists the names.
'Observation' says: Regarding the first aspect, it is further divided into four parts. The first is 'Se bu ji kong' (色不即空, Form is not Emptiness), because if 'form' is 'emptiness', why? Because 'form' is not annihilated 'emptiness'. So it is not 'emptiness'. Because the entirety of 'form' is 'Zhenkong' (真空, True Emptiness). So it says 'because it is emptiness'. It is precisely because it is 'True Emptiness' that it is not annihilated 'emptiness'. Therefore, it is said, 'because it is emptiness, so it is not emptiness'.
'Explanation' says: These four contemplations all have three parts, namely, marking, explaining, and concluding. However, according to the following text, the first three contemplations use the Dharma to distinguish the emotional attachments of ordinary people, and the fourth contemplation directly elucidates the principles of the Dharma to distinguish the emotional attachments of ordinary people. The first three sentences mark the names, although they are the same, the meanings of the explanations are different. Now, let's first explain in general what these three sentences are intended to distinguish. There are three types to distinguish: one is to distinguish 'Ji' and 'Li' (即 and 離, Identity and Separation), the second is to distinguish confused thoughts, and the third is to distinguish external appearances. The first distinction between 'Identity' and 'Separation', from a general perspective, all three sentences must distinguish between 'Identity' and 'Separation'. From most situations, the first sentence explains that 'emptiness' is not separate from 'form', in order to distinguish the view of separating from 'form'. The second sentence explains that 'emptiness' is not exactly 'form', in order to distinguish the view of being too attached to 'identity'. The third sentence simultaneously explains neither 'identity' nor 'separation', in order to distinguish the view of being attached to both 'identity' and 'separation'. Because these three emotional attachments must be distinguished, the fourth sentence elucidates the correct principle. The second distinction between confused thoughts refers to what is explained in the 'Baoxing Lun' (寶性論, Ratnagotravibhāga), that Bodhisattvas before the ground have three confused thoughts, because they do not understand the Zhenru Laizang (真如來藏, Tathāgatagarbha), and are attached to the two states of Shengsi and Niepan (生死 and 涅槃, Samsara and Nirvana) as being equal, so they are attached to three types of 'emptiness'. One is that 'emptiness' is annihilated, and the first sentence is to distinguish this view. The second is that 'emptiness' is outside of 'form', and the third sentence is to distinguish this view. The third is that 'emptiness' is 'existence', and the second sentence is to distinguish this view. Since these three incorrect 'emptinesses' must be distinguished, the fourth sentence elaborates on the principle of 'True Emptiness'.
。第三揀形顯者。有云。第一句形色體空非斷空。第二句顯色無體自性空。第三句空無形顯一體空。第四句色空不二俱空空。解曰。此第三義乍觀有理。以見第二有青黃言。謂為顯色。第一第三無青黃言。便為形色故。為此釋細詳有違。何者一三。何以不言形色長短等耶。第二何以遍言顯色耶。何以形色揀非斷滅顯色。不得揀斷滅耶。第二顯色何以得言青黃之相。非即真空之理形色。何以不得言長短方圓非真空耶。故第三釋非為愜。當但揀前二足顯真空。而文第二遍言青黃非真空者。顯色明相。相顯著故。又形色是假。顯色是實。實色即空。例假形色亦即空矣。是知三句皆含形顯二皆即空。次正釋文。今初。第一句有三。初標。次何以下釋。此揀離色明空及斷滅空。言離色者。空在色外。色外復二。一對色明空。如墻處不空墻外是空。此第三句揀二滅色明空。謂如穿井除土出空要須滅色。今正揀此。故中論云。先有而後無。是即為斷滅。然外道二乘皆有斷滅。外道斷滅歸於太虛。二乘斷滅歸於涅槃。故肇公云。大幻莫若於有身。故滅身以歸無勞。勤莫先於有智。故絕智以淪虛。又云。智為雜毒。形為桎梏。故灰身滅智撥喪無餘。若謂入滅同於太虛全同外道。故楞伽云。若心體滅不異外道斷見戲論故。今文云不即斷空。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 第三揀形顯者（第三種辨析形和顯現的方法）。有人說：第一句，『形色體空非斷空』（形色雖然本體是空，但不是斷滅的空）。第二句，『顯色無體自性空』（顯現的顏色沒有實體，其自性本空）。第三句，『空無形顯一體空』（空沒有形和顯現，形、顯、空三者一體皆空）。第四句，『色空不二俱空空』（色和空不是兩個東西，都是空，連空本身也是空）。 解釋：這第三種解釋乍一看有道理，因為它認為第二句有『青黃』（指顏色）的說法，所以是『顯色』。第一句和第三句沒有『青黃』的說法，所以是『形色』。但仔細分析，這種解釋有矛盾。為什麼第一句和第三句不說『形色長短』等呢？為什麼第二句要普遍地說『顯色』呢？為什麼『形色』要揀別不是斷滅，而『顯色』就不能揀別斷滅呢？第二句的『顯色』為什麼可以說成是『青黃』的相，難道『形色』就不能說是『長短方圓』，不是真空的道理嗎？所以第三種解釋並不恰當。應當只是揀別前兩種說法，來顯示真空。而文中的第二句普遍地說『青黃』不是真空，是因為『顯色』是明顯的相，相是顯著的緣故。而且，『形色』是虛假的，『顯色』是真實的，真實的色即是空，那麼虛假的形色也即是空了。由此可知，三句話都包含形和顯，二者都是空。下面正式解釋經文。 現在開始解釋第一句，第一句有三層意思。首先是標明，然後是『何以下釋』（以下解釋什麼）。這句話是用來揀別離開色而說明空，以及斷滅空。所謂『離色』，是指空在色之外。色外又有兩種情況：一種是與色相對而說明空，比如墻所在的地方不空，墻外才是空。這第三句是用來揀別滅色而說明空，比如挖井，除去泥土才出現空，必須要滅色。現在正是要揀別這種情況。所以《中論》說：『先有而後無，是即為斷滅。』（先有色，然後滅色而得空，這就是斷滅）。然而外道和二乘都有斷滅。外道的斷滅是歸於太虛，二乘的斷滅是歸於涅槃。所以肇公說：『最大的虛幻莫過於有身體，所以要滅身以歸於無，這是很勞苦的。最勤奮的事莫過於有智慧，所以要斷絕智慧而淪於虛無。』又說：『智慧是雜毒，形體是桎梏。』所以要灰身滅智，撥喪得乾乾淨淨。如果認為入滅等同於太虛，那就完全等同於外道了。所以《楞伽經》說：『如果心體滅了，就和外道的斷見戲論沒有區別了。』所以本文說『不即斷空』（不是斷滅的空）。
【English Translation】 English version Third Discerning Form and Manifestation. Some say: The first sentence, 'Form and color are empty in essence, but not a void of annihilation' (Although form and color are empty in their essence, they are not a void of annihilation). The second sentence, 'Manifested colors have no substance, their self-nature is empty' (Manifested colors have no substance, their self-nature is inherently empty). The third sentence, 'Emptiness has no form or manifestation, form, manifestation, and emptiness are all one and the same emptiness' (Emptiness has no form or manifestation; form, manifestation, and emptiness are all one and the same emptiness). The fourth sentence, 'Form and emptiness are not two, both are empty, even emptiness is empty' (Form and emptiness are not two separate things; both are empty, and even emptiness itself is empty). Explanation: This third explanation seems reasonable at first glance because it considers the second sentence to have the statement of 'blue and yellow' (referring to colors), so it is 'manifested color'. The first and third sentences do not have the statement of 'blue and yellow', so they are 'form and color'. However, upon careful analysis, this explanation has contradictions. Why don't the first and third sentences mention 'form and color, length and short', etc.? Why does the second sentence universally say 'manifested color'? Why should 'form and color' be distinguished as not annihilation, while 'manifested color' cannot be distinguished as annihilation? Why can the 'manifested color' of the second sentence be said to be the appearance of 'blue and yellow'? Can't 'form and color' be said to be 'length, short, square, and round', not the principle of true emptiness? Therefore, the third explanation is not appropriate. It should only discern the first two statements to reveal true emptiness. And the second sentence in the text universally says that 'blue and yellow' are not true emptiness because 'manifested color' is a clear appearance, and appearance is prominent. Moreover, 'form and color' are false, and 'manifested color' is real. Real color is emptiness, then false form and color are also emptiness. From this, it can be known that all three sentences contain form and manifestation, and both are emptiness. Now, the text is officially explained. Now, let's begin to explain the first sentence. The first sentence has three layers of meaning. First is the indication, then 'what is explained below' (what is explained below). This sentence is used to distinguish between explaining emptiness apart from form and color, and the emptiness of annihilation. The so-called 'apart from form and color' means that emptiness is outside of form and color. There are two situations outside of form and color: one is explaining emptiness in contrast to form and color, such as the place where the wall is is not empty, and only outside the wall is empty. This third sentence is used to distinguish between explaining emptiness by eliminating form and color, such as digging a well, where emptiness appears only after removing the soil, and form and color must be eliminated. Now, this is exactly the situation to be distinguished. Therefore, the Madhyamaka-karika (中論) says: 'First there is existence, then there is non-existence; this is annihilation' (First there is form and color, then emptiness is obtained by eliminating form and color; this is annihilation). However, both the heretics (外道) and the Two Vehicles (二乘) have annihilation. The annihilation of the heretics is to return to the Great Void, and the annihilation of the Two Vehicles is to return to Nirvana (涅槃). Therefore, Master Zhao (肇公) said: 'The greatest illusion is having a body, so it is laborious to extinguish the body to return to nothingness. The most diligent thing is having wisdom, so it is to cut off wisdom and sink into nothingness.' He also said: 'Wisdom is mixed poison, and the body is a shackle.' Therefore, one must reduce the body to ashes and extinguish wisdom, and completely eliminate everything. If one thinks that entering extinction is the same as the Great Void, then it is completely the same as the heretics. Therefore, the Lankavatara Sutra (楞伽經) says: 'If the mind-essence is extinguished, it is no different from the heretics' theories of annihilation.' Therefore, this text says 'not the emptiness of annihilation'.
次以色舉體下。釋上以即空。故三良由下結成。于中先約義結。由即真空故非斷滅。后是故下。結成標名。
觀曰。二色不即空。以即空故。何以故。以青黃之相。非是真空之理故云不即空。然青黃無體。莫不皆空故云即空。良以青黃無體之空非即青黃。故云不即空也。
釋曰。亦標釋結。釋中揀二妄情。一揀太即。以聞色空不知性空。便執色相以為真空。故須揀之。故云青黃之相非是真空之理。此唯揀凡也。小不計色為即空故。次然青黃下。明亦非離相有性。要即青黃無體為真空耳。由此義故則似雙揀。亦揀小乘。然是舉法雙揀情。后明不離是舉法耳。二亦用上文以揀亂意。三種空中以空為有。彼謂別有一物是于空體。故今揀之。故十地經云。有不二不盡此一句經。揀三亂意空。以有揀斷滅空。以不二揀異色明空。以不盡揀空為有。不謂有體盡滅。今當不盡。謂空若是物則有盡滅。若有盡滅則有生起。今法空相不生不滅。豈有有耶。故般若云。是諸法空相不生不滅等。又青黃之相尚非真空。要須無性。豈得以空而為有耶。三良以下結成。舉其無體之空。結非色相。明空非有豈得色耶。
觀曰。三色不即空以即空故。何以故。以空中無色故不即空。會色無體故是即空。良由會色歸空。空中必無有色
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 其次，從『色』（rupa，物質、顏色）的整體層面來理解『空』（sunyata，空性）。解釋『色』即是『空』，所以三良（Sanliang，可能是人名或地名）由此向下總結。其中先從義理上總結，因為『色』即是『真空』（true emptiness），所以不是斷滅。後面『是故』以下，總結並標明名稱。
觀（Guan，可能是作者或註釋的名稱）說：『色』不即是『空』，因為『色』即是『空』。為什麼呢？因為青色、黃色的表相，不是『真空』的道理，所以說『不即空』。然而青色、黃色沒有自體，沒有不是空的，所以說『即空』。實在是因為青色、黃色無自體的『空』，不是即青色、黃色，所以說『不即空』啊。
解釋說：這也是標明、解釋和總結。解釋中揀擇兩種錯誤的理解。一是揀擇『太即』，因為聽到『色空』，不知道『性空』（emptiness of nature），便執著『色相』（form）以為是『真空』，所以需要揀擇它。所以說青色、黃色的表相不是『真空』的道理，這只是揀擇凡夫。小乘不認為『色』是『即空』，所以其次『然青黃』以下，說明也不是離開『色相』而有『性』，要即『青黃』無自體才是『真空』。由此義理，則像是雙重揀擇，也揀擇小乘。然而這是舉出法來雙重揀擇情執，後面說明不離開『色』是舉出法而已。二是也用上面的文句來揀擇混亂的意念，三種『空』中以『空』為『有』。他們認為另外有一物是『空體』，所以現在揀擇它。所以《十地經》（Dasabhumika Sutra）說：『有不二不盡』這一句經文，揀擇三種混亂的意念『空』。用『有』來揀擇斷滅『空』，用『不二』來揀擇異『色』明『空』，用『不盡』來揀擇『空』為『有』。不認為有自體會窮盡滅亡，現在應當不窮盡。說『空』如果是物體，則有窮盡滅亡，如果有窮盡滅亡則有生起。現在法『空相』不生不滅，哪裡會有『有』呢？所以《般若經》（Prajna Sutra）說：『是諸法空相不生不滅』等等。又青色、黃色的表相尚且不是『真空』，必須要無自性，怎麼可以把『空』當作『有』呢？三良以下總結，舉出其無自體的『空』，總結不是『色相』，說明『空』不是『有』，哪裡能是『色』呢？
觀說：三『色』不即是『空』，因為『色』即是『空』。為什麼呢？因為『空』中沒有『色』，所以『不即空』。會合『色』沒有自體，所以是『即空』。實在是因為會合『色』歸於『空』，『空』中必定沒有『色』。
【English Translation】 English version: Next, understand 'emptiness' (sunyata) from the perspective of the entirety of 'rupa' (matter, form, color). Explaining that 'rupa' is 'emptiness', therefore Sanliang (possibly a name or place) concludes downwards from this. Among them, first conclude from the meaning, because 'rupa' is 'true emptiness' (true sunyata), so it is not annihilation. Following 'therefore' below, conclude and mark the name.
Guan (possibly the author or name of the commentary) says: 'Rupa' is not identical to 'emptiness', because 'rupa' is identical to 'emptiness'. Why? Because the appearance of blue and yellow is not the principle of 'true emptiness', so it is said 'not identical to emptiness'. However, blue and yellow have no self-nature, and there is nothing that is not empty, so it is said 'identical to emptiness'. It is truly because the 'emptiness' of blue and yellow without self-nature is not identical to blue and yellow, so it is said 'not identical to emptiness'.
Explanation says: This also marks, explains, and concludes. In the explanation, select two false understandings. First, select 'too identical', because upon hearing 'rupa is emptiness', not knowing 'emptiness of nature' (svabhava-sunyata), they cling to 'form' (rupa-lakshana) as 'true emptiness', so it is necessary to select it. Therefore, it is said that the appearance of blue and yellow is not the principle of 'true emptiness'; this only selects ordinary people. The Hinayana does not consider 'rupa' to be 'identical to emptiness', so next, from 'however, blue and yellow' below, it explains that it is also not that there is 'nature' apart from 'form'; it is necessary that 'blue and yellow' without self-nature are 'true emptiness'. From this meaning, it seems like a double selection, also selecting the Hinayana. However, this is raising the Dharma to doubly select emotional attachments; the later explanation of not being apart from 'rupa' is merely raising the Dharma. Second, it also uses the above sentences to select confused thoughts, in the three kinds of 'emptiness', taking 'emptiness' as 'existence'. They think that there is another thing that is the 'body of emptiness', so now select it. Therefore, the Dasabhumika Sutra says: 'Existence, non-duality, non-exhaustion' this sentence of scripture selects three kinds of confused thoughts of 'emptiness'. Use 'existence' to select annihilation 'emptiness', use 'non-duality' to select different 'rupa' illuminating 'emptiness', use 'non-exhaustion' to select 'emptiness' as 'existence'. Not thinking that there is self-nature that will be exhausted and perish, now it should not be exhausted. Saying that if 'emptiness' is an object, then there is exhaustion and perishing, and if there is exhaustion and perishing, then there is arising. Now the 'appearance of emptiness' of Dharma does not arise or perish, how can there be 'existence'? Therefore, the Prajna Sutra says: 'These dharmas are empty in appearance, neither arising nor perishing', and so on. Moreover, the appearance of blue and yellow is not yet 'true emptiness', it must be without self-nature, how can 'emptiness' be taken as 'existence'? The following from Sanliang concludes, raising its 'emptiness' without self-nature, concluding that it is not 'form', explaining that 'emptiness' is not 'existence', how can it be 'rupa'?
Guan says: Three 'rupa' are not identical to 'emptiness', because 'rupa' is identical to 'emptiness'. Why? Because there is no 'rupa' in 'emptiness', so 'not identical to emptiness'. Assembling 'rupa' has no self-nature, so it is 'identical to emptiness'. It is truly because assembling 'rupa' returns to 'emptiness', and there must be no 'rupa' in 'emptiness'.
。是故由色空故色非空也。上三句以法揀情訖。
釋曰。此中文二。先釋當句。后結前三。前中亦三。初標。次釋。釋中先雙揀即離。以空中無色故色不即空。以離色無禮故空不離色。不即不離方為真空。二揀亂意異色明空。彼執色外有空與色為異。如前對色明空。今明空中尚無有色。何得有空與色相對。又會色無體故說即空。豈於色外有空對色。古人云。色去不留空。空非有邊住也。三良由下。結成上義。以下即空結上不即空也。特由會色為空。安得空中有色。二上三下總結三門。
觀曰。四色即是空。何以故。凡是色法必不異真空。以諸色法必無性故。是故色即是故。如色空既爾。一切法亦然思之。
釋曰。此中有二。先正顯真空之義后結例諸法。前中亦三。初標。次釋。以色從緣必無性故者。依他無性即真空圓成。三是故下結。既非滅色異色。不即不離故即真空。空非色相無遍計矣。緣生無性即依他無性。無性真理即是圓成。故此真空該徹性相。二如色空既爾下。結例諸法。上之四門但明色空。色即法相之首。五蘊之初故。諸經論凡說一義。皆先約色故。大般若等。從色已上種智已還八十餘科。皆將色例。今此亦爾例一切法。若略收法不出上之十對所依體事無不即空。皆須以法揀情。顯即事
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，由於色的本性是空，所以色不是空。上面三句用佛法來辨別（破除）凡夫的情執已經結束。
解釋：這段文字分為兩部分。首先解釋當句經文，然後總結前面的三句。在第一部分中又分為三點。第一點是標示（主題）。第二點是解釋。在解釋中，首先雙重辨別「即」和「離」。因為在空性中沒有色，所以色不是空。因為離開色就沒有空，所以空不離色。不即不離才是真正的真空。第二點是辨別混亂的觀念，即認為色異於空而顯明空性。那些人執著于在色之外存在一個與色不同的空，就像前面所說的「對色明空」。現在說明在空性中尚且沒有色，怎麼會有空與色相對立呢？又因為明白色沒有自體，所以說色即是空。難道會在色之外存在一個空來與色相對立嗎？古人說：『色去不留空，空非有邊住』（色消失了，不會留下空，空不是固定在某個地方的）。第三點是『良由下』，總結上面的意義。用『即空』來總結上面的『不即空』。特別是因為明白色就是空，怎麼能在空中有色呢？第二部分是『上三下』，總結前面的三門。
觀察：色就是空，為什麼呢？凡是色法必定不異於真空。因為諸色法必定沒有自性。因此，色就是空。像色和空這樣，一切法也是如此，仔細思考。
解釋：這段文字分為兩部分。首先正面顯明真空的意義，然後總結並類比諸法。在第一部分中又分為三點。第一點是標示（主題）。第二點是解釋。因為色從因緣而生，必定沒有自性。依他起性沒有自性就是真空圓成實性。第三點是『是故下』，總結。既然不是滅色而顯空，也不是異色而顯空，不即不離，所以就是真空。空不是色的現象，沒有遍計所執。緣起而無自性就是依他起性無自性。無自性的真理就是圓成實性。所以這個真空涵蓋了體性和現象。第二部分是『如色空既爾下』，總結並類比諸法。上面的四門只是說明色和空。色是法相的首要，五蘊的開始。所以諸經論凡是說到一個義理，都先從色開始。例如《大般若經》等，從色以上到種智以下八十餘科，都用色來做類比。現在這裡也是這樣，類比一切法。如果簡略地概括一切法，也離不開上面的十對關係，所依據的體和事沒有不是空的。都必須用佛法來辨別（破除）凡夫的情執，顯明即事而真。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, because the nature of form (rupa) is emptiness (sunyata), form is not emptiness. The above three sentences conclude the use of Dharma to discern (and dispel) sentient beings' emotional attachments.
Explanation: This passage is divided into two parts. First, it explains the current sentence, and then it summarizes the previous three sentences. The first part is further divided into three points. The first point is the indication (of the topic). The second point is the explanation. In the explanation, it first doubly discerns 'identity' and 'difference'. Because there is no form in emptiness, form is not identical to emptiness. Because there is no emptiness apart from form, emptiness is not different from form. Only non-identity and non-difference is true emptiness. The second point is to discern confused notions, namely, the notion that form is different from emptiness, thereby illuminating emptiness. Those who cling to the idea that there is an emptiness outside of form that is different from form, as mentioned earlier in 'illuminating emptiness in relation to form.' Now it is explained that there is not even form in emptiness, how can there be emptiness standing in opposition to form? Furthermore, because it is understood that form has no inherent existence, it is said that form is emptiness. Could there be an emptiness outside of form that stands in opposition to form? An ancient person said: 'When form disappears, it leaves no emptiness behind; emptiness is not fixed in one place.' The third point is 'Because of the following,' which summarizes the above meaning. It uses 'is emptiness' to conclude the above 'is not emptiness.' Especially because it is understood that form is emptiness, how can there be form in emptiness? The second part is 'The above three, the following,' which summarizes the previous three doors.
Observation: Form is emptiness, why? All forms (rupa-dharma) are certainly not different from true emptiness. Because all forms certainly have no self-nature (svabhava). Therefore, form is emptiness. Just as with form and emptiness, all dharmas are also like this; contemplate it carefully.
Explanation: This passage is divided into two parts. First, it directly reveals the meaning of true emptiness, and then it summarizes and analogizes all dharmas. The first part is further divided into three points. The first point is the indication (of the topic). The second point is the explanation. Because form arises from conditions, it certainly has no self-nature. Dependent origination without self-nature is true emptiness, the perfectly accomplished nature (parinis panna). The third point is 'Therefore, below,' which summarizes. Since it is not revealing emptiness by extinguishing form, nor revealing emptiness by differentiating it from form, it is neither identical nor different, therefore it is true emptiness. Emptiness is not the appearance of form, there is no completely imputed nature (parikalpita). Dependent arising without self-nature is dependent origination without self-nature. The truth of no self-nature is the perfectly accomplished nature. Therefore, this true emptiness encompasses both essence and phenomena. The second part is 'Just as with form and emptiness, below,' which summarizes and analogizes all dharmas. The above four doors only explain form and emptiness. Form is the foremost of the characteristics of phenomena, the beginning of the five aggregates (skandhas). Therefore, whenever the sutras and treatises speak of a principle, they always start with form. For example, the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra) and others, from form upwards to the eighty-odd categories below the wisdom of all modes (sarvakarajnata), all use form as an analogy. Now it is also like this, analogizing all dharmas. If all dharmas are briefly summarized, they cannot be separated from the above ten pairs of relationships; the underlying essence and phenomena are not other than emptiness. All must use the Dharma to discern (and dispel) sentient beings' emotional attachments, revealing that phenomena are truly as they are.
歸理。
觀曰。第二明空即色觀。于中亦作四門。
釋曰。此總標也。然此四門總相但翻上四。亦前三句以法揀情。第四句正顯法理。就揀情中。翻前色空義則大同。取文小異。亦標語則同。釋義有別。今先總揀。亦有三義。一揀即離。二揀亂意。三揀形顯。今初第一句明真空不離前色。第二句明真空非即色相。第三句明真空雙非即色離色。第二揀三亂意者。第一句明斷空非是實色。第二句明相有非真空。即揀相有。第三句明所依非能依。即揀能依。其第三義揀形顯者。有云。第一句明非斷空不礙形色。第二句明自性空不礙顯色。第三句明一體空俱不礙形顯。第四句明俱空空不礙二空色。解曰。前會色歸空觀。第三揀義既違正理。今雖列之以對前文亦不取也。次正釋文四句亦各有三。后二復加有二。
觀曰。一空不即色。以空即色故。何以故。斷空不即是色。故云非色。真空必不異色。故云即色。要由真空即色。故令斷空不即色也。
釋曰。此門亦三。初標二釋。釋上二句。初句明斷空非真色。對前色即空中實色非斷空。下句明真空不異色。對前不離色明空。雖含即離。下句則是舉正上句是所揀情情謂離色。二揀亂意者。揀斷空非實色。對前會色歸空觀。實色非斷空。三要由真空下。結成以
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 歸理。
觀曰：第二是明空即色觀。其中也分為四個方面。
釋曰：這是總體的概括。然而這四個方面的總的相狀只是對前四個方面的翻譯。也是用前三句以法來辨別情。第四句正式地彰顯法理。在辨別情中，翻譯前面的色空之義則大體相同，只是用詞略有不同。標示的語句相同，解釋的含義有所區別。現在先總體辨別，也有三重含義。一是辨別即是離，二是辨別混亂的意念，三是辨別形體的顯現。現在先說第一句，說明真空不離前面的色。第二句說明真空並非就是色相。第三句說明真空既非即色也非離色。第二重辨別三種混亂意念的是：第一句說明斷滅空不是實在的色。第二句說明相有並非真空，即辨別相有。第三句說明所依非能依，即辨別能依。第三重含義辨別形體顯現的是：有人說，第一句說明非斷滅空不妨礙形色。第二句說明自性空不妨礙顯色。第三句說明一體空都不妨礙形顯。第四句說明俱空空不妨礙二空色。解釋說：前面的會色歸空觀，第三重辨別的含義既然違背了正理，現在雖然列出它來對應前面的文字，也不採納它。接下來正式解釋文字，四句也各有三種含義，后兩句又增加了兩種含義。
觀曰：一是空不即色，因為空即是色。為什麼呢？斷滅空不是色，所以說『非色』。真空必定不異於色，所以說『即色』。正是由於真空即是色，所以才使得斷滅空不是色。
釋曰：這一方面也分為三個部分。首先是標示，然後是解釋，解釋上面的兩句話。第一句說明斷滅空不是真實的色，對應前面色即是空中的實色不是斷滅空。下一句說明真空不異於色，對應前面不離色而明空，雖然包含即和離。下一句則是舉出正面的例子，上一句是所辨別的情，情指的是離色。第二重辨別混亂意念的是：辨別斷滅空不是實在的色，對應前面會色歸空觀，實色不是斷滅空。三是由於真空，下面總結完成。
【English Translation】 English version Returning to the principle.
Observation: The second is the contemplation of emptiness being identical to form. Within this, there are also four aspects.
Explanation: This is a general summary. However, the overall appearance of these four aspects is merely a translation of the previous four. It also uses the first three sentences to distinguish emotion (情) with Dharma (法). The fourth sentence formally manifests the principle of Dharma. In distinguishing emotion, the translation of the meaning of form and emptiness is largely the same, only the wording is slightly different. The indicative statements are the same, but the meanings of the explanations are different. Now, let's first make a general distinction, which also has three meanings. First, distinguishing means separation; second, distinguishing confused thoughts; and third, distinguishing the manifestation of form. Now, let's talk about the first sentence, which explains that true emptiness is not separate from the preceding form. The second sentence explains that true emptiness is not identical to the characteristics of form. The third sentence explains that true emptiness is neither identical to nor separate from form. The second aspect of distinguishing three confused thoughts is: the first sentence explains that annihilation emptiness (斷空) is not substantial form. The second sentence explains that phenomenal existence (相有) is not true emptiness, which is distinguishing phenomenal existence. The third sentence explains that the supported (所依) is not the supporter (能依), which is distinguishing the supporter. The third meaning of distinguishing the manifestation of form is: some say that the first sentence explains that non-annihilation emptiness does not hinder form. The second sentence explains that self-nature emptiness does not hinder manifest form. The third sentence explains that the emptiness of oneness does not hinder form and manifestation. The fourth sentence explains that mutual emptiness does not hinder the emptiness of the two forms. The explanation says: In the previous contemplation of merging form into emptiness, since the meaning of the third distinction violates the correct principle, although it is listed now to correspond to the previous text, it is not adopted. Next, formally explaining the text, each of the four sentences also has three meanings, and the latter two sentences have two additional meanings.
Observation: First, emptiness is not identical to form, because emptiness is form. Why? Annihilation emptiness is not form, so it is said 'not form'. True emptiness must not be different from form, so it is said 'identical to form'. It is precisely because true emptiness is identical to form that annihilation emptiness is not form.
Explanation: This aspect is also divided into three parts. First is the indication, then the explanation, explaining the above two sentences. The first sentence explains that annihilation emptiness is not true form, corresponding to the previous substantial form in 'form is emptiness' is not annihilation emptiness. The next sentence explains that true emptiness is not different from form, corresponding to the previous clarifying emptiness without separating from form, although it contains identity and separation. The next sentence is to give a positive example, the previous sentence is the emotion to be distinguished, and emotion refers to separation from form. The second aspect of distinguishing confused thoughts is: distinguishing that annihilation emptiness is not substantial form, corresponding to the previous contemplation of merging form into emptiness, substantial form is not annihilation emptiness. Third, because of true emptiness, the following summarizes and completes.
下句舉正結上句。是所揀情。
觀曰。二空不即色。以空即色故。何以故。以空理非青黃故。云空不即色。然非青黃之真空。必不異青黃故。是故言空即色。要由不異青黃故。不即青黃故言空即色不即色也。
釋曰。此亦有三。初標。釋中先揀即離。明真空非即色相。云空不即色。正揀太即。對前會色歸空中。色相非真空。后然非青黃之理。必不異青黃者。明不即色之空亦非全在色外對前亦非離相有性。二揀亂意者。揀謂空為有。既空理非青黃豈是有耶。對前真空不是相有。三要由下結。舉不異之正結前太即之情。
觀曰。三空不即色以空即色故。何以故。空是所依非能依故。不即色也。必與能依作所依故。即是色也。良由是所依故不即色。是所依故即是色。是故言由不即色故即是色也。上三句亦以法揀情訖。
釋曰。就文亦二。先釋此句。后結上三句。前中亦三。初標。釋中雙揀即離可知。但前約空中無色揀。此約能依非所依揀。次下當知。然正反前應云色中無空。故今不云爾者。空中無色有理有文。色中無空文理俱絕。以空中無色。由事即理。理絕相故色必有空。無空之色非實故。故不反上。別就能所依以釋其義。二揀亂意者。唯取下句必與能依為所依。故揀于異空之色。對前異色明空
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 下句舉正，總結上句所揀別的情執。
觀曰：二空（指空性和空相）不即是色（指物質現象），因為空性即是色。為什麼這樣說呢？因為空性的道理不是青色或黃色等具體顏色。所以說空不即是色，然而，不是青黃的真空，必定不異於青黃。因此說空即是色，關鍵在於不異於青黃。因為不即于青黃，所以說空即是色，不即色。
釋曰：這裡也有三重含義。首先是標示。解釋中先揀別『即』和『離』，說明真空並非即是色相。說『空不即是色』，正是爲了揀別執著于『太即』的觀點，針對前面所說的『會色歸空中』，說明色相併非真空。後面說『然而，不是青黃的道理，必定不異於青黃』，說明不即於色的空，也並非完全在色之外，針對前面所說的『亦非離相有性』。第二是揀別混亂的理解，即揀別認為空是有。既然空性的道理不是青黃，怎麼能說它是有呢？針對前面所說的『真空不是相有』。第三是『要由下結』，用『不異』的正理來總結前面『太即』的情執。
觀曰：三空（指空性、空相、空用）不即是色，因為空性是所依，不是能依。為什麼這樣說呢？不即是色，必定與能依作為所依；即是色，是因為空性是所依。正因為是所依，所以不即是色；正因為是所依，所以即是色。因此說，因為不即是色，所以即是色。以上三句也用佛法揀別情執完畢。
釋曰：就文句而言也有兩層含義。先解釋此句，后總結以上三句。前面解釋此句中也有三重含義。首先是標示。解釋中雙重揀別『即』和『離』，這可以理解。但前面是就空中無色來揀別，這裡是就『能依』不是『所依』來揀別。其次，應當知道，如果反過來說，應該說『色中無空』。之所以現在不這樣說，是因為『空中無色』有理有據，而『色中無空』在文理上都說不通。因為空中無色，是從事相上即是理體，理體斷絕了色相的緣故，所以色必定有空。沒有空性的色不是真實的。所以不反過來說。另外，就『能依』和『所依』來解釋它的含義。第二是揀別混亂的理解，只取下句『必定與能依作為所依』，所以揀別于異於空的色，針對前面所說的『異色明空』。
【English Translation】 English version The following sentence corrects and concludes the emotional attachments that were distinguished in the previous sentence.
Commentary: The two emptinesses (referring to emptiness of nature and emptiness of form) are not identical to form (referring to material phenomena), because emptiness of nature is identical to form. Why is this so? Because the principle of emptiness is not blue or yellow, etc. Therefore, it is said that emptiness is not identical to form. However, the true emptiness that is not blue or yellow must not be different from blue or yellow. Therefore, it is said that emptiness is identical to form, the key lies in not being different from blue or yellow. Because it is not identical to blue or yellow, it is said that emptiness is identical to form, yet not identical to form.
Explanation: There are also three layers of meaning here. First is the indication. In the explanation, first distinguish between 'identity' and 'separation', explaining that true emptiness is not identical to form. Saying 'emptiness is not identical to form' is precisely to distinguish the view that clings to 'too much identity', addressing the previous statement 'converging form into emptiness', explaining that form is not true emptiness. Later, saying 'however, the principle that is not blue or yellow must not be different from blue or yellow' explains that the emptiness that is not identical to form is also not entirely outside of form, addressing the previous statement 'also not having a nature separate from form'. Second is to distinguish confused understandings, that is, to distinguish the view that emptiness is existence. Since the principle of emptiness is not blue or yellow, how can it be said to be existence? Addressing the previous statement 'true emptiness is not existence of form'. Third is 'concluding from below', using the correct principle of 'not being different' to conclude the emotional attachments of 'too much identity'.
Commentary: The three emptinesses (referring to emptiness of nature, emptiness of form, and emptiness of function) are not identical to form, because emptiness of nature is the supported, not the supporter. Why is this so? Not being identical to form means it must be the supported with the supporter; being identical to form is because emptiness of nature is the supported. Precisely because it is the supported, it is not identical to form; precisely because it is the supported, it is identical to form. Therefore, it is said that because it is not identical to form, it is identical to form. The above three sentences also complete the distinction of emotional attachments using the Dharma.
Explanation: In terms of the sentences, there are also two layers of meaning. First explain this sentence, then summarize the above three sentences. In the previous explanation of this sentence, there are also three layers of meaning. First is the indication. The dual distinction between 'identity' and 'separation' in the explanation can be understood. But the previous one distinguished based on the absence of form in emptiness, while this one distinguishes based on 'supporter' not being 'supported'. Secondly, it should be known that if it were reversed, it should be said 'there is no emptiness in form'. The reason why it is not said this way now is because 'there is no form in emptiness' has both reason and textual support, while 'there is no emptiness in form' is not logically or textually sound. Because there is no form in emptiness, it is because the event is identical to the principle, and the principle cuts off the cause of form, so form must have emptiness. Form without emptiness is not real. Therefore, it is not reversed. In addition, the meaning is explained in terms of 'supporter' and 'supported'. Second is to distinguish confused understandings, only taking the following sentence 'must be the supported with the supporter', so distinguishing the form that is different from emptiness, addressing the previous statement 'clarifying emptiness through different forms'.
。三良由下結。以一所依雙結不即不離。意云。既是所依之空。必非能依之色。故云不即色。二既是色之所依。非余所依故不離色也。結離亂意者。既必與能依之色而為所依。明色非空外。對前空非色外也。二上三句下。總結三門義如前說。
觀曰。四空即是色。何以故。凡是真空必不異色。以是法無我理非斷滅故。是故空即是色。如空色既爾。一切法皆然思之。
釋曰。此門亦二。先釋第四。后結例諸法。今初亦三。初標。二釋。言以是法無我理等者。出所以也。無我即空以是法空。即法無我故空是色。三是故空即是色者。結此門也。二如空色下結。例舉上四門。空即是色。則例此空是一切法。況不是十對所依耶。
觀曰。第三色空無礙觀者。謂色舉體不異空。全是盡色之空故。即色不盡而空現。空舉體不異色。全是盡空之色故。即空即色而空不隱也。是故菩薩觀色無不見空。觀空莫非見色。無障無礙為一味法。思之可見。
釋曰。此觀有三。謂標釋結。二謂色下釋。釋相云。全是盡色之空者。有本無盡色之三字。但云全是空故耳。而釋義亦通。以不對下文理非全現故。今依有本釋。然色是有中之別稱。通是空有二門耳。空有各有二義。空二義者。謂空非空。有二義者。謂有非有。空中言
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：三良由下文總結，以一個所依（所依賴的事物）和雙結（兩種束縛）來說明不即不離的關係。意思是說，既然是作為所依的空性，必定不是能依（能依賴的事物）的色相，所以說『不即色』。其次，既然是色相的所依，就不是其他事物的所依，所以說『不離色』。總結離亂之意是，既然必定與能依的色相作為所依，說明色相不在空性之外，對應前面所說的空性不在色相之外。第二部分，上面的三句話，總結了前面所說的三個門義。
觀曰：四空就是色，為什麼呢？凡是真空必定不異於色，因為這是法無我的道理，不是斷滅。所以說，空就是色。如同空和色這樣，一切法都是如此，仔細思考。
釋曰：此門也分為兩部分，先解釋第四點，然後總結並舉例說明諸法。現在開始解釋第一部分，也分為三點：首先是標明，其次是解釋。『言以是法無我理等者』，是說明原因。無我即是空，因為這是法空，即法無我，所以空就是色。第三點，『是故空即是色者』，是總結這個門義。第二部分，『如空色下結』，舉例說明上面的四個門義。空即是色，那麼就可以舉例說明這個空就是一切法，更何況不是十對所依呢？
觀曰：第三是色空無礙觀，意思是說，色相的整體不異於空性，完全是窮盡色相的空性，所以說，色相不窮盡而空性顯現。空性的整體不異於色相，完全是窮盡空性的色相，所以說，即空即色而空性不隱沒。因此，菩薩觀察色相沒有不見到空性的，觀察空性沒有不是見到色相的，沒有障礙，沒有阻礙，成為一種統一的法味。仔細思考就可以明白。
釋曰：這個觀有三個部分，分別是標明、解釋和總結。第二部分，『謂色下釋』，解釋相狀說，『全是盡色之空者』，有的版本沒有『盡色之』這三個字，只是說『全是空故耳』，而解釋的意義也通順。因為不對照下面的文理就不能完全顯現，所以現在按照有『盡色之』的版本來解釋。然而，色相是有中一個特別的稱謂，貫通空有二門。空有各有兩種含義。空的兩種含義是，空非空；有的兩種含義是，有非有。空性中說
【English Translation】 English version: Sanliang concludes from below, using one '所依' (suǒ yī, that which is relied upon) and '雙結' (shuāng jié, two bonds) to explain the relationship of neither identical nor separate. The meaning is that since it is the emptiness that is relied upon, it must not be the form that relies, therefore it is said 'not identical to form'. Secondly, since it is the basis of form, it is not the basis of other things, therefore it is said 'not separate from form'. The meaning of summarizing separation and confusion is that since it must be the basis with the form that relies, it shows that form is not outside of emptiness, corresponding to the previous statement that emptiness is not outside of form. In the second part, the above three sentences summarize the meaning of the three gates mentioned earlier.
'觀曰' (Guān yuē, Observation says): The four emptinesses are form. Why? All true emptiness must not be different from form, because this is the principle of '法無我' (fǎ wú wǒ, Dharma without self), not annihilation. Therefore, emptiness is form. Just like emptiness and form, all dharmas are like this. Think about it carefully.
'釋曰' (Shì yuē, Explanation says): This gate is also divided into two parts. First, explain the fourth point, and then summarize and exemplify all dharmas. Now, start explaining the first part, which is also divided into three points: first, mark; second, explain. '言以是法無我理等者' (Yán yǐ shì fǎ wú wǒ lǐ děng zhě, Saying that the principle of Dharma without self, etc.), is to explain the reason. '無我' (wú wǒ, No-self) is emptiness, because this is Dharma emptiness, which is Dharma without self, so emptiness is form. The third point, '是故空即是色者' (Shì gù kōng jí shì sè zhě, Therefore, emptiness is form), is to conclude this gate. In the second part, '如空色下結' (Rú kōng sè xià jié, Like emptiness and form below), exemplify the above four gates. Emptiness is form, then it can be exemplified that this emptiness is all dharmas, let alone not the ten pairs of dependencies?
'觀曰' (Guān yuē, Observation says): The third is the '色空無礙觀' (sè kōng wú ài guān, observation of form and emptiness without obstruction), meaning that the entirety of form is not different from emptiness, completely exhausting the emptiness of form, so it is said that form is not exhausted and emptiness appears. The entirety of emptiness is not different from form, completely exhausting the form of emptiness, so it is said that emptiness is form and emptiness is not hidden. Therefore, when a Bodhisattva observes form, there is no seeing that does not see emptiness, and when observing emptiness, there is no not seeing form, without obstacles, without hindrance, becoming a unified taste of Dharma. Thinking about it carefully will make it clear.
'釋曰' (Shì yuē, Explanation says): This observation has three parts, namely marking, explaining, and concluding. In the second part, '謂色下釋' (Wèi sè xià shì, Explaining below regarding form), explaining the characteristics, '全是盡色之空者' (Quán shì jìn sè zhī kōng zhě, Completely exhausting the emptiness of form), some versions do not have the three words '盡色之' (jìn sè zhī, exhausting form), but simply say '全是空故耳' (quán shì kōng gù ěr, completely emptiness), and the meaning of the explanation is also smooth. Because without comparing the following text, it cannot be fully revealed, so now it is explained according to the version with '盡色之' (jìn sè zhī, exhausting form). However, form is a special term in existence, connecting the two gates of emptiness and existence. Emptiness and existence each have two meanings. The two meanings of emptiness are, emptiness is not emptiness; the two meanings of existence are, existence is not existence. In emptiness, it is said
空者。以空必盡有故。言非空者亦無空相故。又不礙有故。有中言有者。有必盡空故。非有者有相離故。又不礙空故。今明色空無礙中。初明色不礙空。取空上盡色之義。次明空不礙色。取色上盡空之義。其不相礙即是舉體全是之義。其離空有相義。在第四泯絕門中。然今文中色空之上各有三句。皆初句標無礙。下句出無礙相。色中出相。言色不盡而空現者。以色不礙空故色不盡也。即是盡色之空故而空現也。空中出相。云即空即色而空不隱者。以空不礙色故空即色也。而是盡色之空故空不隱也。若總相言但色舉體。即空即色不盡。以即空故空便現也。空上亦然。以空舉體為色故。空即色既即是空。空不隱也。若依此釋前無三字義理亦通。則應后句減卻盡空之三字。今依有本。三是故下結成無礙。亦是前明所觀。此正明能觀故。云菩薩見色等。
觀曰。第四泯絕無寄觀者。謂此所觀真空。不可言即色不即色。亦不可言即空不即空。一切法皆不可。不可亦不可。此語亦不受。迥絕無寄。非言所及。非解所到。是謂行境。何以故。以生心動念。即乖法體失正念故。
釋曰。此第四觀大分為二。先正釋第四。后對前三觀會釋成總。今即初也。文中三。初標名。二謂此下釋相。三何以下徴結。此中大意。但拂跡現
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『空』的含義是：因為空性必然包含一切有。說『非空』，是因為沒有獨立的空相，並且不妨礙『有』的存在。在『有』中說『有』，是因為有必然歸於空性。說『非有』，是因為有相脫離了空性，並且不妨礙『空』的存在。現在闡明色空無礙的道理，首先說明色不妨礙空，取空性包含一切色的含義。其次說明空不妨礙色，取色相包含一切空的含義。它們互不障礙，即是整體完全的含義。至於脫離空有之相的含義，在第四泯絕門中說明。然而，現在文中色和空各有三句，都是第一句標明無礙，下面的句子闡述無礙之相。在色中闡述相，說色不窮盡而空顯現，是因為色不妨礙空，所以色不窮盡，即是窮盡色的空性，所以空顯現。在空中闡述相，說即空即色而空不隱沒，是因為空不妨礙色，所以空即是色，而是窮盡色的空性，所以空不隱沒。如果總的來說，只是色整體，即空即色不窮盡，因為即是空性，所以空便顯現。空也是這樣，因為空整體是色，空即是色，既然即是空，空就不隱沒。如果按照這個解釋，前面沒有『三』字的義理也說得通，那麼後面的句子就應該減去『盡空』這三個字。現在按照現有的版本，第三句『是故』下面總結成無礙，也是前面所觀照的，這裡正是闡明能觀照的，所以說『菩薩見色』等。
觀照說：第四泯絕無寄觀，是指所觀照的真空，不可說即是色，也不可說不即是色，也不可說即是空，也不可說不即是空，一切法都不可說，不可說也不可說，這種說法也不接受，完全斷絕，無所寄託，不是言語所能表達，不是理解所能到達，這就是行境。為什麼呢？因為一生起心念，就違背了法的本體，失去了正確的念頭。
解釋說：這第四觀大分為二，先解釋第四觀，后將前三觀會合解釋成總觀。現在是第一部分。文中分為三部分，首先標明名稱，其次『謂此下』解釋相狀，第三『何以下』提問總結。這裡的大意是，只是拂去痕跡，顯現真性。
【English Translation】 English version 『Emptiness』 means: because emptiness necessarily encompasses all existence. To say 『non-emptiness』 is because there is no independent aspect of emptiness, and it does not hinder the existence of 『existence』. To say 『existence』 within 『existence』 is because existence necessarily returns to emptiness. To say 『non-existence』 is because the aspect of existence is separate from emptiness, and it does not hinder the existence of 『emptiness』. Now, clarifying the principle of the unobstructedness of form and emptiness, first explaining that form does not obstruct emptiness, taking the meaning of emptiness encompassing all forms. Secondly, explaining that emptiness does not obstruct form, taking the meaning of form encompassing all emptiness. Their mutual non-obstruction is the meaning of the whole being complete. As for the meaning of detachment from the aspects of emptiness and existence, it is explained in the fourth gate of annihilation. However, now in the text, form and emptiness each have three sentences, all of which have the first sentence marking unobstructedness, and the following sentences elaborating on the aspect of unobstructedness. Elaborating on the aspect in form, saying that form is not exhausted and emptiness appears, is because form does not obstruct emptiness, so form is not exhausted, which is the emptiness that exhausts form, so emptiness appears. Elaborating on the aspect in emptiness, saying that it is both emptiness and form, and emptiness is not hidden, is because emptiness does not obstruct form, so emptiness is form, and it is the emptiness that exhausts form, so emptiness is not hidden. If speaking generally, only the whole of form, which is both emptiness and form, is not exhausted, because it is emptiness, so emptiness then appears. Emptiness is also like this, because the whole of emptiness is form, emptiness is form, and since it is emptiness, emptiness is not hidden. If according to this explanation, the meaning of the absence of the word 『three』 earlier is also understandable, then the later sentences should subtract the three words 『exhausting emptiness』. Now according to the existing version, the third sentence 『therefore』 below concludes with unobstructedness, which is also what was contemplated earlier, and here is precisely clarifying what can be contemplated, so it says 『Bodhisattvas see form』 etc.
The contemplation says: The fourth contemplation of annihilation and non-reliance refers to the true emptiness that is contemplated, which cannot be said to be form, nor can it be said to be not form, nor can it be said to be emptiness, nor can it be said to be not emptiness. All dharmas cannot be spoken of, and cannot be spoken of either. This statement is not accepted either, completely cut off, without any reliance, not expressible by words, not attainable by understanding, this is the realm of practice. Why? Because as soon as a thought arises, it violates the essence of the Dharma and loses the correct mindfulness.
The explanation says: This fourth contemplation is divided into two major parts, first explaining the fourth contemplation, and then combining the previous three contemplations to explain it as a general contemplation. Now is the first part. The text is divided into three parts, first marking the name, second 『referring to this below』 explaining the aspect, and third 『what below』 asking and summarizing. The general meaning here is simply to brush away the traces and reveal the true nature.
圓。若細釋者。然色空相望乃有多義。一融。二諦義。初會色歸空。明俗即故真。二明空即色。顯真即是俗。三色空無礙明二諦雙現。四泯絕無寄明二諦俱泯。若約三諦。初即真諦。二即俗諦。后一即中道第一義諦。若約三觀初即空觀。二即假觀。三四即中道觀。三即雙照明中。四即雙遮明中。雖有三觀意。明三觀融通為真空耳。二者色空相望總有四句。取文小異。初會色歸空觀中四句。前三句明色不異空。第四句明色即是空。第二明空即色觀中四句。前三句明空不異色第四句明空即是色。第三觀明但合前二今第四句。拂四句相。現真空相不生不滅。乃至無智亦無得真空觀備矣。若約三觀。就心經意。色不異空明俗不異真。空不異色明真不異俗。色空相即明是中道。即上四句為空假中之三觀也。與今義同。取文小異耳。三者色空相望總有三義。一相成義。二無礙義。三相害義。廣如第二理事無礙觀中。今文含有三。前二相即亦相成義。第三色空無礙觀。正明無礙義。今第四觀。即相害義。相害俱泯故。雖有此三意。俱顯于真空義耳。若別消文者。不可言即色不即色者。拂前第二。明空即色觀。不可言即色者。正拂第四句。不可言不即色者。亦拂前三句。以空非空故。無可言即色不即色。又理本絕言故。約觀即心冥真極
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 圓。如果詳細解釋，色和空相互觀照，實則包含多種含義：一是融合二諦之義。初會時，色歸於空，闡明俗諦即是真諦。二是闡明空即是色，彰顯真諦即是俗諦。三是色空無礙，表明二諦同時顯現。四是泯滅一切執著，表明二諦皆空。如果從三諦的角度來看，初會色歸空即是真諦，闡明空即是色即是俗諦，色空無礙即是中道第一義諦。如果從三觀的角度來看，初會色歸空即是空觀，闡明空即是色即是假觀，色空無礙和泯滅一切執著即是中道觀。其中，色空無礙是雙照明中，泯滅一切執著是雙遮明中。雖然包含三觀的意蘊，但都旨在闡明三觀融通為真空。二者，色和空相互觀照總共有四句，只是取用的文字略有不同。初會色歸空觀中的四句，前三句闡明色不異於空，第四句闡明色即是空。第二，闡明空即是色觀中的四句，前三句闡明空不異於色，第四句闡明空即是色。第三觀只合並了前兩觀的第四句，拂去四句的表相，顯現不生不滅的真空之相，乃至無智亦無得，真空觀就完備了。如果從三觀的角度，就《心經》的含義而言，色不異空闡明俗諦不異於真諦，空不異色闡明真諦不異於俗諦，色空相即闡明是中道。即以上四句為空、假、中之三觀，與現在的含義相同，只是取用的文字略有不同罷了。三者，色和空相互觀照總共有三種含義：一是相成之義，二是無礙之義，三是相害之義，詳細內容如同第二理事無礙觀中所述。現在這段文字包含這三種含義。前兩個相即也相成，是相成之義。第三個色空無礙觀，正是闡明無礙之義。現在的第四觀，即是相害之義，因為相害俱泯。雖然包含這三種意蘊，但都旨在顯現真空之義。如果分別解釋文句，不可說『即色不即色』，這是拂去前面的第二觀，闡明空即是色觀。不可說『即色』，這是正是拂去第四句。不可說『不即色』，這也是拂去前三句。因為空非空，所以無可說『即色不即色』。而且，理體本來就超越言語，從觀的角度來說，就是心與真理冥合，達到極致。
【English Translation】 English version Roundness. If explained in detail, the mutual observation of form (rupa) and emptiness (sunyata) contains multiple meanings: First, the meaning of the fusion of the two truths (dve satye). In the initial meeting, form returns to emptiness, clarifying that the conventional truth (samvriti-satya) is the same as the ultimate truth (paramartha-satya). Second, it clarifies that emptiness is form, revealing that the ultimate truth is the same as the conventional truth. Third, form and emptiness are unobstructed, indicating that the two truths appear simultaneously. Fourth, all attachments are extinguished, indicating that both truths are empty. If viewed from the perspective of the three truths (tri-satya), the initial meeting of form returning to emptiness is the ultimate truth, clarifying that emptiness is form is the conventional truth, and the unobstructedness of form and emptiness is the first principle of the middle way (madhyamaka). If viewed from the perspective of the three contemplations (tri-vidha-dhyana), the initial meeting of form returning to emptiness is the contemplation of emptiness (sunyata-dhyana), clarifying that emptiness is form is the contemplation of provisional existence (prajnaparamita-dhyana), and the unobstructedness of form and emptiness and the extinguishing of all attachments are the contemplation of the middle way. Among them, the unobstructedness of form and emptiness is the dual illumination of the middle, and the extinguishing of all attachments is the dual negation of the middle. Although it contains the implications of the three contemplations, they all aim to clarify that the three contemplations merge into true emptiness (sunyata). Second, the mutual observation of form and emptiness has a total of four sentences, but the words used are slightly different. The four sentences in the initial meeting of form returning to the contemplation of emptiness, the first three sentences clarify that form is not different from emptiness, and the fourth sentence clarifies that form is emptiness. Second, clarifying the four sentences in the contemplation that emptiness is form, the first three sentences clarify that emptiness is not different from form, and the fourth sentence clarifies that emptiness is form. The third contemplation only combines the fourth sentences of the previous two contemplations, brushing away the appearance of the four sentences, revealing the appearance of true emptiness that is neither born nor dies, and even without wisdom there is no attainment, the contemplation of true emptiness is complete. If from the perspective of the three contemplations, in terms of the meaning of the Heart Sutra (Prajnaparamita Hrdaya Sutra), form is not different from emptiness clarifies that the conventional truth is not different from the ultimate truth, emptiness is not different from form clarifies that the ultimate truth is not different from the conventional truth, and the mutual identity of form and emptiness clarifies that it is the middle way. That is, the above four sentences are the three contemplations of emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, which have the same meaning as now, but the words used are slightly different. Third, the mutual observation of form and emptiness has a total of three meanings: First, the meaning of mutual accomplishment, second, the meaning of unobstructedness, and third, the meaning of mutual harm, the details of which are as described in the Second Contemplation of the Unobstructedness of Principle and Phenomena. This passage now contains these three meanings. The first two, mutual identity and mutual accomplishment, are the meaning of mutual accomplishment. The third contemplation of the unobstructedness of form and emptiness, precisely clarifies the meaning of unobstructedness. The current fourth contemplation is the meaning of mutual harm, because mutual harm is extinguished. Although it contains these three implications, they all aim to reveal the meaning of true emptiness. If the sentences are explained separately, it cannot be said 'form is identical to emptiness and not identical to emptiness', this is brushing away the previous second contemplation, clarifying the contemplation that emptiness is form. It cannot be said 'form is identical to emptiness', this is precisely brushing away the fourth sentence. It cannot be said 'form is not identical to emptiness', this is also brushing away the first three sentences. Because emptiness is not emptiness, there is nothing to say 'form is identical to emptiness and not identical to emptiness'. Moreover, the principle is originally beyond words, from the perspective of contemplation, it is the mind merging with the truth, reaching the extreme.
故。方成妙色觀耳。次云亦不可言即空不即空者。拂第一會色歸空觀。不可言即空。正拂第四句。不可言不即空。亦拂前三句。以色亦即非色。無可言即空不即空。故即事同理故。理本絕言故。心冥真極無心即故。方成即空觀耳。又上會色歸空無增益謗。明意即色無損減謗。色空無礙無雙。非戲論謗。今無可相即。無相違謗。四謗既無。百非斯絕故迥絕無寄。又云。一切法皆不可者結例總拂。言結例者。非獨色法成其三觀。並皆拂之。受想行識萬化之法皆同前色。言總拂者。總拂前三會色歸空觀等皆不可也。亦無四句可絕。三觀可拂故。不可亦不可。言此語亦不受者。若受不可說言是則有受。有受則有念。有念者。皆是心言之跡故。迥絕無寄二邊既離。中道不存心境兩亡。亡絕無寄般若現矣。若生心動念皆不會理。言語道斷故言不及。心行處滅故解不到。言是謂行境者。結成上行。然有二意。一者上是行家之境。今心與境冥。智與神會。亡言虛懷。冥心遺智。方詣茲境。明唯行能到非解境故。二者即上心智契合即是真行。行即是境行分齊故。三何以下反釋成行。
觀曰。又前四句中。初二句八門皆揀情顯解。第三句一門解終趣行。此第四句一門正成行體。若不洞明前解。無以躡成此行。若不解此行法絕於前解無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，才能成就微妙的色觀。接下來所說的『不可說即空，也不可說不即空』，是拂去第一會（指初次集會）的色歸於空的觀法。『不可說即空』，正是拂去了第四句（指四句否定式中的最後一句）。『不可說不即空』，也拂去了前面的三句。因為色也就是非色，所以無可說即空或不即空。因此，從事相上來說，與真理相同，因為真理的根本就是斷絕言語的。心與真理融合，達到無心的境界，才能成就即空觀。而且，前面的集會中，色歸於空，沒有增益的誹謗；說明意即是色，沒有損減的誹謗；色與空沒有障礙，沒有雙重性，沒有戲論的誹謗。現在無可相即，沒有相違背的誹謗。四種誹謗既然沒有了，各種錯誤也就都斷絕了，所以完全斷絕了依附。接下來所說的『一切法都不可說』，是總結並舉例，全部拂去。所說的總結並舉例，並非只有色法才能成就這三種觀法，而是全部拂去。受、想、行、識等萬法都與前面的色相同。所說的全部拂去，是全部拂去前面三次集會的色歸於空觀等，都是不可說的。也沒有四句可以斷絕，三種觀法可以拂去，所以不可說也不可說。所說的『這句話也不接受』，如果接受不可說，那麼就是有接受。有接受，那麼就是有念頭。有念頭，都是心和言語的痕跡。所以完全斷絕了依附，兩邊既然離開了，中道也不存在，心和境都消失了，消失了依附，般若智慧就顯現了。如果生起心念，都不會符合真理，因為言語的道路斷絕了，所以言語無法到達；心行之處滅絕了，所以理解無法到達。所說的『這就是行境』，是總結上面的修行。然而有兩種含義：一是上面是修行者的境界，現在心與境融合，智慧與神會合，忘記言語，虛心，忘記心，捨棄智慧，才能到達這個境界，說明只有修行才能到達，而不是理解的境界。二是上面的心智契合就是真正的修行，修行就是境界，修行有分寸。三是為什麼下面反過來解釋成就修行。 觀曰：又前四句中，初二句八門皆揀情顯解。第三句一門解終趣行。此第四句一門正成行體。若不洞明前解。無以躡成此行。若不解此行法絕於前解無。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, only then can the wonderful contemplation of form be achieved. Next, the statement 'It cannot be said to be identical to emptiness, nor can it be said to be not identical to emptiness' negates the contemplation of form returning to emptiness from the first assembly. 'It cannot be said to be identical to emptiness' directly negates the fourth statement (referring to the last of the four negations). 'It cannot be said to be not identical to emptiness' also negates the previous three statements. Because form is also non-form, there is nothing to say about being identical to emptiness or not identical to emptiness. Therefore, from the perspective of phenomena, it is the same as principle, because the root of principle is the cessation of words. When the mind merges with truth and reaches a state of no-mind, the contemplation of 'identity with emptiness' can be achieved. Moreover, in the previous assembly, form returning to emptiness has no slander of increase; clarifying that intention is form has no slander of decrease; form and emptiness are without obstruction, without duality, and without the slander of playfulness. Now there is no mutual dependence, no slander of contradiction. Since the four slanders are gone, all errors are cut off, so there is complete detachment. Next, the statement 'all dharmas are unspeakable' is a summary and example, negating everything. The so-called summary and example is not only that form can achieve these three contemplations, but all are negated. The myriad dharmas of sensation (vedana), perception (samjna), volition (samskara), and consciousness (vijnana) are all the same as the previous form. The so-called complete negation is the complete negation of the contemplation of form returning to emptiness from the previous three assemblies, etc., all of which are unspeakable. There are also no four statements to cut off, and three contemplations to negate, so it cannot be said or not said. The statement 'this statement is also not accepted' means that if the unspeakable is accepted, then there is acceptance. If there is acceptance, then there is thought. If there is thought, then all are traces of mind and speech. Therefore, there is complete detachment, and since the two sides are separated, the middle way does not exist, both mind and object disappear, and with the disappearance of attachment, prajna wisdom appears. If thoughts arise, they will not conform to the truth, because the path of words is cut off, so words cannot reach it; the place where the mind acts is extinguished, so understanding cannot reach it. The statement 'this is called the realm of practice' summarizes the above practice. However, there are two meanings: one is that the above is the realm of the practitioner, now the mind merges with the object, wisdom merges with the spirit, forgetting words, being humble, forgetting the mind, abandoning wisdom, to reach this realm, indicating that only practice can reach it, not the realm of understanding. Second, the above union of mind and wisdom is true practice, practice is the realm, and practice has limits. Third, why does the following explain the achievement of practice in reverse? Commentary: Furthermore, in the previous four statements, the first two statements of the eight gates all select emotions and reveal understanding. The third statement of one gate ends understanding and leads to practice. This fourth statement of one gate directly forms the body of practice. If the previous understanding is not thoroughly understood, there is no way to achieve this practice. If this practice is not understood, the method is cut off from the previous understanding.
以成其正解。若守解不捨。無以入茲正行。是故行由解成。行起解絕也。
釋曰。此即第二總結四門。然上第四門唯結當門成行。今總結四門。然云上二句八門者。則句大門小前總標中亦云四句十門。皆句大門小。上結中雲上三句以法揀情。此第四句一門是則門句互通。應合門大句小。義既互通此隨文釋。于中三句。初正分解行二。若不洞明下。反顯相資。如目足相資。于中初以解成行。次若不解下。絕解成解。后若守下。舍解成行。三是故下。結成二相。總成真空絕相觀也。則內外並冥。緣觀俱寂也。
觀曰。理事無礙觀第二。
釋曰。即理事無礙法界也。
觀曰。但理事镕融存亡逆順通有十門。
釋曰。此觀文三。初總標。二別釋。三結勸。今則初也。即總顯觀名。具為十門。本就前色空觀中。亦即事理不得此名者。有四義故。一雖有色事為成空理。色空無礙為真空故。二理但明空。未顯真如之妙有故。三泯絕無寄。亡事理故。四不廣顯無礙之相。無為而為無相而相。諸事與理炳現無礙雙融相故。為上四義故。不得名至此獨受。是以今標。具下十門無礙之根镕融。是總該下十門。似如洪爐鑄眾像。故镕謂镕冶。即初銷義。融謂融和。即終成一義。以理镕事。事與理和二而不二。十
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：爲了成就正確的理解。如果固守已有的理解而不放手，就無法進入這正確的修行。因此，修行由理解而成，修行開始於理解的超越。
解釋說：這即是第二重總結四門。然而，上面第四門只是總結當門成就修行。現在總結四門。然而說上面二句八門，那麼句子大於門，前面總標中也說四句十門，都是句子大於門。上面總結中說上面三句用法來揀擇情，這第四句一門則是門句互通。應該合為門大於句，意義既然互通，這裡就隨文解釋。其中三句。初正分解行二。若不洞明下。反過來顯示互相資助，如眼睛和腳互相資助。其中初以理解成就修行。其次若不理解下。超越理解成就理解。后若固守下。捨棄理解成就修行。三是故下。總結成就二相。總成就真空絕相觀。那麼內外都泯滅，緣起觀照都寂靜。
觀想說：理事無礙觀第二。
解釋說：即理事無礙法界。
觀想說：但理事镕融，存亡逆順，通有十門。
解釋說：這段觀想文分為三部分。初總標，二別釋，三結勸。現在是第一部分，即總顯觀想的名稱。具備十門。本來就在前面的色空觀中，也即是事理，沒有得到這個名稱的原因，有四種意義。一，雖然有色事爲了成就空理，色空無礙是真空的緣故。二，理只是闡明空，沒有顯示真如的妙有的緣故。三，泯滅斷絕沒有寄託，捨棄事理的緣故。四，不廣泛顯示無礙的相，無為而為，無相而相，諸事與理炳然顯現無礙雙重融合的相的緣故。因為上面的四種意義，所以沒有得到這個名稱，到這裡才單獨接受。因此現在標明，具備下面的十門無礙的根本，镕融，是總括下面的十門，好像洪爐鑄造眾多的形象。所以镕叫做镕冶，即最初銷融的意義。融叫做融合，即最終成就一體的意義。以理來镕鑄事，事與理融合，二而不二。十門。
【English Translation】 English version: In order to accomplish a correct understanding. If one clings to an understanding and does not let go, one cannot enter this correct practice. Therefore, practice is accomplished by understanding, and practice begins with the transcendence of understanding.
Explanation: This is the second summary of the four gates. However, the fourth gate above only summarizes the achievement of practice within that gate. Now, it summarizes all four gates. However, it says that the two lines above are eight gates, then the lines are larger than the gates. In the previous general introduction, it also says four lines and ten gates, all of which have lines larger than gates. In the previous summary, it says that the three lines above use the Dharma to discern emotions, and this fourth line, one gate, is where the gates and lines communicate. It should be combined as gates larger than lines. Since the meanings communicate, here it is explained according to the text. Among them are three lines. First, correctly analyze practice and understanding. 'If one does not fully understand' below, it shows mutual assistance in reverse, like eyes and feet assisting each other. Among them, first, practice is accomplished by understanding. Second, 'If one does not understand' below, understanding is transcended to accomplish understanding. Later, 'If one clings' below, understanding is abandoned to accomplish practice. Third, 'Therefore' below, it concludes the accomplishment of two aspects, and generally accomplishes the contemplation of True Emptiness and the Cessation of Characteristics. Then, both inside and outside are extinguished, and the conditions and contemplation are both silent.
Contemplation says: The Second Contemplation of the Unobstructed Interpenetration of Principle and Phenomena.
Explanation: This is the Dharma Realm of the Unobstructed Interpenetration of Principle and Phenomena.
Contemplation says: But the interpenetration of principle and phenomena, existence and non-existence, accordance and opposition, all have ten gates.
Explanation: This contemplation text is divided into three parts. First, a general introduction; second, separate explanations; and third, a concluding exhortation. Now it is the first part, which is the general manifestation of the name of the contemplation. It possesses ten gates. Originally, it was in the previous contemplation of form and emptiness, which is the phenomena and principle, and the reason it did not receive this name is because of four meanings. First, although there is form and phenomena to accomplish the principle of emptiness, the unobstructed interpenetration of form and emptiness is the reason for True Emptiness. Second, the principle only clarifies emptiness, and does not manifest the wonderful existence of True Thusness. Third, it is extinguished and cut off without reliance, abandoning the phenomena and principle. Fourth, it does not widely manifest the aspect of unobstructedness, acting without acting, having no characteristics and yet having characteristics, the aspects of all phenomena and principle brightly appearing, unobstructed, and doubly fused. Because of the above four meanings, it did not receive this name, and only receives it here. Therefore, it is now marked, possessing the root of the ten gates of unobstructedness below, interpenetrating and fusing, which is to encompass the ten gates below, like a great furnace casting many images. Therefore, 'rong' (镕) is called 'rongye' (镕冶), which is the meaning of the initial melting. 'Rong' (融) is called 'ronghe' (融合), which is the meaning of the final accomplishment of oneness. Using principle to cast phenomena, phenomena and principle fuse, two but not two. Ten gates.
門無礙其義同故。又此二理事镕融。別當相遍。相遍互融故。次存即九十。真理非事。事法非理。二相存故。亡即七八。真理即事。事法即理。廢己同他。各自泯故。逆即五六。真理奪事。理逆事也。事能隱理。事逆理故。順即三四。依理成事理順事也。事能顯理事順理也。故此二句總攝十門。方為事理無礙之義成第二觀。然事理無礙方是所觀觀之於心即名能觀。此觀別說觀事俗觀。觀理真觀。觀事理無礙成中道觀。又觀事兼悲。觀理是智。此二無礙。即悲智相導成無住行。亦即假空中道觀耳。
觀曰。一理遍於事門。謂能遍之理性無分限。所遍之事分位差別。一一事中理皆全遍非是分遍。何以故。以彼真理不可分故。是故一一纖塵皆攝無邊真理無不圓足。
釋曰。此第一門。然下十門應即為十以釋二意。便總料揀故分五對。第一理事相遍對。第二理事相成對。第三理事相害對。第四理事相即對。第五理事相非對。亦名不即對。然此五對皆先明理。尊于理故。又皆相望。一三五七九以理望事。二四六八十以事望理。初對為二。先正釋。二料揀。前中二門。即分為二。今初也。文中有三。初標名。二謂能遍下。釋事理相性空。真理一相無相。故不可分則無分限。事約緣起故分位萬差。三一一事中下。釋其遍
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『門無礙』的意義與此相同。而且這兩種理事相互融合，彼此互相周遍，互相融合。其次，『存』即九十，真理不是事相，事法不是真理，兩種相狀並存的緣故。『亡』即七八，真理就是事相，事法就是真理，捨棄自己而與他相同，各自泯滅的緣故。『逆』即五六，真理違背事相，是理違背事相；事相能夠隱藏真理，是事相違背真理的緣故。『順』即三四，依理成就事相，是理順應事相；事相能夠顯現真理，是事相順應真理的緣故。』因此這兩句話總括了十門，才成為事理無礙的意義，成就第二觀。然而事理無礙才是所觀的境界，在心中觀想就稱為能觀。這個觀想分別來說，觀事是俗諦觀，觀理是真諦觀，觀事理無礙成就中道觀。而且觀事兼具悲心，觀理是智慧，這二者無礙，就是悲智相互引導，成就無住行，也就是假、空、中道觀。 觀想說：『一理周遍於事門』，意思是能周遍的理性沒有分界限，所周遍的事相分位有差別，每一個事相中，理都完全周遍，不是部分周遍。為什麼呢？因為那個真理不可分割的緣故。因此，每一個細微的塵埃都包含著無邊的真理，沒有不圓滿具足的。 解釋說：這是第一門。然而下面的十門應該就作為十來解釋二種意義，就總括地選擇，所以分為五對。第一是理事相遍對，第二是理事相成對，第三是理事相害對，第四是理事相即對，第五是理事相非對，也叫不即對。然而這五對都先說明理，因為尊重理的緣故。而且都是相互觀望，一三五七九是以理觀望事，二四六八十是以事觀望理。初對分為二，先是正式解釋，二是簡擇。前面中間的二門，即分為二，現在是開始。文中有三，首先是標明名稱，其次是『謂能遍下』，解釋事理相性空，真理一相無相，所以不可分割，就沒有分界限。事相是依據緣起，所以分位有萬種差別。第三是『一一事中下』，解釋它的周遍。
【English Translation】 English version: The meaning of 'no obstruction between doors' is the same as this. Moreover, these two principles and phenomena (理事 lǐshì) are mutually fused, pervading each other, and interpenetrating. Next, 'existence' (存 cún) is equivalent to nine and ten, because true principle (真理 zhēnlǐ) is not phenomena (事相 shìxiàng), and phenomena are not principle; the two aspects coexist. 'Non-existence' (亡 wáng) is equivalent to seven and eight, because true principle is phenomena, and phenomena are principle; abandoning oneself and becoming the same as others, each disappears. 'Opposition' (逆 nì) is equivalent to five and six, because true principle opposes phenomena, principle opposes phenomena; phenomena can conceal principle, phenomena oppose principle. 'Compliance' (順 shùn) is equivalent to three and four, because relying on principle to accomplish phenomena, principle complies with phenomena; phenomena can reveal principle, phenomena comply with principle. Therefore, these two sentences encompass all ten doors, and only then does the meaning of no obstruction between principles and phenomena become complete, accomplishing the second contemplation. However, no obstruction between principles and phenomena is the object of contemplation, and contemplating it in the mind is called the ability to contemplate. This contemplation, separately speaking, contemplating phenomena is the mundane truth contemplation, contemplating principle is the ultimate truth contemplation, and contemplating no obstruction between principles and phenomena accomplishes the middle way contemplation. Moreover, contemplating phenomena includes compassion, contemplating principle is wisdom, and the no obstruction between these two is the mutual guidance of compassion and wisdom, accomplishing unattached practice, which is also the contemplation of emptiness, falsity, and the middle way. The contemplation says: 'One principle pervades the door of phenomena,' meaning that the principle that can pervade has no boundaries, and the divisions of the phenomena that are pervaded are different. In each phenomenon, the principle is completely pervasive, not partially pervasive. Why? Because that true principle cannot be divided. Therefore, each tiny dust particle contains boundless true principle, without being incomplete. The explanation says: This is the first door. However, the following ten doors should be used as ten to explain the two meanings, and then comprehensively select, so they are divided into five pairs. The first is the pair of principle and phenomena mutually pervading, the second is the pair of principle and phenomena mutually accomplishing, the third is the pair of principle and phenomena mutually harming, the fourth is the pair of principle and phenomena mutually identical, and the fifth is the pair of principle and phenomena mutually non-identical, also called non-identical. However, these five pairs all first explain principle, because they respect principle. Moreover, they are all mutually regarded, one, three, five, seven, and nine regard phenomena from the perspective of principle, and two, four, six, eight, and ten regard principle from the perspective of phenomena. The first pair is divided into two, first the formal explanation, and second the selection. The previous middle two doors are divided into two, and now it is the beginning. There are three parts in the text, first the naming, second 'meaning the ability to pervade below,' explaining the emptiness of the characteristics of principle and phenomena, the true principle is one characteristic and no characteristic, so it cannot be divided, and there are no boundaries. Phenomena are based on dependent origination, so the divisions have ten thousand differences. Third is 'in each phenomenon below,' explaining its pervasiveness.
相理非事外。故要遍事。經云。法性遍在一切處一切眾生及國土故。次何以下。釋全遍所由。謂要全遍者。若不全遍理可分故。非如浮雲遍滿虛空隨方可分故。是故下。別指一事顯其遍相。以塵含理顯理全遍。
觀曰。二事遍於理門。謂能遍之事是有分限。所遍之理要無分限。此有分限之事。于無分限之理。全同非分同。何以故。以事無體還如理故。是故一塵不壞而遍法界也。如一塵。一切法亦然思之。
釋曰。文亦有三。初標。二謂能遍下。示能所相。三此有分下。明遍理之相。于中初正明。以全同名遍。次何以下。釋同所以。有分之事全如理故。若不遍同事有別體。次是故下。結示遍相。后如一塵下。例一切法。此對為下四對之本。由相遍故。有相成等。
觀曰。此全遍門超情難見。非世喻能況。
釋曰。第三料揀上二門也。于中三。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。即相無相五目難睹。其容全理之事。世法何能為喻。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 相不是在事之外的。所以需要周遍一切事。經書上說：『法性（Dharmata，萬法的本性）遍在於一切處、一切眾生以及國土中。』接下來『次何以下』，解釋完全周遍的原因。如果不能完全周遍，道理就可以被分割。不像浮雲遍滿虛空，可以隨意分割。所以下面特別指出一件事來顯示它的周遍之相，用一粒塵土包含道理來顯示道理的完全周遍。
觀曰：兩件事周遍于理的層面。能周遍的事物是有分界限的，所周遍的理必須沒有分界限。這有分界限的事物，對於沒有分界限的理，是完全相同還是部分相同？因為事物沒有自體，還如理一樣。所以一粒塵土不會壞滅而周遍法界（Dharmadhatu，宇宙萬有）。如同一粒塵土，一切法也是這樣，思考它。
釋曰：文也有三部分。首先是標示。其次是『二謂能遍下』，顯示能遍和所遍的相互關係。第三是『此有分下』，闡明周遍于理的相狀。其中首先正面闡明，用完全相同來命名為周遍。其次『次何以下』，解釋相同的原因。有分界的事物完全如理一樣。如果不周遍，事和理就有區別的本體。其次『是故下』，總結顯示周遍的相狀。最後『后如一塵下』，用一粒塵土來比喻一切法。這相對為下面四對的基礎。由於相的周遍，才有相的成就等等。
觀曰：這完全周遍的法門超越了情識，難以見到，不是世間的比喻能夠比擬的。
釋曰：第三是簡擇上面兩個法門。其中有三部分。首先是標示難以比喻。其次是借用比喻來特別顯示。第三是問答解釋。現在是第一部分。說難以見到，是因為道理深奧。有版本說：『離見離見』，就是超越情識的意思。說難以見到，是容許有見到理的可能性。下面『理故下』，借用比喻來闡明難以比喻。說是世間的比喻難以比喻。說是難以比喻，是因為事和理的相狀不同而互相周遍。理周遍於事，所以無相完全在相中。事周遍于理，所以一粒塵土就沒有邊際。一粒塵土既然沒有邊際，哪裡有法能夠符合情識？無相完全在相中，至理何曾懸遠？即相無相，五眼難以看到。像容納完全的理的事，世間法怎麼能夠作為比喻呢？
【English Translation】 English version: The aspect is not outside of the event. Therefore, it needs to be pervasive in all events. The sutra says: 'Dharmata (the nature of all dharmas) is pervasive in all places, all sentient beings, and all lands.' Next, '次何以下' explains the reason for complete pervasiveness. If it cannot be completely pervasive, the principle can be divided. It is not like floating clouds filling the void, which can be divided at will. Therefore, below, a specific event is pointed out to show its pervasive aspect, using a dust particle containing the principle to show the complete pervasiveness of the principle.
Observation: Two things are pervasive at the level of principle. The thing that can pervade has boundaries, and the principle that is pervaded must have no boundaries. Is this thing with boundaries completely the same or partially the same as the principle without boundaries? Because things have no self-nature and are still like the principle. Therefore, a dust particle does not decay but pervades the Dharmadhatu (the universe and all its phenomena). Like a dust particle, all dharmas are also like this, contemplate it.
Explanation: The text also has three parts. First is the indication. Second is '二謂能遍下', showing the relationship between what can pervade and what is pervaded. Third is '此有分下', clarifying the aspect of pervasiveness in principle. Among them, the first is to clarify positively, using complete sameness to name pervasiveness. The second is '次何以下', explaining the reason for sameness. Things with boundaries are completely like the principle. If it is not pervasive, things and principles have different entities. The second is '是故下', summarizing and showing the aspect of pervasiveness. Finally, '后如一塵下', using a dust particle to illustrate all dharmas. This opposition is the basis for the following four oppositions. Because of the pervasiveness of the aspect, there is the accomplishment of the aspect, and so on.
Observation: This gate of complete pervasiveness transcends emotions and is difficult to see, and cannot be compared to worldly metaphors.
Explanation: The third is to discern the above two gates. There are three parts in it. The first is to indicate that it is difficult to metaphor. The second is to use metaphors to show it specially. The third is question and answer explanation. Now is the first part. Saying it is difficult to see is because the principle is profound. Some versions say: '離見離見', which means transcending emotions. Saying it is difficult to see is to allow the possibility of seeing the principle. Below '理故下', use metaphors to clarify that it is difficult to metaphor. Saying that worldly metaphors are difficult to metaphor. Saying that it is difficult to metaphor is because the aspects of things and principles are different and pervade each other. The principle pervades things, so the formless is completely in the form. Things pervade the principle, so a dust particle has no boundaries. Since a dust particle has no boundaries, where is the dharma that can conform to emotions? The formless is completely in the form, how far away has the ultimate principle ever been? The form and the formless are difficult to see with the five eyes. How can worldly dharmas be used as metaphors for things that contain the complete principle?
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。
觀曰。如全大海在一波中而海非小。如一小波匝于大海而波非大。同時全遍於諸波而海非異。俱時各匝于大海而波非一。又大海全遍一波時。不妨舉體全遍於諸波。一波全匝大海時。諸波亦各全匝。互不相礙思之。
釋曰。第二寄喻以明也。既無可喻而舉喻者。借其分喻通其玄意。令諸達識因小見大亡言領旨。文有三重無礙。初以大海對一波明大小無礙。此舉喻上事理相遍二義竟也。文但舉喻略無法合。若總相合以海喻理。以波喻事。配文可解。然意猶難見。大海何得全在一波。以海無二故。一理何得全在於一事。以理無二故。一波何以全匝大海。以同海故。一塵何以全遍於理。事同理故。一同時全遍下。以一海對諸波明一異無礙。約法。即一理對於諸事。以辯無礙。又上即非大非小。此即非一非異。其一異等相至下問答自明所以。三又大海全遍一波下。以大海雙對一波諸波。互望齊遍無礙。約法。即以一理。對一事多事。相望齊遍無礙。
觀曰。問理既全體遍一塵。何故非小。既不同塵而小。何得說為全體遍於一塵。又一塵全匝于理性。何故非大。若不同理而廣大。何得全遍於理性。既
【現代漢語翻譯】 故經中說：『譬如法界（Dharmadhatu，一切法的本體）遍佈一切處，但不能執著于任何可見之物而認為它就是一切。』又說：『三界（Trailokya，欲界、色界、無色界）有無的一切法，都不能用來比喻它。』可見，用大海來比喻，也只是取其一部分相似之處而已。
觀：就像整個大海存在於一個波浪之中，但大海並沒有因此變小；就像一個小波浪環繞著整個大海，但波浪並沒有因此變大。大海同時完全遍佈于所有波浪之中，但大海並沒有因此而不同；所有波浪同時各自環繞著大海，但波浪並沒有因此而相同。而且，當大海完全遍佈於一個波浪時，不妨礙它整體完全遍佈于所有波浪。一個波浪完全環繞大海時，所有波浪也各自完全環繞大海。彼此互不相礙，仔細思考。
釋：第二部分，借用比喻來闡明。既然沒有什麼可以完全比喻，而又舉出比喻，那是借用其部分相似之處來溝通玄妙的意義，使那些通達事理的人能夠從小處看到大處，忘卻言語而領會宗旨。文中有三重無礙。首先，用大海對應一個波浪，來闡明大小無礙。這舉出了比喻中事理相互遍佈的兩種含義。文中只是舉出比喻，省略了法理的結合。如果總的來說，用大海比喻理，用波浪比喻事，來配合文意，可以解釋。然而，其意仍然難以理解。大海怎麼能夠完全存在於一個波浪之中呢？因為大海沒有分別。一個理怎麼能夠完全存在於一件事物之中呢？因為理沒有分別。一個波浪為什麼能夠完全環繞大海呢？因為它與大海相同。一粒微塵為什麼能夠完全遍佈于理呢？因為事與理相同。其次，『一同時全遍下』，用一個大海對應多個波浪，來闡明一異無礙。就法而言，就是一理對應于諸事，用來辯論無礙。而且，上面說既非大也非小，這裡說既非一也非異。其一異等相互相聯繫，到下面的問答中自然會明白其所以然。第三，『又大海全遍一波下』，用大海同時對應一個波浪和多個波浪，相互觀望，齊頭並進，沒有阻礙。就法而言，就是用一理，對應一事和多事，相互觀望，齊頭並進，沒有阻礙。
觀：問：理既然全體遍佈於一粒微塵，為什麼不能說是小的呢？既然與微塵不同而小，又怎麼能說是全體遍佈於一粒微塵呢？又，一粒微塵完全環繞于理性，為什麼不能說是大的呢？如果與理不同而廣大，又怎麼能完全遍佈于理性呢？既然
【English Translation】 The sutra says: 'For example, the Dharmadhatu (the essence of all dharmas) pervades everything, but one should not grasp at any visible thing and consider it to be everything.' It also says: 'All dharmas, whether existent or nonexistent, in the three realms (Trailokya, the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm), cannot be used as a metaphor for it.' Thus, using the ocean as a metaphor only captures a partial resemblance.
Observation: Just as the entire ocean is present in a single wave, yet the ocean does not become smaller; just as a small wave encompasses the entire ocean, yet the wave does not become larger. The ocean simultaneously and completely pervades all waves, yet the ocean does not become different; all waves simultaneously and individually encompass the ocean, yet the waves do not become the same. Moreover, when the ocean completely pervades a single wave, it does not prevent it from completely pervading all waves in its entirety. When a wave completely encompasses the ocean, all waves also individually completely encompass the ocean. They do not obstruct each other. Contemplate this carefully.
Explanation: The second part uses a metaphor to clarify. Since there is nothing that can perfectly serve as a metaphor, yet a metaphor is used, it is to borrow its partial resemblance to communicate the profound meaning, enabling those who understand the principles to see the great from the small, forget words, and grasp the essence. There are three aspects of non-obstruction in the text. First, using the ocean to correspond to a single wave clarifies the non-obstruction of size. This illustrates the two meanings of mutual pervasion of principle and phenomena in the metaphor. The text only presents the metaphor, omitting the combination with the Dharma. If, in general, the ocean is used to represent principle and the wave to represent phenomena, it can be explained in accordance with the text. However, its meaning is still difficult to understand. How can the ocean be completely present in a single wave? Because the ocean has no distinctions. How can a principle be completely present in a single phenomenon? Because the principle has no distinctions. Why can a wave completely encompass the ocean? Because it is the same as the ocean. Why can a dust mote completely pervade the principle? Because phenomena are the same as principle. Second, 'simultaneously and completely pervades below,' using one ocean to correspond to multiple waves clarifies the non-obstruction of oneness and difference. In terms of the Dharma, it is one principle corresponding to multiple phenomena, used to argue for non-obstruction. Moreover, the above says neither large nor small, and this says neither one nor different. The mutual relationship of oneness and difference will naturally become clear in the questions and answers below. Third, 'also the ocean completely pervades a wave below,' using the ocean to simultaneously correspond to one wave and multiple waves, observing each other, advancing together, without obstruction. In terms of the Dharma, it is using one principle to correspond to one phenomenon and multiple phenomena, observing each other, advancing together, without obstruction.
Observation: Question: Since the principle completely pervades a dust mote in its entirety, why can't it be said to be small? Since it is different from the dust mote and small, how can it be said to completely pervade a dust mote in its entirety? Also, since a dust mote completely encompasses the nature of principle, why can't it be said to be large? If it is different from the principle and vast, how can it completely pervade the nature of principle? Since
成矛盾。義極相違。
釋曰。第三問答解釋。雙釋法喻而其文中但就法說。例使曉喻。上喻之中文有三節。今但合為兩重問答。一問牒大小而答兼一異。二對前第三以大海雙對一波諸波互望齊遍無礙為問。前中先問后答。今初問也。文中二。先以理望事問。約喻。即前大海全在一波。而海非小故云理既全體遍等。即以遍難小既不同塵而小下。以非小難遍二。又一塵全匝下。約事望理難。先以一塵難大。次云若不同理而廣大下。以非廣難遍。約喻。即前一波全遍於大海而波非大。既成矛盾下。結難。矛者[金*(穴/囚/?)]也。盾者排也。昔人雙賣二事。嘆盾即云。矛刺不入。嘆矛即云。能穿十重之盾。買者云。我買汝矛還刺汝盾。豈不傷哉。意明二語互相違。
觀曰。答理事相望各非一異。故得全收而不壞本位。
釋曰。此下答中二。先雙標。后雙釋。今即初也。上問但問大小。今正答一異兼于大小。由於理事二法相望。故云各非一異。
觀曰。先理望事有其四句。一真理與事非異故。真理全體在一事中。二真理與事非一故。理性恒無邊際。三以非一即是非異故。無邊理性全在一塵。四以非異即是非一故。一塵理性無有分限。
釋曰。此釋理望事。四句中。前二正明遍塵非小之相
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
互相矛盾，意義極其相違背。
解釋：第三個問答是解釋。同時解釋了法和比喻，但文中的解釋側重於法，用比喻來幫助理解。之前的比喻部分有三個小節，現在合併爲兩個問答。第一個問答是根據大小來提問，回答則兼顧了一和異。第二個問答是針對前面第三個問題，用大海和一波的關係來比喻，所有的波浪互相觀望，達到齊遍無礙的狀態。前面一個問答是先提問后回答，現在是開始提問。文中分為兩部分。第一部分，先從理的角度來看待事，用比喻來說明。就像之前說的大海完全在一波之中，但海不是小的，所以說理是全體遍等的。然後用遍來反駁小，既然不同於塵埃，而小在下面。用非小來反駁遍。第二部分，又說一塵完全周匝，從事的角度來看待理來反駁。先用一塵來反駁大。接著說如果不同於理，而廣大在下面。用非廣來反駁遍。用比喻來說，就像之前說的一波完全遍佈于大海，但波不是大的。既然已經形成了矛盾，就總結這個反駁。矛，是一種兵器。盾，是用來防禦的。以前有人同時賣矛和盾，誇讚盾的時候就說，任何矛都刺不穿它。誇讚矛的時候就說，能穿透十層盾。買的人說，我買你的矛來刺你的盾，那會怎麼樣呢？意思是說這兩句話互相矛盾。
觀察：回答是理事相互觀望，各自不是一也不是異，所以能夠全部包含而不破壞原來的位置。
解釋：下面是回答，分為兩部分。先是雙重標明，然後是雙重解釋。現在是第一部分。上面的提問只是問大小，現在正式回答一異，並且兼顧大小。由於理事這兩種法相互觀望，所以說各自不是一也不是異。
觀察：先從理的角度來看待事，有四句話。第一，真理與事不是異，所以真理全體在一件事中。第二，真理與事不是一，所以理性永遠沒有邊際。第三，因為不是一，所以就不是異，所以無邊的理性完全在一粒塵埃中。第四，因為不是異，所以就不是一，所以一粒塵埃的理性沒有分限。
解釋：這裡解釋從理的角度來看待事。在四句話中，前兩句是正面說明遍塵不是小的樣子。
【English Translation】 English version:
They contradict each other, and their meanings are extremely contradictory.
Explanation: The third question and answer is an explanation. It explains both the Dharma and the analogy, but the explanation in the text focuses on the Dharma, using the analogy to help understanding. The previous analogy section has three subsections, now combined into two questions and answers. The first question and answer is based on size, and the answer takes into account both oneness and difference. The second question and answer is in response to the previous third question, using the relationship between the ocean and a wave as an analogy, where all the waves look at each other, achieving a state of complete pervasiveness and unobstructedness. The previous question and answer was question first, then answer, now it is the beginning of the question. The text is divided into two parts. The first part, first looks at things from the perspective of principle, using analogy to illustrate. Just like the previous saying that the ocean is completely in one wave, but the ocean is not small, so it is said that the principle is completely pervasive and equal. Then use pervasiveness to refute smallness, since it is different from dust, and smallness is below. Use non-smallness to refute pervasiveness. The second part, again says that one dust is completely encompassing, looking at principle from the perspective of things to refute. First use one dust to refute bigness. Then say if it is different from principle, and vastness is below. Use non-vastness to refute pervasiveness. Using analogy, it is like the previous saying that one wave is completely pervasive in the ocean, but the wave is not big. Since a contradiction has been formed, summarize this refutation. A 'spear' is a weapon. A 'shield' is used for defense. In the past, someone sold both spears and shields at the same time, praising the shield by saying that no spear could pierce it. Praising the spear by saying that it could pierce ten layers of shields. The buyer said, 'I will buy your spear to pierce your shield, what will happen?' The meaning is that these two sentences contradict each other.
Observation: The answer is that principle and phenomena look at each other, each is neither one nor different, so they can be fully contained without destroying the original position.
Explanation: Below is the answer, divided into two parts. First is the double indication, then the double explanation. Now is the first part. The above question only asked about size, now formally answers oneness and difference, and also takes into account size. Because principle and phenomena these two Dharmas look at each other, it is said that each is neither one nor different.
Observation: First look at things from the perspective of principle, there are four sentences. First, truth and phenomena are not different, so the whole truth is in one thing. Second, truth and phenomena are not one, so rationality is forever without boundaries. Third, because it is not one, so it is not different, so boundless rationality is completely in one grain of dust. Fourth, because it is not different, so it is not one, so the rationality of one grain of dust has no limits.
Explanation: Here explains looking at things from the perspective of principle. In the four sentences, the first two sentences are a positive explanation of the appearance of pervasive dust not being small.
。初句遍塵。第二句非小。其三四二句遍酬其難。難意云。遍塵非小二義相違。何得互通。今第三句明大理遍在一塵。第四句明雖遍非小。其無分限則非小也。即雙答遍塵難。非小及非小難遍一塵難。雖兩假但一相遍耳。
華嚴法界玄鏡捲上 大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1883 華嚴法界玄鏡
華嚴法界玄鏡卷下
唐清涼山大華嚴寺沙門澄觀述
觀曰。次以事望理亦有四句者。一事法與理非異故。一塵全匝于理性。二事法與理非一故。不壞於一塵。三以非一即非異故。一小塵匝無邊真理。四以非異即非一故。匝無邊理而塵不大。思之。
釋曰。答事望理。即答前一塵遍理何故非大等。亦初二句正明遍理非大之相。初句一塵遍理。第二句明其非大。亦三四句正答相違之難。亦第三句明一小塵遍於大理。亦第四句雖遍於理而塵不大。但明事理非一非異。兩義難通。
觀曰。問無邊理性全遍一塵時。外諸事處。為有理性。為無理性。若塵外有理。則非全體遍一塵。若塵外無理。則非全體遍一切事。義甚相違。
釋曰。此下第二番對。前以大海雙對一波諸波。互望齊遍無礙之喻而為問答。今此問也。彼前喻云。又大海全遍一波時。不妨舉體全遍於諸波一波。全遍大海時。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：第一句說的是理體周遍于微塵。第二句說的是理體並非渺小。第三句和第四句這兩句是爲了迴應之前的疑問。疑問是：『周遍于微塵』和『並非渺小』這兩種含義是相互矛盾的，怎麼能夠互通呢？』現在的第三句說明廣大的理體周遍於一粒微塵之中。第四句說明雖然周遍，但並非渺小，它的無限性決定了它不是渺小的。這實際上是同時回答了『周遍于微塵』的疑問，以及『並非渺小卻周遍於一塵』的疑問。雖然是兩種假設，但實際上只是理體的一種周遍性而已。
《華嚴法界玄鏡》捲上 大正藏第45冊 No. 1883 《華嚴法界玄鏡》
《華嚴法界玄鏡》卷下
唐 清涼山大華嚴寺沙門 澄觀（Chengguan） 述
澄觀（Chengguan）說：接下來從現象觀察理體，也有四句。第一句是現象與理體並非不同，所以一粒微塵完全包含著理性。第二句是現象與理體並非相同，所以不會破壞一粒微塵的本性。第三句是因為『非一』也就是『非異』，所以一粒微小的微塵包含著無邊的真理。第四句是因為『非異』也就是『非一』，所以包含著無邊的真理，而微塵本身並沒有變大。仔細思考這些。
解釋：這是回答從現象觀察理體的問題，也就是回答前面『一粒微塵周遍理體，為什麼沒有變大』等問題。第一句和第二句正是說明周遍理體而沒有變大的狀態。第一句說一粒微塵周遍理體。第二句說明微塵並沒有因此變大。第三句和第四句也是爲了正面回答相互矛盾的疑問。第三句說明一粒微小的微塵周遍于廣大的理體。第四句說明雖然周遍于理體，但微塵本身並沒有變大。這只是說明事相和理體並非相同也並非相異，這兩種含義難以貫通。
澄觀（Chengguan）說：問：當無邊的理性完全周遍於一粒微塵時，微塵之外的其他事物，是有理性還是沒有理性？如果微塵之外有理性，那麼就不是全體周遍於一粒微塵。如果微塵之外沒有理性，那麼就不是全體周遍於一切事物。這兩種說法含義非常矛盾。
解釋：這是下面的第二輪對答。前面是用大海與一個波浪以及眾多波浪相互對應，用相互觀察、齊頭並進、沒有阻礙的比喻來進行問答。現在是這個提問。前面那個比喻說：『當大海完全周遍於一個波浪時，不妨礙整體完全周遍于其他的波浪。一個波浪完全周遍大海時。』
【English Translation】 English version: The first sentence states that the principle pervades dust. The second sentence states that the principle is not small. The third and fourth sentences respond to the previous question. The question is: 'Pervading dust' and 'not being small' are contradictory meanings, how can they be interconnected?' The third sentence now explains that the great principle pervades a single dust particle. The fourth sentence explains that although it pervades, it is not small; its boundlessness determines that it is not small. This actually answers the question of 'pervading dust' and the question of 'not being small yet pervading a single dust particle' simultaneously. Although there are two assumptions, in reality, it is only one pervasiveness of the principle.
《Huayan Dharma Realm Profound Mirror》 Volume 1 Taisho Tripitaka Volume 45 No. 1883 《Huayan Dharma Realm Profound Mirror》
《Huayan Dharma Realm Profound Mirror》 Volume 2
Narrated by Shramana Chengguan (澄觀), of Great Huayan Temple on Mount Qingliang, Tang Dynasty
Chengguan (澄觀) says: Next, observing the principle from phenomena also has four sentences. The first sentence is that phenomena and principle are not different, so a single dust particle completely contains rationality. The second sentence is that phenomena and principle are not the same, so it does not destroy the nature of a single dust particle. The third sentence is because 'not one' is also 'not different,' so a tiny dust particle contains boundless truth. The fourth sentence is because 'not different' is also 'not one,' so it contains boundless truth, but the dust particle itself does not become larger. Think carefully about these.
Explanation: This is answering the question of observing the principle from phenomena, which is answering the previous question of 'a single dust particle pervades the principle, why does it not become larger,' etc. The first and second sentences precisely explain the state of pervading the principle without becoming larger. The first sentence says a single dust particle pervades the principle. The second sentence explains that the dust particle does not become larger because of this. The third and fourth sentences also directly answer the contradictory question. The third sentence explains that a tiny dust particle pervades the vast principle. The fourth sentence explains that although it pervades the principle, the dust particle itself does not become larger. This only explains that phenomena and principle are neither the same nor different, and these two meanings are difficult to connect.
Chengguan (澄觀) says: Question: When boundless rationality completely pervades a single dust particle, do other things outside the dust particle have rationality or not? If there is rationality outside the dust particle, then it is not the whole pervading a single dust particle. If there is no rationality outside the dust particle, then it is not the whole pervading all things. These two statements have very contradictory meanings.
Explanation: This is the second round of answers below. Previously, the great sea was corresponded with a wave and many waves, and the analogy of mutual observation, keeping pace, and no obstruction was used for questions and answers. Now is this question. The previous analogy said: 'When the great sea completely pervades a wave, it does not prevent the whole from completely pervading other waves. When a wave completely pervades the great sea.'
諸波亦各全遍互不相礙。文中先正問。后答。若塵外有下。結成妨難。若約喻問應云。大海全遍一波時。余諸波處。為有大海。為無大海。若波外有海。則非全體遍一波。若波外無海。則非全體遍一切波。對難文可知。
觀曰。答以一理性融故。多事無礙故。故得全在內而全在外。無障無礙。是故各有四句。
釋曰。此下答中文則雙標二門。一理性融故。標約理四句。多事無礙故。標約事四句。余可知。
觀曰。先就理四句者。一以理性全體在一切事中時。不礙全體在一塵處。是故在外即在內。二全體在一塵中時。不礙全體在餘事處。是故在內即在外。三以無二之性。各全在一切中故。是故亦在內亦在外。四以無二之性非一切故。是故非內非外。前三句明與一切法非異。此之一句明與一切法非一。良為非一非異故。內外無礙。
釋曰。此就理中文一先正明。后結與礙。今初。即答前無邊理性。全遍一塵時。外諸事處。為有理性。為無理性。今第二句正答明余處有。即釋喻中大海全遍一波時。不妨舉體全遍於諸波。其第一句。兼明在一切中時。亦全在一塵。前略無問。若為問者。應云理性全在諸法時。為全在一塵不。今此明全在一塵。以遍一切豈揀一塵。第三句明其總遍內外。此是恒理故亦無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 諸波（wave）亦各自完全遍佈，互相不產生妨礙。文中先提出問題，然後解答。如果說塵埃之外有理性，就形成了妨礙和困難。如果用比喻來問，應該說：『大海完全遍佈於一個波浪時，其餘的波浪處，是有大海，還是沒有大海？』如果波浪之外有大海，就不是全體遍佈於一個波浪；如果波浪之外沒有大海，就不是全體遍佈於一切波浪。』對照這些妨難的文字就可以理解了。
觀曰：用一個理性融合的緣故，多種事物沒有妨礙的緣故，所以能夠全體在內而又全體在外，沒有阻礙。因此各有四句。
釋曰：下面回答中文則雙重標明理和事二門。『一理性融故』，標明約理的四句；『多事無礙故』，標明約事的四句。其餘可以類推得知。
觀曰：先就理的四句來說，一是理性全體在一切事物中時，不妨礙全體在一個塵埃處。所以，在外即在內。二是全體在一個塵埃中時，不妨礙全體在其餘事物處。所以，在內即在外。三是以無二的性質，各自全體在一切之中，所以，也在內也在外。四是以無二的性質並非一切，所以，非內非外。前三句說明與一切法並非相異，這第四句說明與一切法並非同一。正因為非一非異，所以內外沒有妨礙。
釋曰：這是就理中文，先正面闡明，后總結與妨礙。現在開始。即回答前面所說的無邊理性，完全遍佈於一個塵埃時，外面的諸事物處，是有理性，還是沒有理性？現在第二句正面回答，說明其餘處有理性。即解釋比喻中大海完全遍佈於一個波浪時，不妨礙整體完全遍佈于各個波浪。第一句，兼明在一切事物中時，也完全在一個塵埃中。前面略去了提問。如果要提問，應該說：『理性完全在諸法時，是否完全在一個塵埃中？』現在這裡說明完全在一個塵埃中，因為遍佈一切，怎麼會捨棄一個塵埃呢？第三句說明其總體遍佈內外，這是永恒的道理，所以也沒有妨礙。
【English Translation】 English version Each wave (Zhubo) is also completely and universally present, without hindering each other. The text first poses a question and then answers it. If there is reason outside of dust, it creates hindrance and difficulty. If asking with a metaphor, it should be said: 'When the great ocean is completely present in one wave, in the places of the remaining waves, is there the great ocean, or is there no great ocean?' If there is the ocean outside the wave, then it is not the whole being present in one wave; if there is no ocean outside the wave, then it is not the whole being present in all waves.' Understanding can be gained by contrasting these difficult points.
Observation: Because of the fusion of one principle (rationality), and because multiple things are without obstruction, it is possible to be entirely within and entirely without, without hindrance. Therefore, each has four statements.
Explanation: The following answer in the Chinese text doubly marks the two gates of principle and phenomena. 'Because of the fusion of one principle (rationality),' marks the four statements about principle; 'Because multiple things are without obstruction,' marks the four statements about phenomena. The rest can be inferred.
Observation: First, regarding the four statements about principle, one is that when the entirety of principle is in all things, it does not hinder the entirety from being in one speck of dust. Therefore, being outside is being inside. Second, when the entirety is in one speck of dust, it does not hinder the entirety from being in the remaining things. Therefore, being inside is being outside. Third, because of the nature of non-duality, each is entirely in everything, therefore, it is also inside and also outside. Fourth, because the nature of non-duality is not everything, therefore, it is neither inside nor outside. The first three statements clarify that it is not different from all dharmas, and this fourth statement clarifies that it is not the same as all dharmas. Precisely because it is neither one nor different, there is no obstruction between inside and outside.
Explanation: This is about the principle in the Chinese text, first directly clarifying, then summarizing with obstruction. Now beginning. It answers the previously mentioned boundless principle (rationality), when completely present in one speck of dust, in the places of the external things, is there principle, or is there no principle? Now the second statement directly answers, clarifying that there is principle in the remaining places. It explains that in the metaphor, when the great ocean is completely present in one wave, it does not hinder the whole body from being completely present in each wave. The first statement also clarifies that when it is in all things, it is also completely in one speck of dust. The question was omitted earlier. If one were to ask, it should be said: 'When principle is completely in all dharmas, is it completely in one speck of dust?' Now here it clarifies that it is completely in one speck of dust, because it pervades everything, how could it abandon one speck of dust? The third statement clarifies its overall pervasiveness inside and outside, this is an eternal principle, so there is also no obstruction.
問。若問應云爲齊遍不。第四句雙非。亦非遍義。故不為問。義理無妨故。具出四句。后前三下。結成無礙。亦酬前結難義甚相違之言。內外無礙。故不相違。
觀曰。次就事四句者。一一事全匝于理時。不礙一切事法亦全匝。是故在內即在外。二一切事法各匝于理時。不礙一塵亦全匝。是故在外即在內。三以諸事法同時各匝故。是故全在內亦全在外。無有障礙。四以諸事法各不壞故。彼此相望非內亦非外。思之。
釋曰。此約事四句。前問所無。今影出之。前喻卻有喻云一波全匝大海時。諸波亦各全匝互不相礙。先舉一波以望于海故。是就事四句故。前標云多事無礙故。若別為問者。應問云一事遍於理時。餘事亦遍理不。若亦遍者。則理有重重。若不遍者。多事則不如理。故今答云多事如理同理。而遍則無重重。何以故。理無二故。但事同理即無分限。故云遍耳。于中第一句一事遍不礙多事遍。第二句多事遍不礙一事遍。第三句諸法同時遍。第四句一多之相歷然。問理望於事在一事為在內。在多事為在外。今事望理。以何為內外邪。答亦以一事為內。多事為外。若爾何異前門理望於事。答前門先舉理遍於事。名理望事。今門先舉事遍於理。名事望理。故分二門本意。但問多事遍理。一事遍不。前門答之
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 問：如果問『是否應說為齊遍（齊一而周遍）』，第四句是雙重否定，也不是周遍的意義，所以不應該這樣問。因為義理上沒有妨礙，所以完整地列出四句。後面『前三下』，總結成無礙，也是爲了迴應前面所說的『義理非常相違』的詰難。內外沒有障礙，所以不相違背。
觀：接下來就事相上的四句來說，每一件事完全周匝于理時，不妨礙一切事法也完全周匝。因此，在內即在外。第二，一切事法各自周匝于理時，不妨礙一塵也完全周匝。因此，在外即在內。第三，因為諸事法同時各自周匝，所以完全在內也完全在外，沒有障礙。第四，因為諸事法各自不壞，彼此相望，非內也非外。仔細思考。
釋：這是關於事相上的四句，是前面提問中所沒有的，現在隱約地顯現出來。前面的比喻中卻有這樣的比喻：『一波完全周匝于大海時，諸波也各自完全周匝，互相不妨礙。』先舉一波來比望于大海，所以是就事相上的四句來說的。前面標明『多事無礙』，如果另外提問，應該問『一事周遍于理時，其餘的事也周遍于理嗎？』如果也周遍，那麼理就有重重。如果不周遍，那麼多事就不如理。所以現在回答說，多事如理，同理而周遍，就沒有重重。為什麼呢？因為理沒有二。只是事同於理就沒有分限，所以說是周遍罷了。其中第一句，一事周遍不妨礙多事周遍。第二句，多事周遍不妨礙一事周遍。第三句，諸法同時周遍。第四句，一多之相歷歷分明。問：理比望於事，在一事為在內，在多事為在外。現在事比望于理，以什麼為內外呢？答：也以一事為內，多事為外。如果這樣，和前面理比望於事的提問有什麼不同？答：前一門先舉理周遍於事，名為理比望事。現在這一門先舉事周遍于理，名為事比望理。所以分為二門的本意。只是問多事周遍于理，一事周遍不周遍，前一門已經回答了。
【English Translation】 English version Question: If asked, should it be said to be 'uniformly pervasive'? The fourth statement is a double negative and does not convey the meaning of pervasiveness, so it should not be asked this way. Because there is no obstruction in the meaning, all four statements are fully presented. The subsequent 'first three below' concludes into non-obstruction, which also responds to the previous challenge of 'the meaning being very contradictory'. There is no obstruction internally or externally, so there is no contradiction.
Observation: Next, regarding the four statements on the level of phenomena, when each phenomenon fully encompasses the principle, it does not hinder all other phenomena from also fully encompassing it. Therefore, being inside is the same as being outside. Second, when all phenomena each encompass the principle, it does not hinder even a single dust particle from also fully encompassing it. Therefore, being outside is the same as being inside. Third, because all phenomena simultaneously encompass it, therefore being fully inside is also being fully outside, without any obstruction. Fourth, because all phenomena are not destroyed individually, looking at each other, they are neither inside nor outside. Ponder this carefully.
Explanation: These are the four statements regarding phenomena, which were not present in the previous question, and are now implicitly revealed. The previous analogy had a similar comparison: 'When one wave fully encompasses the great ocean, all waves also fully encompass it individually, without obstructing each other.' First, one wave is used to compare to the great ocean, so it pertains to the four statements on the level of phenomena. It was previously stated that 'multiple phenomena are without obstruction'. If asked separately, it should be asked, 'When one phenomenon pervades the principle, do the other phenomena also pervade the principle?' If they also pervade, then the principle would have multiple layers. If they do not pervade, then multiple phenomena would not be in accordance with the principle. Therefore, the answer now is that multiple phenomena are in accordance with the principle, and pervade the same principle, so there are no multiple layers. Why? Because the principle is not dual. Only when phenomena are in accordance with the principle are there no limitations, so it is said to be pervasive. Among them, the first statement is that one phenomenon pervading does not hinder multiple phenomena from pervading. The second statement is that multiple phenomena pervading does not hinder one phenomenon from pervading. The third statement is that all phenomena pervade simultaneously. The fourth statement is that the aspects of one and many are clearly distinct. Question: When the principle is compared to phenomena, is it considered inside when referring to one phenomenon, and outside when referring to multiple phenomena? Now, when phenomena are compared to the principle, what is considered inside and outside? Answer: One phenomenon is also considered inside, and multiple phenomena are considered outside. If so, how is it different from the previous question of the principle being compared to phenomena? Answer: The previous section first presents the principle pervading phenomena, which is called the principle being compared to phenomena. This section first presents phenomena pervading the principle, which is called phenomena being compared to the principle. Therefore, the original intention is to divide into two sections. It only asks whether multiple phenomena pervade the principle, and whether one phenomenon pervades or not, which the previous section has already answered.
。又問一事遍理。多事遍不。故用此門答之通相。皆以事為內外故。前門中但有一重之問。即第一句一事全遍理故在內。不礙一一亦遍理。故即在外。以其一多皆即理故。故云全遍非有多理與事遍也。故第四句云彼此相望非內非外。以前約理。第四但以性非一切。居然非內非外。今此約事望理。理無內外。何有非一非異。故言既不壞相。要須一事之中非是一切。一切事中非是一故。方成第四。故須彼此相望非內非外。已釋第一相遍對竟。
觀曰。三依理成事門。謂事無別體要因真理而得成立。以諸緣起皆無自性故。由無性理事方成故。如波攬水以成動。水望于波能成立故。依如來藏得有諸法。當知亦爾。思之。
釋曰。此下第二相成對。然下八門皆先標名。后謂字下解釋。下更不料揀。就此對中。先明理望於事即第三門。先正釋。后以諸下。出所以。所以有二。一由無性故。二真如隨緣故。而文有三。初明由無性成。中論云。以有空義故。一切法得成。若無空義者。一切則不成。大品云。若諸法不空。則無道無果。二如波下喻。喻有二義。一上喻無性。由水不守水自性故而能成波。二下喻。真如隨緣成故。謂若無水則無有波。若無真如依何法成。三依如來藏下。合於上喻真如隨緣。即勝鬘經云。依如來藏
【現代漢語翻譯】 又問一事是否普遍合理，多事是否普遍不合理？因此用這個法門來回答普遍的表相，都是因為以事為內外。前面的法門中只有一個問題的層面，即第一句『一事完全普遍合理』，所以在內；不妨礙『一一也普遍合理』，所以就在外。因為一和多都直接是理，所以說『完全普遍』並非是有多個理與事普遍。所以第四句說『彼此相望，非內非外』，前面是約理來說，第四句只是以性不是一切，顯然非內非外。現在這是約事望理，理沒有內外，哪裡會有非一非異？所以說既不破壞表相，就必須一事之中不是一切，一切事中不是一，才能成就第四句。所以必須彼此相望，非內非外。以上解釋了第一相遍對完畢。
觀察說：三、依理成事門，說的是事沒有別的自體，必須依靠真理才能成立。因為諸緣起都沒有自性。由於無自性，理事才能成立。比如波浪依靠水才能形成動態，水對於波浪能夠成立它。依靠如來藏（Tathagatagarbha，如來所具有的覺悟本性）才能有諸法，應當知道也是這樣。思考它。
解釋說：下面是第二相成對。然而下面的八個法門都是先標明名稱，然後『謂』字下面是解釋。下面不再進行選擇和辨析。就這個相成對中，先說明理對於事，即第三個法門。先正式解釋，然後『以諸』下面，說明原因。原因有二：一是由無自性故，二是真如（Tathata，事物的真實如是的狀態）隨緣故。而文有三部分。首先說明由無自性成就。中論說：『因為有空（Sunyata，空性）的意義，所以一切法才能成就。如果沒有空的意義，一切法就不能成就。』大品經說：『如果諸法不空，就沒有道，沒有果。』第二，『如波』下面是比喻。比喻有兩個意義：一是上面比喻無自性，因為水不守住水的自性，所以能夠形成波浪。二是下面比喻真如隨緣成就，意思是如果沒有水，就沒有波浪；如果沒有真如，依靠什麼法才能成就？第三，『依如來藏』下面，結合上面的比喻，真如隨緣。即勝鬘經說：『依如來藏』
【English Translation】 Furthermore, it is asked whether one thing is universally reasonable, and whether many things are universally unreasonable? Therefore, this Dharma gate is used to answer the universal appearances, all because things are taken as inner and outer. In the previous Dharma gate, there was only one level of questioning, that is, the first sentence 'one thing is completely and universally reasonable', so it is within; it does not hinder 'each and every one is also universally reasonable', so it is outside. Because one and many are directly the principle, it is said that 'completely universal' is not that there are multiple principles and things that are universal. Therefore, the fourth sentence says 'looking at each other, neither inside nor outside', the previous was about principle, the fourth sentence only takes the nature as not everything, obviously neither inside nor outside. Now this is about looking at principle from the perspective of things, principle has no inside or outside, how can there be non-one and non-different? Therefore, it is said that since it does not destroy the appearances, it must be that one thing is not everything, and everything is not one, in order to achieve the fourth sentence. Therefore, it must be looking at each other, neither inside nor outside. The above explains the first pair of universal correspondence is completed.
Observation says: Three, the Dharma gate of relying on principle to accomplish things, says that things have no separate self-nature, and must rely on true principle to be established. Because all arising conditions have no self-nature. Because of no self-nature, principle and things can be established. For example, waves rely on water to form movement, and water can establish waves. Relying on the Tathagatagarbha (the womb of the Tathagata, the inherent Buddha-nature), there can be all dharmas, and it should be known that it is also like this. Think about it.
Explanation says: Below is the second pair of mutual accomplishment. However, the following eight Dharma gates all first mark the name, and then the word '謂' (wei, meaning 'to say') below is the explanation. Below, there will be no more selection and analysis. In this pair of mutual accomplishment, first explain the principle in relation to things, which is the third Dharma gate. First, give a formal explanation, and then '以諸' (yi zhu, meaning 'because of all') below, explain the reason. There are two reasons: one is because of no self-nature, and the second is because of the Thusness (Tathata, the true suchness of things) follows conditions. And the text has three parts. First, explain the accomplishment by no self-nature. The Middle Treatise says: 'Because there is the meaning of emptiness (Sunyata, emptiness), all dharmas can be accomplished. If there is no meaning of emptiness, all dharmas cannot be accomplished.' The Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra says: 'If all dharmas are not empty, there is no path, no fruit.' Second, '如波' (ru bo, meaning 'like waves') below is a metaphor. The metaphor has two meanings: one is that the above metaphor is no self-nature, because water does not hold onto its own self-nature, so it can form waves. The second is that the below metaphor is that Thusness follows conditions to accomplish, meaning that if there is no water, there are no waves; if there is no Thusness, what Dharma can be relied upon to accomplish? Third, '依如來藏' (yi rulai zang, meaning 'relying on the Tathagatagarbha') below, combines the above metaphor, Thusness follows conditions. That is, the Srimala Sutra says: 'Relying on the Tathagatagarbha'
故有生死。依如來藏故有真如。謂若無真如將何合妄而成生死。以一切法離於真心無自體故。其如來藏即生死門之真如也。故問明品文殊難云。心性是一。云何見有種種差別。覺首答云。法性本無生示現而有生。則是真如隨緣答。
觀曰。四事能顯理門。謂由事攬理故。則事虛而理。實以事虛故。全事中之理挺然露現。如由波相虛令水體露現。當知此中道理亦爾。思之。
釋曰。此第四門事望理也。文有法喻合。今釋之。然躡前門成。謂無第三則離理有事。今第四門何能顯理。如離水無波。波起現水。既攬理成故能現理。以法從緣則無性故。況從無性理而成於事。事必無性故從緣無性。即是圓成。夜摩偈云。分別此諸蘊其性本空寂。空故不可滅此是無生義。由蘊之事方顯性空。性空即是無生真理。又須彌偈云。了知一切法自性無所有。如是解法性。則見盧舍那一切法事也。無所有即真理也。
觀曰。五以理奪事門。謂事既攬理成。遂令事相皆盡。唯一真理平等顯現。以離真理外無片事可得故。如水奪波波無不盡。此則水存已壞波令盡。
釋曰。此下第三相害對。言相害者。形奪兩亡故。今此第五。理望於事故理奪事。文有法喻。亦攬第三成此第五。以全將理而為事故。事本盡矣。先正釋。后
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：所以才會有生死。因為有如來藏（tathāgatagarbha，一切眾生皆具的佛性），所以才會有真如（tathātā，事物的真實本性）。如果不存在真如，又如何將虛妄與真如結合而產生生死呢？因為一切法都離開了真心，就沒有自體的緣故。這裡的如來藏就是生死之門的真如。所以《問明品》中，文殊菩薩（Mañjuśrī，智慧的象徵）詰難說：『心性是一，為何見到種種差別？』覺首菩薩（Buddhānāṁ-buddha，覺悟之首）回答說：『法性本來沒有生，只是示現而有生。』這就是真如隨緣的回答。
觀曰：四種事相能夠顯現理體之門。這是因為通過事相來把握理體，所以事相是虛幻的，而理體是真實的。因為事相是虛幻的，所以完全的事相中的理體才能挺拔地顯露出來。就像通過波浪的虛幻，才能使水的本體顯露出來一樣。應當知道這其中的道理也是如此。仔細思考。
釋曰：這是第四門，從事相來看理體。文中有法、喻、合。現在解釋它。然而，這是承接前一門而成的。如果沒有第三門，就會變成離開了理體而有事相。那麼，這第四門又如何能夠顯現理體呢？就像離開了水就沒有波浪一樣，波浪的生起才能顯現水。既然是把握理體而成的，所以能夠顯現理體。因為法從因緣而生，所以沒有自性。更何況是從沒有自性的理體而成就的事相呢？事相必定沒有自性，所以從因緣而生就沒有自性，這就是圓成實性（pariniṣpanna，佛教術語，指事物最圓滿、真實的性質）。《夜摩偈》說：『分別這些諸蘊（skandha，構成個體的要素），它們的性質本來就是空寂的。因為是空，所以不可滅，這就是無生的意義。』通過諸蘊的事相，才能顯現性空。性空就是無生的真理。又有《須彌偈》說：『了知一切法，自性無所有。如是解法性，則見盧舍那（Locana，佛名）。』一切法的事相也是如此，無所有就是真理。
觀曰：第五，以理奪事之門。意思是說，事相既然是把握理體而成的，於是就使得事相全部消失，只有唯一的真理平等地顯現出來。因為離開了真理之外，沒有片點事相可以得到。就像水奪走了波浪，波浪沒有不消失的。這就像水存在而已經破壞了波浪，使波浪全部消失。
釋曰：下面是第三種相害對，說的是相害，就是形和奪都消失了。現在是第五，從理體來看事相，就是理奪事。文中有法和比喻。這也是把握第三門而成就的第五門。因為完全是將理體作為事相，所以事相本來就應該消失。先解釋正文，然後...
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, there is birth and death. Because of the Tathāgatagarbha (the womb of the Tathāgata, the Buddha-nature inherent in all beings), there is Suchness (tathātā, the true nature of things). If there were no Suchness, how could delusion be combined with Suchness to produce birth and death? Because all dharmas are apart from the true mind and have no self-nature. This Tathāgatagarbha is the Suchness of the gate of birth and death. Therefore, in the 『Inquiry Chapter,』 Mañjuśrī (the Bodhisattva of wisdom) questioned, 『Mind-nature is one; how is it that there are various differences?』 Jue Shou Bodhisattva (the leader of enlightenment) replied, 『The nature of dharma is originally without birth, but it manifests as having birth.』 This is the answer of Suchness following conditions.
Observation: The four aspects can reveal the principle. This is because by grasping the principle through phenomena, the phenomena are illusory, and the principle is real. Because the phenomena are illusory, the principle within the entire phenomenon is clearly revealed. Just as the illusion of waves reveals the substance of water. It should be understood that the principle here is also the same. Think about it.
Explanation: This is the fourth gate, viewing principle from phenomena. The text includes dharma, metaphor, and combination. Now, let's explain it. However, it is formed by following the previous gate. Without the third gate, there would be phenomena apart from principle. Then, how can this fourth gate reveal principle? Just as without water, there are no waves; the arising of waves reveals water. Since it is formed by grasping principle, it can reveal principle. Because dharma arises from conditions, it has no self-nature. Moreover, it is from the principle of no self-nature that phenomena are formed. Phenomena must be without self-nature, so arising from conditions is without self-nature. This is the Perfected Nature (pariniṣpanna, the ultimately real nature of things). The Yama Gatha says, 『Discriminating these aggregates (skandha, the components of an individual), their nature is originally empty and still. Because they are empty, they cannot be destroyed; this is the meaning of no birth.』 Through the phenomena of the aggregates, emptiness is revealed. Emptiness is the truth of no birth. Also, the Sumeru Gatha says, 『Knowing that all dharmas have no self-nature, understanding the nature of dharma in this way, one sees Locana (a Buddha name).』 The phenomena of all dharmas are also like this; having nothing is the truth.
Observation: Fifth, the gate of principle seizing phenomena. It means that since phenomena are formed by grasping principle, the phenomena all disappear, and only the one true principle is equally revealed. Because apart from principle, there is not a single phenomenon to be obtained. Just as water seizes the waves, and the waves all disappear. This is like the water existing and already destroying the waves, causing them all to disappear.
Explanation: Below is the third type of mutual harm, which means that both form and seizure disappear. Now, it is the fifth, viewing phenomena from principle, which is principle seizing phenomena. The text includes dharma and metaphor. This is also the fifth gate formed by grasping the third gate. Because the entire principle is taken as phenomena, the phenomena should originally disappear. First, explain the main text, then...
以離真下。出其所以。真外無事故則奪事也。如攬水為波。波唯是濕波自虛矣。故出現品云。設一切眾生於一念中悉成正覺。與不成正覺亦無有異。何以故。菩提無相無非相故。物物無相斯理顯現。生佛兩亡。
觀曰。六事能隱理門。謂真理隨緣成諸事法。然此事法既違于理。遂令事顯。理不顯也。如水成波動顯靜隱。經云。法身流轉五道名曰眾生。故眾生現時法身不現也。
釋曰。此事望理也。文分為三。初正釋。亦由第三門成。以全理成事。事有形相。理無形相故。事覆理故。然此事法既違于理故隱也。有本云。既匝于理不及違也。次喻顯取靜為水隱義明故。三經云下。引證。即法身經下當更釋財首。亦云世間所言論。一切是分別未曾有一法。得入於法性者事隱理故。
觀曰。七真理即事門。謂凡是真理必非事外。以是法無我理故。事必依理。理虛無體故。是故此理舉體皆事方為真理。如水即波無動。而非濕故即水是波。思之。
釋曰。此下第四相即對也。前明隱奪。事隱於理而理不亡。理奪於事而事猶存。雖言奪事皆盡。而意在彼事相虛。非無彼事也。今明相即。廢己同他。各唯一耳。今第七門。理望於事亦有法喻。法中先略釋。后以是法無我下。出所以。若是但空出於事外。則不即
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 以離真下的方式來探究事物的原因。如果真理之外沒有其他事故，那麼就可以去除事故。就像用手攬水形成波浪，波浪的本質仍然是水，波浪的自性是虛幻的。所以《出現品》中說：『假設一切眾生在一念之間都成就正覺（Sammasambuddha，完全覺悟），與沒有成就正覺也沒有什麼不同。』為什麼呢？因為菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）沒有固定的相狀，也沒有不是相狀的相狀。萬物都沒有固定的相狀，這個道理就顯現出來了，眾生和佛的分別都消失了。 觀察：六種事物能夠隱藏真理之門，也就是說真理隨著因緣變化成為各種事物和法則。然而這些事物和法則既然與真理相違背，就使得事物顯現，而真理不顯現。就像水形成波浪，波浪的動顯現，而水的靜止被隱藏。經中說：『法身（Dharmakaya，佛的法性之身）流轉於五道（五種輪迴的途徑）中，名為眾生。』所以眾生顯現的時候，法身就不顯現了。 解釋：這是從事物相對於真理的角度來說的。這段文字分為三部分。首先是正式的解釋，也是通過第三門（全理成事）來完成的。因為完全的真理形成了事物，事物有形狀和相貌，而真理沒有形狀和相貌，所以事物覆蓋了真理。然而這些事物和法則既然與真理相違背，所以真理就被隱藏了。有的版本說：『既然周遍于真理，就不會違背真理。』其次是用比喻來顯明，取靜止的水來比喻隱藏的意義，這樣就明白了。第三部分是『經云下』，引用經文來證明。即《法身經》下文將進一步解釋財首（一個人的名字）。也說世間所說的，一切都是分別，從來沒有一種法，能夠進入法性的，這是因為事物隱藏了真理。 觀察：第七真理即是事物之門，也就是說凡是真理一定不是在事物之外的。因為這是法無我（Dharma-nairatmya，佛法中無我的真理）的道理。事物必定依賴於真理，因為真理是虛無沒有實體的。所以這個真理整個體現為事物，才是真正的真理。就像水就是波浪，沒有動，而不是濕潤，所以說水就是波浪。仔細思考。 解釋：下面是第四種相即的對應關係。前面說明了隱藏和奪取。事物隱藏於真理，而真理並沒有消失。真理奪取了事物，而事物仍然存在。雖然說奪取事物都盡了，但是意思在於那個事物的相狀是虛幻的，而不是沒有那個事物。現在說明相即，廢除自己而與他者相同，各自都是唯一的。現在是第七門，真理相對於事物也有法則和比喻。法則中先簡略地解釋，然後用『以是法無我下』，來說明原因。如果只是空，在事物之外，那麼就不相即了。
【English Translation】 English version: Investigate the cause of things by starting from the perspective of being apart from the truth. If there are no accidents outside of the truth, then accidents can be removed. It's like using your hand to scoop water to form waves; the essence of the waves is still water, and the self-nature of the waves is illusory. Therefore, the 'Appearance Chapter' says: 'Suppose all sentient beings attain perfect enlightenment (Sammasambuddha, complete enlightenment) in a single thought, there is no difference from not attaining perfect enlightenment.' Why? Because Bodhi (enlightenment) has no fixed form, nor is there a form that is not a form. All things have no fixed form, and this principle is revealed, and the distinction between sentient beings and Buddhas disappears. Observation: Six things can conceal the gate of truth, that is, truth changes with conditions to become various things and laws. However, since these things and laws are contrary to the truth, they cause things to appear, while the truth does not appear. It's like water forming waves, the movement of the waves appears, while the stillness of the water is hidden. The sutra says: 'The Dharmakaya (the Dharma-nature body of the Buddha) flows through the five paths (five paths of reincarnation), and is called sentient beings.' Therefore, when sentient beings appear, the Dharmakaya does not appear. Explanation: This is from the perspective of things relative to truth. This passage is divided into three parts. The first is the formal explanation, which is also accomplished through the third gate (the whole truth becomes things). Because the complete truth forms things, things have shapes and appearances, while truth has no shapes and appearances, so things cover the truth. However, since these things and laws are contrary to the truth, the truth is hidden. Some versions say: 'Since it pervades the truth, it will not violate the truth.' The second is to clarify with a metaphor, taking still water as a metaphor for the hidden meaning, so it is understood. The third part is 'Sutra says below', citing scriptures to prove it. That is, the following of the 'Dharmakaya Sutra' will further explain Caisou (a person's name). It also says that what the world says is all discrimination, and there has never been a Dharma that can enter the Dharma-nature, because things hide the truth. Observation: The seventh truth is the gate of things, that is, all truth must not be outside of things. Because this is the principle of Dharma-nairatmya (the truth of non-self in Buddhism). Things must depend on the truth, because the truth is empty and has no substance. Therefore, this truth is fully embodied as things, which is the true truth. It's like water is waves, there is no movement, but it is wet, so it is said that water is waves. Think carefully. Explanation: Below is the fourth correspondence of interpenetration. The previous explanation clarified hiding and seizing. Things are hidden in the truth, but the truth has not disappeared. The truth seizes things, but things still exist. Although it is said that seizing things is exhausted, the meaning lies in the fact that the appearance of that thing is illusory, not that there is no that thing. Now explain interpenetration, abolish oneself and be the same as others, each is unique. Now is the seventh gate, truth relative to things also has laws and metaphors. The law first briefly explains, and then uses 'Because it is Dharma-nairatmya below' to explain the reason. If it is just emptiness, outside of things, then it is not interpenetration.
事。今以即法為無我理。離於事外有何理耶。故理虛無體全將事法。本來虛寂為真理耳。喻中無動而非濕以事即理。意明全將濕為動。故理即事耳。
觀曰。八事法即理門。謂緣起事法必無自性。無自性故舉體即真。故說眾生即如不待滅也。如波動相舉體即水。故無異相也。
釋曰。事望理也。亦有法喻。中論曰。若法從緣生是則無自性。若無自性者。云何有是法。無自性者是真理也。故事即理。故說眾生即如下。闇引凈名。凈名彌勒章云。一切眾生皆如也。又云。若彌勒得滅度者。一切眾生亦應滅度。所以者何。一切眾生即真如相不復更滅。森羅及萬象一法之所印。觸事而真。不壞假名。而說實相。舉喻可知。是即第八眾生寂滅即是法身。第七法身隨緣名曰眾生。眾生法身體一名異。從本已來未曾動靜。亦無隱顯。以名異故。有互相即。有互隱奪。以一體故。得互相即。得互隱顯。由此相即真俗二諦曾不相違。夜摩偈云。如金與金色展轉無差別。法非法亦然。體性無有異。理即事故雖空不斷。事即理故雖有不常。理即事故無智外如。為智所入事即理故。無如外智慧證於如。
觀曰。九真理非事門。謂即事之理而非是事。以真妄異故。實非虛故。所依非能依故。如即波之水非波。以動濕異故。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 事。現在以即法為無我之理。離開事物之外還有什麼理呢？所以理是虛無的，本體完全在於事物之法。本來虛寂就是真理。譬如水中無動就不是濕，以事即理。意思是明白完全以濕為動。所以理就是事。
觀曰：八、事法即理門。說的是緣起的事法必定沒有自性。因為沒有自性，所以整體就是真如。所以說眾生就是如來，不需要等待滅度。如同波動的相，整體就是水，所以沒有不同的相。
釋曰：事相對於理而言。也有法和譬喻。《中論》說：『如果法從因緣而生，那就是沒有自性。如果沒有自性，怎麼會有這個法呢？』沒有自性就是真理。所以事就是理。所以說眾生就是如來，下面暗中引用《維摩詰經》。《維摩詰經·彌勒菩薩品》說：『一切眾生都是如來。』又說：『如果彌勒得到滅度，一切眾生也應該滅度。』為什麼呢？一切眾生就是真如之相，不再有滅度。森羅萬象都被一法所印證，接觸事物就是真如，不破壞假名，而說真實之相。舉例就可以知道。這就是第八，眾生寂滅就是法身。第七，法身隨緣而名為眾生。眾生和法身，名稱不同而本體相同。從本來就沒有動靜，也沒有隱顯。因為名稱不同，所以有互相即入，有互相隱沒。因為本體相同，所以能夠互相即入，能夠互相隱沒。因此，相即的真諦和俗諦從來不相違背。《夜摩偈》說：『如金與金色，輾轉沒有差別。法與非法也是這樣，體性沒有不同。』理就是事，所以雖然空卻不斷滅。事就是理，所以雖然有卻不恒常。理就是事，所以沒有智慧之外的如來，為智慧所入。事就是理，所以沒有如來之外的智慧證悟如來。
觀曰：九、真理非事門。說的是即事之理而不是事本身。因為真和妄不同，真實和虛妄不同，所依和能依不同。如同即波的水不是波，因為動和濕不同。 English version: Affairs. Now, taking 'immediate dharma' as the principle of no-self. Apart from affairs, what principle is there? Therefore, principle is emptiness, and the essence is entirely in the dharma of affairs. Originally, stillness and quiescence are the true principle. For example, in water, without movement, there is no wetness, using affairs to represent principle. The meaning is to clarify that wetness is entirely movement. Therefore, principle is affairs.
Observation: Eight, the gate of affairs-dharma being identical to principle. It means that the affairs-dharma arising from conditions must be without self-nature. Because there is no self-nature, the entire entity is identical to Suchness (Tathata). Therefore, it is said that sentient beings are identical to the Thus Come One (Tathagata), without waiting for extinction. Like the appearance of waves, the entire entity is water, so there is no different appearance.
Explanation: Affairs are viewed in relation to principle. There are also dharma and metaphors. The Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) says: 'If a dharma arises from conditions, then it has no self-nature. If there is no self-nature, how can there be this dharma?' No self-nature is the true principle. Therefore, affairs are identical to principle. Therefore, it is said that sentient beings are identical to the Thus Come One, implicitly quoting the Vimalakirti Sutra. The Vimalakirti Sutra, in the chapter on Maitreya, says: 'All sentient beings are Thus Come One.' It also says: 'If Maitreya attains extinction, all sentient beings should also attain extinction.' Why? All sentient beings are the aspect of True Thusness, and there is no further extinction. The myriad phenomena and all appearances are sealed by one dharma, touching affairs is True Thusness, without destroying provisional names, and speaking of the real aspect. The example can be understood. This is the eighth, the extinction of sentient beings is the Dharmakaya (Dharma Body). The seventh, the Dharmakaya, according to conditions, is named sentient beings. Sentient beings and the Dharmakaya, the name is different, but the essence is the same. From the beginning, there has been no movement or stillness, nor concealment or manifestation. Because the names are different, there is mutual identity and mutual concealment. Because the essence is one, there can be mutual identity and mutual concealment. Therefore, the identity of True Thusness and conventional truth never contradict each other. The Yama Gatha says: 'Like gold and golden color, there is no difference in transformation. Dharma and non-dharma are also like this, the essence has no difference.' Principle is affairs, so although it is empty, it is not cut off. Affairs are principle, so although they exist, they are not constant. Principle is affairs, so there is no Suchness outside of wisdom, it is entered by wisdom. Affairs are principle, so there is no intelligence outside of Suchness that can realize Suchness.
Observation: Nine, the gate of true principle not being affairs. It means that the principle that is identical to affairs is not the affairs themselves. Because the true and the false are different, the real and the unreal are different, the supported and the supporting are different. Like the water that is identical to the wave is not the wave, because movement and wetness are different.
【English Translation】 Affairs. Now, taking 'immediate dharma' as the principle of no-self. Apart from affairs, what principle is there? Therefore, principle is emptiness, and the essence is entirely in the dharma of affairs. Originally, stillness and quiescence are the true principle. For example, in water, without movement, there is no wetness, using affairs to represent principle. The meaning is to clarify that wetness is entirely movement. Therefore, principle is affairs. Observation: Eight, the gate of affairs-dharma being identical to principle. It means that the affairs-dharma arising from conditions must be without self-nature. Because there is no self-nature, the entire entity is identical to Suchness (Tathata). Therefore, it is said that sentient beings are identical to the Thus Come One (Tathagata), without waiting for extinction. Like the appearance of waves, the entire entity is water, so there is no different appearance. Explanation: Affairs are viewed in relation to principle. There are also dharma and metaphors. The Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) says: 'If a dharma arises from conditions, then it has no self-nature. If there is no self-nature, how can there be this dharma?' No self-nature is the true principle. Therefore, affairs are identical to principle. Therefore, it is said that sentient beings are identical to the Thus Come One, implicitly quoting the Vimalakirti Sutra. The Vimalakirti Sutra, in the chapter on Maitreya, says: 'All sentient beings are Thus Come One.' It also says: 'If Maitreya attains extinction, all sentient beings should also attain extinction.' Why? All sentient beings are the aspect of True Thusness, and there is no further extinction. The myriad phenomena and all appearances are sealed by one dharma, touching affairs is True Thusness, without destroying provisional names, and speaking of the real aspect. The example can be understood. This is the eighth, the extinction of sentient beings is the Dharmakaya (Dharma Body). The seventh, the Dharmakaya, according to conditions, is named sentient beings. Sentient beings and the Dharmakaya, the name is different, but the essence is the same. From the beginning, there has been no movement or stillness, nor concealment or manifestation. Because the names are different, there is mutual identity and mutual concealment. Because the essence is one, there can be mutual identity and mutual concealment. Therefore, the identity of True Thusness and conventional truth never contradict each other. The Yama Gatha says: 'Like gold and golden color, there is no difference in transformation. Dharma and non-dharma are also like this, the essence has no difference.' Principle is affairs, so although it is empty, it is not cut off. Affairs are principle, so although they exist, they are not constant. Principle is affairs, so there is no Suchness outside of wisdom, it is entered by wisdom. Affairs are principle, so there is no intelligence outside of Suchness that can realize Suchness. Observation: Nine, the gate of true principle not being affairs. It means that the principle that is identical to affairs is not the affairs themselves. Because the true and the false are different, the real and the unreal are different, the supported and the supporting are different. Like the water that is identical to the wave is not the wave, because movement and wetness are different.
釋曰。此下第五相非對也。即雙存義。若不雙存無可相成。相即隱奪等。此門則隨緣。非有之法身。恒不異事而顯現。後門則寂滅。非無之眾生。恒不異真而成立。謂於此門理望於事。而有三對。一是真。二是實。三是所依。即顯第十門。是妄。是虛。是能依故。
觀曰。十事法非理門。謂全理之事。事恒非理性相異故。能依非所依故。是故舉體全理。而事相宛然。如全水之波。波恒非水。以動義非濕故。
釋曰。此第十門。事望于理。但有二對。一明事是于相則影出。第九理是于性都有四對。二能依所依不異前門。文並可知。若依此對二諦跱立。即于諦常自二七八。即于解常自一五六。則二而不二。三四則不二而二。由初一對。則令前義皆得相成。
觀曰。此上十義同一緣起。約理望事。則有成有壞。有即有離。事望于理。有顯有隱。有一有異。逆順自在無障無礙。同時頓起深思令觀明現。是謂理事圓融無礙觀。
釋曰。第三結勸。于中二。先結束前義。后勸修成觀。前中先總標。若闕一義非真緣起。后約理下。別收十門以成八字。然一三五七九理望於事。二四六八十事望于理。先理望於事有成者。第三依理成事門。有壞者。第五真理奪事門。有即者。第七真理即事門。有離者。第九
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 釋：下面第五相是非對立的，是雙重存在的意義。如果不是雙重存在，就無法相互成就，例如相即、隱奪等。這個門則隨緣，非有的法身（Dharmakaya，佛的法性之身），恒常不離事物而顯現。後面的門則是寂滅，非無的眾生，恒常不離真如而成立。這是說在此門中，從理的層面來看待事物，有三對關係：一是真，二是實，三是所依。這顯示了第十門，是妄，是虛，是能依的緣故。
觀：十事法不是理門，是說完全是理的事物。事物恒常不是理，因為性相不同。能依不是所依的緣故。因此，整體完全是理，而事物的相狀依然宛然存在，就像全是水的水波，水波恒常不是水，因為動的意義不是濕的緣故。
釋：這第十門，事物看待理，只有兩對關係。一是說明事物在於相則影子顯現，第九理在於性都有四對。二是能依所依與前面的門沒有不同，文字都可以理解。如果依據此對，二諦（Two Truths，勝義諦和世俗諦）就確立了，即在於諦常是二七八，即在於解常是一五六。則是二而不二，三四則是不二而二。由於最初的一對，就使得前面的意義都能夠相互成就。
觀：以上這十種意義都是同一緣起。從理的層面來看待事物，則有成有壞，有即有離。事物看待理，有顯有隱，有一有異。逆順自在，沒有障礙。同時頓然生起深刻的思考，使觀照明白顯現。這就是理事圓融無礙觀。
釋：第三是總結勸勉。其中分為兩部分。先是結束前面的意義，然後勸勉修成觀。前面一部分先是總標，如果缺少一個意義就不是真正的緣起。後面從理的層面來看待事物，分別收攝十門以成就八個字。然而一三五七九是從理的層面來看待事物，二四六八十是從事物的層面來看待理。先說從理的層面來看待事物有成就的，是第三依理成事門。有壞的，是第五真理奪事門。有即的，是第七真理即事門。有離的，是第九
【English Translation】 English version: Shì said: The following fifth aspect is not oppositional, but rather a dual existence. If there is no dual existence, there can be no mutual accomplishment, such as interpenetration, concealment and removal, etc. This gate follows conditions, the non-existent Dharmakaya (the Dharma-nature body of the Buddha) constantly manifests without being different from phenomena. The later gate is quiescence, the non-non-existent sentient beings constantly establish without being different from Suchness. This means that in this gate, viewing phenomena from the perspective of principle, there are three pairs of relationships: first, truth; second, reality; and third, that which is relied upon. This reveals the tenth gate, which is illusion, emptiness, and that which is able to rely.
Guān said: The ten phenomena are not the gate of principle, meaning that phenomena are entirely principle. Phenomena are constantly not principle because their nature and characteristics are different. That which is able to rely is not that which is relied upon. Therefore, the whole body is entirely principle, while the characteristics of phenomena are still clearly present, like waves that are entirely water. Waves are constantly not water because the meaning of movement is not the meaning of wetness.
Shì said: In this tenth gate, phenomena view principle, there are only two pairs of relationships. First, it clarifies that phenomena are in appearance, then shadows appear; the ninth principle is in nature, there are four pairs. Second, that which is able to rely and that which is relied upon are not different from the previous gate, and the text can be understood. If based on this pair, the Two Truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth) are established, that is, in truth, it is always two, seven, and eight; in understanding, it is always one, five, and six. Then it is two but not two, three and four are not two but two. Because of the initial pair, it enables the previous meanings to all be mutually accomplished.
Guān said: The above ten meanings are all the same arising from conditions. Viewing phenomena from the perspective of principle, there is accomplishment and destruction, there is identity and separation. Phenomena view principle, there is manifestation and concealment, there is oneness and difference. Reversing and following are free and unobstructed. Simultaneously and suddenly arising deep thought, causing contemplation to be clear and manifest. This is called the unobstructed contemplation of the perfect fusion of principle and phenomena.
Shì said: The third is the concluding exhortation. It is divided into two parts. First, it concludes the previous meanings, and then exhorts to cultivate and accomplish contemplation. The first part first gives a general statement, if one meaning is missing, it is not true arising from conditions. Later, viewing phenomena from the perspective of principle, it separately collects the ten gates to accomplish eight characters. However, one, three, five, seven, and nine are viewing phenomena from the perspective of principle, two, four, six, eight, and ten are viewing principle from the perspective of phenomena. First, speaking of viewing phenomena from the perspective of principle, there is accomplishment, which is the third gate of accomplishing phenomena based on principle. There is destruction, which is the fifth gate of true principle removing phenomena. There is identity, which is the seventh gate of true principle being identical to phenomena. There is separation, which is the ninth
真理非事門。事望理中有顯者。第四事能顯理門。有隱者。第六事能隱理門。有一者。第八事法即理門。有異者。第十事法非理門。然成壞等就功能說。言有成者。理能成事非理自成。餘七亦然。則一一門皆有事理無礙之義。故云約理望事等。不會相遍者。有三義故。一是總相后八。依此相遍而得成故。二者相遍無別異相。非如成壞隱顯等殊故。三者大同相即相即攝故。言逆順自在者。理事相望各二順二逆。三成七即理順事也。四顯八即事順理也。五奪九非理逆理也。六隱十非事逆理也。其相遍言亦是順也。欲成即成。欲壞即壞。欲顯即顯。欲隱即隱等故云自在。成不礙壞。壞不礙成等故云無礙。正成之時。即壞時等故曰同時。五對無前後故云頓起。又上四對。理望於事。但有成等而無顯等。事望于理。但有顯等而無成等。事從理成故。可許言成理非新有。故但可言顯事。成必滅故得言壞。真理常住伹可言隱理。無形相故但可即事。事有萬差可與理冥。故得云一理。絕諸相故云離事。事有差異故云異相。上約義別有此不同。統而收之但成五對。五中前四明事理不離。后一明事理不即。不即不離方為緣起相。又五對之中共有三義。成顯一對。是理事相作義。奪隱不即此之二對。即是事理相違義。相遍相即二對。是事理不
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 真理並非獨立於事物的存在（真理非事門）。從事物來看，有些事物能彰顯真理（事望理中有顯者），這是第四事能顯理門。有些事物則會遮蔽真理（有隱者），這是第六事能隱理門。有些事物與真理相合（有一者），這是第八事法即理門。有些事物與真理相異（有異者），這是第十事法非理門。然而，成就與毀壞等，都是就其功能而言的（然成壞等就功能說）。說到成就，是真理能夠成就事物，而不是真理自身成就（言有成者，理能成事非理自成）。其餘七種情況也是如此（餘七亦然）。那麼，每一門都具有事與理之間沒有阻礙的意義（則一一門皆有事理無礙之義）。所以說，從真理的角度來看事物等等（故云約理望事等）。 之所以說不會相互周遍，是因為有三種含義（不會相遍者，有三義故）。一是總體的相，后八門都是依據這種相周遍而得以成立的（一是總相后八，依此相遍而得成故）。二是相周遍沒有特別的差異相，不像成就、毀壞、顯現、隱藏等那樣不同（二者相遍無別異相，非如成壞隱顯等殊故）。三是大的相同，相互即是，相互包含（三者大同相即相即攝故）。說到逆順自在，理事相互對應，各有兩種順和兩種逆（言逆順自在者，理事相望各二順二逆）。成就、包含，這是理順應事（三成七即理順事也）。顯現、包含，這是事順應理（四顯八即事順理也）。奪取、不合，這是非理違逆理（五奪九非理逆理也）。隱藏、不合，這是非事違逆理（六隱十非事逆理也）。 其相遍的說法也是順應（其相遍言亦是順也）。想要成就就成就，想要毀壞就毀壞，想要顯現就顯現，想要隱藏就隱藏，所以說是自在（欲成即成，欲壞即壞，欲顯即顯，欲隱即隱等故云自在）。成就不妨礙毀壞，毀壞不妨礙成就，所以說是無礙（成不礙壞，壞不礙成等故云無礙）。正在成就的時候，就是毀壞的時候，所以說是同時（正成之時，即壞時等故曰同時）。五對關係沒有先後順序，所以說是頓起（五對無前後故云頓起）。 另外，上面四對關係，從真理的角度來看事物，只有成就等，而沒有顯現等。從事物的角度來看真理，只有顯現等，而沒有成就等。事物是從真理而成就的，所以可以說成就。真理並非新產生的，所以只能說顯現事物。成就必然會滅亡，所以可以說毀壞。真理是常住的，只能說隱藏真理。真理沒有形狀和相貌，所以只能說即事物。事物有萬千差別，可以與真理冥合，所以可以說一理。真理超越一切相，所以說是離事。事物有差異，所以說是異相。上面是從意義的差別來說明這些不同。總括起來，只有五對關係。五對關係中，前四對說明事與理不相離，后一對說明事與理不相即。不即不離，才是緣起之相。另外，五對關係中共有三種意義。成就與顯現一對，是理事相互作用的意義。奪取、隱藏、不即這二對，是事理相互違背的意義。相遍、相即二對，是事理相融的意義。
【English Translation】 English version 'Truth is not separate from phenomena' (真理非事門). Looking from phenomena, some phenomena can manifest truth (事望理中有顯者), which is the fourth 'phenomena can reveal truth' gate (第四事能顯理門). Some phenomena obscure truth (有隱者), which is the sixth 'phenomena can conceal truth' gate (第六事能隱理門). Some phenomena are in accordance with truth (有一者), which is the eighth 'phenomena are identical to truth' gate (第八事法即理門). Some phenomena are different from truth (有異者), which is the tenth 'phenomena are not truth' gate (第十事法非理門). However, accomplishment and destruction, etc., are spoken of in terms of their function (然成壞等就功能說). When speaking of accomplishment, it is truth that accomplishes phenomena, not truth accomplishing itself (言有成者，理能成事非理自成). The remaining seven cases are also like this (餘七亦然). Then, each gate has the meaning of no obstruction between phenomena and truth (則一一門皆有事理無礙之義). Therefore, it is said, 'looking at phenomena from the perspective of truth,' etc. (故云約理望事等). The reason for saying that they do not pervade each other is because there are three meanings (不會相遍者，有三義故). First, the overall aspect; the latter eight gates are established based on this aspect pervading (一是總相后八，依此相遍而得成故). Second, the aspect of pervasion has no special difference, unlike accomplishment, destruction, manifestation, concealment, etc., which are different (二者相遍無別異相，非如成壞隱顯等殊故). Third, the great sameness, mutual identity, and mutual inclusion (三者大同相即相即攝故). Speaking of being free in accordance and opposition, phenomena and truth correspond to each other, each having two kinds of accordance and two kinds of opposition (言逆順自在者，理事相望各二順二逆). Accomplishment and inclusion are truth according with phenomena (三成七即理順事也). Manifestation and inclusion are phenomena according with truth (四顯八即事順理也). Seizing and non-accordance are non-truth opposing truth (五奪九非理逆理也). Concealment and non-accordance are non-phenomena opposing truth (六隱十非事逆理也). The statement of mutual pervasion is also in accordance (其相遍言亦是順也). Wanting to accomplish, then accomplish; wanting to destroy, then destroy; wanting to manifest, then manifest; wanting to conceal, then conceal; therefore, it is said to be free (欲成即成，欲壞即壞，欲顯即顯，欲隱即隱等故云自在). Accomplishment does not obstruct destruction, and destruction does not obstruct accomplishment; therefore, it is said to be unobstructed (成不礙壞，壞不礙成等故云無礙). At the very moment of accomplishment, it is the moment of destruction; therefore, it is said to be simultaneous (正成之時，即壞時等故曰同時). The five pairs have no order of precedence; therefore, it is said to arise suddenly (五對無前後故云頓起). Furthermore, in the above four pairs, from the perspective of truth looking at phenomena, there is only accomplishment, etc., but no manifestation, etc. From the perspective of phenomena looking at truth, there is only manifestation, etc., but no accomplishment, etc. Phenomena are accomplished from truth; therefore, it can be said to be accomplishment. Truth is not newly produced; therefore, it can only be said to manifest phenomena. Accomplishment will inevitably perish; therefore, it can be said to be destruction. Truth is permanent; it can only be said to conceal truth. Truth has no shape or form; therefore, it can only be said to be identical to phenomena. Phenomena have myriad differences and can merge with truth; therefore, it can be said to be one truth. Truth transcends all aspects; therefore, it is said to be separate from phenomena. Phenomena have differences; therefore, it is said to be different aspects. The above explains these differences from the difference in meaning. To summarize, there are only five pairs of relationships. Among the five pairs, the first four pairs explain that phenomena and truth are not separate, and the last pair explains that phenomena and truth are not identical. Not identical and not separate is the aspect of dependent origination. Furthermore, there are three meanings in the five pairs. The pair of accomplishment and manifestation is the meaning of phenomena and truth interacting with each other. The two pairs of seizing, concealment, and non-identity are the meaning of phenomena and truth contradicting each other. The two pairs of mutual pervasion and mutual identity are the meaning of phenomena and truth harmonizing with each other.
相礙義。又由相遍故有相作。有相作故有于相即。由相違故有于不即。又若無不即則無可即乃至相遍。由相遍故四對皆成。故說真空妙有各有四義。約理望事有真空四義。一廢己成他義。即依理成事門。二泯他顯己義。即真理奪事門。三自他俱存義。即真理非事門。四自他俱泯義。即真理即事門。由其相即故得互泯。又由初及三。有理遍事門。以自存故舉體成他。故遍他也。后約事望理有妙有四義。一顯他自盡義。即事能顯理門。二自顯隱他義。即事能隱理門。三自他俱存義。即事法非理門。四自他俱泯義。即事法即理門。又由初及三。有即事遍於理門。以自存故而能顯他故遍他耳。故約有存亡無礙。真空隱顯自在故。故逆順自在無障無礙。二深思下。勸修成觀學而不思同無所得。體達於心。即凡成聖矣。
觀曰。周遍含容觀第三。
釋曰。即事事無礙法界也。
觀曰。事如理融遍攝無礙。交參自在。略辯十門。
釋曰。此觀有三。初總標舉數。二別顯觀相。三結勸修行。今則初也。即總名之意。以事事無礙。若唯約事則彼此相礙。若唯約理則無可相礙。今以理融事。事則無礙。故云事如理融。然理含萬有無可同喻。略如虛空。虛空中略取二義。一普遍一切色非色處。即周遍義。二理含無外
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 相礙的意義在於，由於相互遍及，所以有相互作用。因為有相互作用，所以有相互融合。因為相互違背，所以有不融合。而且，如果沒有不融合，就沒有融合，乃至相互遍及。由於相互遍及，四種對立關係都能成立。所以說真空妙有各有四種意義。 從理的角度來看事，有真空的四種意義：一是廢棄自己成就他者，即依理成事之門；二是泯滅他者彰顯自己，即真理奪事之門；三是自己與他者共同存在，即真理非事之門；四是自己與他者共同泯滅，即真理即事之門。由於相互融合，所以能夠互相泯滅。而且，從第一種和第三種意義來看，有理遍及事之門，因為自身存在，所以整體成就他者，因此遍及他者。 從事的角度來看理，有妙有的四種意義：一是彰顯他者自己消失，即事能顯理之門；二是自己彰顯隱藏他者，即事能隱理之門；三是自己與他者共同存在，即事法非理之門；四是自己與他者共同泯滅，即事法即理之門。而且，從第一種和第三種意義來看，有即事遍及理之門，因為自身存在，所以能夠彰顯他者，因此遍及他者。 所以，從有無存亡的角度來看，沒有阻礙，真空的隱顯是自在的。因此，逆順都是自在的，沒有障礙。 第二段，深入思考。勸勉修行者通過思考來成就觀行，只學習而不思考就如同沒有收穫。如果能從內心深處領悟，就能從凡人轉變為聖人。
觀想：周遍含容觀第三。
解釋：就是事事無礙法界。
觀想：事如理融，周遍攝取沒有阻礙，交錯參與自在。簡略地闡述十個方面。
解釋：這個觀想有三個部分。首先是總體的標示和列舉，其次是分別顯示觀想的形態，最後是總結並勸勉修行。現在是第一部分，也就是總體的命名。因為事事沒有阻礙，如果只從事的角度來看，彼此就會相互阻礙。如果只從理的角度來看，就沒有什麼可以阻礙的。現在用理來融合事，事就沒有阻礙了，所以說事如理融。然而，理包含萬有，沒有什麼可以比擬的，勉強用虛空來比喻。在虛空中勉強選取兩種意義：一是普遍存在於一切有色和無色的地方，這就是周遍的意義；二是理包含一切，沒有內外之分。
【English Translation】 English version The meaning of mutual obstruction lies in the fact that due to mutual pervasiveness, there is mutual action. Because there is mutual action, there is mutual fusion. Because of mutual opposition, there is non-fusion. Moreover, if there is no non-fusion, there is no fusion, and so on to mutual pervasiveness. Because of mutual pervasiveness, the four pairs of opposites can be established. Therefore, it is said that True Emptiness and Wondrous Existence each have four meanings. From the perspective of principle looking at phenomena, there are four meanings of True Emptiness: first, abandoning oneself to accomplish others, which is the gate of accomplishing phenomena based on principle; second, obliterating others to manifest oneself, which is the gate of truth seizing phenomena; third, oneself and others coexisting, which is the gate of truth being distinct from phenomena; fourth, oneself and others co-obliterating, which is the gate of truth being identical to phenomena. Because of mutual fusion, they can mutually obliterate. Moreover, from the first and third meanings, there is the gate of principle pervading phenomena, because self exists, so the whole body accomplishes others, therefore pervading others. From the perspective of phenomena looking at principle, there are four meanings of Wondrous Existence: first, manifesting others while oneself disappears, which is the gate of phenomena revealing principle; second, oneself manifesting while hiding others, which is the gate of phenomena concealing principle; third, oneself and others coexisting, which is the gate of phenomena being distinct from principle; fourth, oneself and others co-obliterating, which is the gate of phenomena being identical to principle. Moreover, from the first and third meanings, there is the gate of phenomena pervading principle, because self exists, so it can manifest others, therefore pervading others. Therefore, from the perspective of existence and non-existence, there is no obstruction, and the manifestation and concealment of True Emptiness are unhindered. Therefore, going against and going along are both unhindered, without any obstacles. Second paragraph, deep contemplation. Encouraging practitioners to achieve contemplation through thinking, learning without thinking is like having no gain. If one can deeply understand from the heart, one can transform from an ordinary person into a sage.
Contemplation: The Third Contemplation of Universal Inclusion.
Explanation: This is the Dharma Realm of unobstructedness in all phenomena.
Contemplation: Phenomena are fused with principle, universally encompassing without obstruction, intermingling freely. Briefly explain ten aspects.
Explanation: This contemplation has three parts. First, the overall indication and enumeration; second, the separate display of the forms of contemplation; and third, the conclusion and encouragement to practice. Now is the first part, which is the overall naming. Because all phenomena are unobstructed, if only viewed from the perspective of phenomena, they will obstruct each other. If only viewed from the perspective of principle, there is nothing to obstruct. Now, using principle to fuse phenomena, phenomena are unobstructed, therefore it is said that phenomena are fused with principle. However, principle contains all things, and there is nothing to compare it to, so it is roughly compared to empty space. In empty space, two meanings are roughly selected: first, universally existing in all places of form and formlessness, which is the meaning of pervasiveness; second, principle contains everything, without inside or outside.
。無有一法出虛空故。即含容。義理亦如空。具於二義無不遍故。無不包故。即事如理乃至纖塵亦能包遍。故云事如理融遍攝無礙。攝即含容義。無礙二義。一偏不礙攝。二攝不礙遍故。事事能攝能遍。等皆無礙。其交參自。在亦遍十門。
觀曰。一理如事門。謂事法既虛。相無不盡。理性真實體無不現。是則事無別事。即全理為事。是故菩薩雖復看事即是觀理。然說此事為不即理。
釋曰。此下十門展轉相生。然事理相如大同前門相遍門也。即為總意能成下八。比二猶兼理事無礙。有此二故。得有事事無礙之義。屬事事攝。而有本云。理如事現。事如理遍。乍觀釋文多遍現義細尋成局。但有遍現闕余義故。遍現二字諸本多無。無則義寬。今依無本。今理如事者。如事之現。如事之局。如事差別。如事大小一多等。故後門事如於理。非但如理遍亦如於理。無相無礙非內外等。又若有遍現。亦似事理。無礙觀中事理相遍故。無遍現於義為正。十門皆先標名。后解釋。今初理如事中。先正釋。既以事虛理實理體現。是則真理如事之虛。以虛名為實體。虛即是實名無別事。次是故菩薩下。以人證成由見事實。是故見事即是見理。后然說此事下。不壞相故。若壞於相理何所如。是則真理。如事相大小。
觀
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：沒有一種法能夠超出虛空之外。這就是『含容』（包含和容納）的含義。義理也像虛空一樣，具備兩種含義，無所不遍，無所不包。因此，事就像理一樣，乃至細微的塵埃也能包容周遍。所以說『事如理融遍攝無礙』，『攝』就是含容的意思。『無礙』有兩種含義：一是偏頗不妨礙攝取，二是攝取不妨礙周遍。因此，事事都能攝取，都能周遍，等等，都沒有障礙。它們交錯參與，自在無礙，也周遍於十門。
觀經上說：『一理如事門』，意思是說事法既然是虛幻的，那麼它的相貌就沒有不窮盡的；理性是真實的，它的本體就沒有不顯現的。這樣，事就沒有獨立的事，而是完全以理為事。因此，菩薩雖然看事，實際上就是觀理。然而，（爲了不執著于相）說這件事並不等同於理。
解釋：下面的十門輾轉相生，然而事理相如，大體與前面的相遍門相似。這可以作為總體的意思，能夠成就下面的八門。相比之下，這二者還兼有理事無礙的含義。有了這二者，才能有事事無礙的意義，屬於事事相攝的範疇。有的版本說：『理如事現，事如理遍』，乍一看解釋文字多是周遍和顯現的含義，仔細推敲就成了侷限。只是有周遍和顯現，缺少其餘的含義。周遍和顯現這兩個詞，很多版本都沒有。沒有這兩個詞，含義就寬泛。現在依照沒有這兩個詞的版本。現在說『理如事』，是說如事的顯現，如事的侷限，如事的差別，如事的大小一多等等。所以後面的門說『事如於理』，不僅僅是如理周遍，也如於理的無相無礙，非內外等等。又如果有了周遍和顯現，也像是事理無礙觀中事理相遍，沒有周遍和顯現才符合正義。十門都是先標明名稱，後進行解釋。現在最初的『理如事』中，先是正式解釋，既然以事虛理實，理體現，那麼真理就像事的虛幻，以虛幻作為實體的名稱，虛幻就是真實，名稱沒有差別的事。其次是『是故菩薩』以下，用人來證明成就，因為見到事實。所以見到事就是見到理。後面『然說此事』以下，是不破壞相的緣故。如果破壞了相，理又如什麼呢？這就是真理，如事相的大小。
觀經
【English Translation】 English version: There is no dharma that can go beyond emptiness. This is the meaning of 'containing and accommodating' (含容). The meaning of principle is also like emptiness, possessing two meanings, all-pervasive and all-encompassing. Therefore, things are like principle, even the finest dust can encompass and pervade. Therefore, it is said 'things are like principle, merging, pervading, encompassing, unobstructed' (事如理融遍攝無礙). 'Encompassing' (攝) means containing and accommodating. 'Unobstructed' (無礙) has two meanings: first, partiality does not hinder encompassing; second, encompassing does not hinder pervasiveness. Therefore, things can all encompass and all pervade, and so on, without obstruction. Their intermingling, freedom, and ease also pervade the ten gates.
The Contemplation Sutra says: 'The gate of principle being like things' (一理如事門) means that since the dharma of things is illusory, its appearances are inexhaustible; the nature of principle is real, and its essence is fully manifested. Thus, things have no independent existence, but are entirely principle as things. Therefore, although Bodhisattvas observe things, they are actually contemplating principle. However, (in order not to be attached to appearances) it is said that this thing is not identical to principle.
Explanation: The following ten gates arise in succession, but the likeness of things and principle is largely similar to the previous gate of mutual pervasion (相遍門). This can be taken as the overall meaning, capable of accomplishing the following eight gates. In comparison, these two also combine the meaning of unobstructedness between principle and things (理事無礙). With these two, there can be the meaning of unobstructedness between things (事事無礙), belonging to the category of mutual encompassing of things. Some versions say: 'Principle appears like things, things pervade like principle' (理如事現，事如理遍). At first glance, the explanatory text mostly contains the meanings of pervasiveness and manifestation, but upon careful examination, it becomes limited. There is only pervasiveness and manifestation, lacking the remaining meanings. The words 'pervasiveness' and 'manifestation', many versions do not have. Without these two words, the meaning is broad. Now according to the version without these words. Now saying 'principle is like things' is saying like the manifestation of things, like the limitation of things, like the difference of things, like the size, oneness, and multiplicity of things, and so on. Therefore, the following gate says 'things are like principle' (事如於理), not only pervading like principle, but also like the non-appearance and unobstructedness of principle, non-inner and outer, and so on. Also, if there is pervasiveness and manifestation, it is also like the mutual pervasion of things and principle in the contemplation of unobstructedness between things and principle, without pervasiveness and manifestation is in accordance with justice. The ten gates all first mark the name, and then explain. Now in the initial 'principle is like things', first is the formal explanation, since taking things as illusory and principle as real, principle manifests, then the true principle is like the illusion of things, taking illusion as the name of reality, illusion is reality, the name has no different things. Secondly, 'therefore Bodhisattvas' (是故菩薩) below, use people to prove accomplishment, because seeing the facts. So seeing things is seeing principle. Later 'however saying this thing' (然說此事) below, is because of not destroying the appearance. If the appearance is destroyed, what is principle like? This is the true principle, like the size of the appearance of things.
Contemplation Sutra (觀經)
曰。二事如理門。謂諸事法與理非異故。事隨理而圓遍。遂令一塵普遍法界。法界全體遍諸法時。此一微塵亦如理性。全在一切法中如一微塵。一切事法亦爾。
釋曰。據初釋文。似但明遍義。遍是理之別稱。相無分限故。既一微塵舉體。全在一切法中。亦如理之不可分也。文中先出所因。由不異理故。由第一門理如事故。遂得此門事全如理。言圓遍者。無分故圓體周故偏。次遂令下。別示遍相。謂遍理法界。從法界全體下。明壞遍事。由塵如理故遍諸事。次如一塵下。舉微塵例諸事。即事事皆遍。斯則事事重重無礙矣。
觀曰。三事含理事無礙門。謂諸事法與理非一故。存本一事而能廣容。如一微塵其相不大。而能容攝無邊法界。由剎等諸法既不離法界。是故俱在一塵中現如一塵一切法亦爾。此事理融通非一非異故。總有四句。一一中一。二一切中一。三一中一切。四一切中一切。各有所由思之。
釋曰。文有三。一正釋。二結例。三融通。今初。由上一事含于理故。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。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 說：二事如理門（Er Shi Ru Li Men，二事如理之門）。意思是說，諸事法與理並非不同，所以事法隨著理而圓滿周遍，於是使得一微塵普遍於法界。當法界全體周遍于諸法時，這一微塵也如理性一樣，完全存在於一切法中，就像存在於一微塵中一樣，一切事法也是如此。 解釋說：根據最初的解釋，似乎只是闡明了周遍的含義。周遍是理的別稱，因為相沒有分界限。既然一微塵整體完全存在於一切法中，也就像理一樣不可分割。文中先說明原因，由於不異於理的緣故，由於第一門中理如事物的緣故，於是得到此門中事物完全如理。所說的『圓遍』，是因為沒有分割所以圓滿，本體周全所以周遍。其次，『遂令』以下，分別展示周遍的相狀，指的是周遍于理法界。從『法界全體』以下，說明破壞周遍的事物，由於微塵如理的緣故，所以周遍于諸事物。其次，『如一微塵』以下，用微塵來比喻諸事物，即事事都周遍，這樣就是事事重重無礙了。 觀：三事含理事無礙門（San Shi Han Li Shi Wu Ai Men，三事含理事無礙之門）。意思是說，諸事法與理並非一體，所以保持原本一事的性質而能夠廣泛容納，如同一微塵，它的相狀不大，卻能夠容納無邊的法界。由於剎土（Kshaatra，佛國）等諸法不離法界，所以都存在於一微塵中顯現，如同一微塵，一切法也是如此。這件事理融通，非一非異，所以總共有四句：一，一一中一；二，一切中一；三，一中一切；四，一切中一切。各自有其原因，仔細思考。 解釋說：文中有三部分：一是正式解釋，二是總結比喻，三是融會貫通。現在說第一部分，由於上一事包含于理中，其餘一切事與所包含的理體沒有差異，隨著所包含的理都存在於一事中。所說『與理非一』，是因為前一門說『與理非異』，是與理相同而周遍。此門也是如理，而包含則也是不異。由於不破壞一相，才能夠包含。針對前面所說的『非異』，所以說『非一』。下面的通局中則顯示第二點，也不破壞相狀。『如一微塵其相』以下，說明事物包含的相狀。
【English Translation】 English version: It is said: The Second Aspect is the 'Principle-like Nature of Phenomena' (Er Shi Ru Li Men). This means that all phenomena (事法, shi fa) are not different from principle (理, li), so phenomena follow principle and are perfectly pervasive, thus causing one dust mote to pervade the entire Dharma Realm (法界, Fa Jie). When the entire Dharma Realm pervades all phenomena, this one dust mote is also like principle, completely present in all phenomena, just as it is present in one dust mote; all phenomena are also like this. The explanation says: According to the initial explanation, it seems to only clarify the meaning of pervasiveness. Pervasiveness is another name for principle, because the form has no boundaries. Since one dust mote is entirely present in all phenomena, it is also as indivisible as principle. The text first explains the reason, because it is not different from principle, because in the first aspect, principle is like phenomena, thus obtaining this aspect where phenomena are completely like principle. The so-called 'perfectly pervasive' is because it is complete due to having no division, and pervasive because the substance is all-encompassing. Secondly, 'thus causing' and below, separately shows the appearance of pervasiveness, referring to pervading the Dharma Realm of principle. From 'the entire Dharma Realm' and below, it explains destroying pervasive phenomena, because the dust mote is like principle, so it pervades all phenomena. Secondly, 'like one dust mote' and below, uses the dust mote to exemplify all phenomena, that is, all phenomena are pervasive, thus phenomena are unobstructed in every way. Contemplate: The Third Aspect is the 'Mutual Containment of Phenomena and Principle without Obstruction' (San Shi Han Li Shi Wu Ai Men). This means that all phenomena are not one with principle, so maintaining the original nature of one phenomenon while being able to broadly contain, like one dust mote, its form is not large, yet it can contain the boundless Dharma Realm. Because lands (剎土, Kshaatra) and other phenomena are inseparable from the Dharma Realm, they are all present and manifest in one dust mote, just like one dust mote, all phenomena are also like this. This interpenetration of phenomena and principle is neither one nor different, so there are a total of four phrases: one, one in one; two, all in one; three, one in all; four, all in all. Each has its own reason, think carefully. The explanation says: There are three parts to the text: one is the formal explanation, two is the concluding analogy, and three is the synthesis. Now speaking of the first part, because the previous phenomenon is contained in principle, all other phenomena are not different from the substance of the contained principle, following the contained principle, they are all present in one phenomenon. The saying 'not one with principle' is because the previous aspect said 'not different from principle', being the same as principle and pervasive. This aspect is also like principle, and containment is also not different. Because the one form is not destroyed, it is able to contain. In response to the previously said 'not different', it is said 'not one'. The following discussion of generality and specificity then reveals the second point, also not destroying the form. 'Like one dust mote, its form' and below, explains the appearance of phenomena containing.
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。能含于下一。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。
觀曰。四通局無礙門。謂諸事法與理非一即非異。故令此事法不離一處。即全遍十方一切塵內。由非異即非一故。全遍十方而不動。一位即遠即近。即遍即住。無障無礙。
釋曰。此門重釋第二。第二俱遍今不壞相有不遍義遍即是通。不遍是局。文中
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 二如一塵下。（總結例子） 三此事理下。（融會貫通，就此擴充套件）容門有此四句。此中能包含的和被包含的，都不離一和多。交錯構成四句，作為能包含的一邊。都具備與理非一非異的意義。因為非一，所以有體，作為能包含者。因為非異，所以有用，才能包含作為被包含的一邊。但只是就與理非異的意義來說。 如初一中一者。上一不壞相的緣故，有能包含的體，而與下一理非異。所以就能包含下一。而下一由於與上一理非異的緣故，隨著所包含的理，在上一中。因為離開理就沒有事故。 二一切中一者。以一切不壞相的緣故，有能包含的體，與下之一理不異的緣故，能包含于下一。下之一與上一切理不異的緣故，隨著下自一之理，在上一切中。 三一中一切者。由一不壞相的緣故，可以作為能包含者，而與下一切理不異的緣故，能包含一切，所包含的一切與上一理不異。所以隨著自一切之理，在上一中。 四一切中一切者。由上一切不壞相的緣故，有能包含的體，與下一切理非異的緣故，包含下一切。下之一切與上一切理非異的緣故，隨著下一切之理，在上一切之中。是故總結說各自有所由來。 前第二門是廣遍義。此第三門是含容義。已經具備此觀的總名了。此下的七門，都不離廣遍含容的二義。
觀曰：四通局無礙門。說的是諸事法與理非一即非異。所以使此事法不離一處，就完全遍佈十方一切塵內。由於非異即非一的緣故，完全遍佈十方而不動。一位即遠即近，即遍即住，沒有障礙。
釋曰：此門重新解釋第二門。第二門是俱遍，現在不壞相有不遍的意義，遍就是通，不遍就是局。文中
【English Translation】 English version Two, like one dust below. (Concluding example) Three, this matter and principle below. (Integrate and connect, expanding on this) The 'Capacity' gate has these four sentences. Within this, what can contain and what is contained do not depart from one or many. Intertwined to form four sentences, serving as the side of what can contain. All possess the meaning of being neither one nor different from principle. Because it is not one, it has substance, serving as what can contain. Because it is not different, it has function, only then can it contain as the side of what is contained. But it only speaks of the meaning of not being different from principle. For example, the first 'one within one'. Because of the indestructible characteristic of the previous one, it has the substance of what can contain, and is not different in principle from the next one below. Therefore, it can contain the next one below. And the next one below, because it is not different in principle from the previous one, follows the principle it contains, within the previous one. Because there are no accidents apart from principle. Two, 'one within all'. Because of the indestructible characteristic of all, it has the substance of what can contain, and is not different in principle from the one below, therefore it can contain the next one below. The one below is not different in principle from all above, therefore, following the principle of the one below, it is within all above. Three, 'all within one'. Because of the indestructible characteristic of one, it can serve as what can contain, and is not different in principle from all below, therefore it can contain all. All that is contained is not different in principle from the one above. Therefore, following the principle of all itself, it is within the one above. Four, 'all within all'. Because of the indestructible characteristic of all above, it has the substance of what can contain, and is not different in principle from all below, therefore it contains all below. All below is not different in principle from all above, therefore, following the principle of all below, it is within all above. Therefore, it is concluded that each has its origin. The previous second gate is the meaning of broad pervasiveness. This third gate is the meaning of containing and accommodating. It already possesses the general name of this contemplation. The seven gates below do not depart from the two meanings of broad pervasiveness and containing accommodation.
Contemplation says: The fourth gate of unobstructed interpenetration of universality and particularity. It speaks of how all phenomena are neither one nor different from principle. Therefore, it causes this phenomenon to not depart from one place, and completely pervades all within the ten directions and all dust particles. Because it is not different, it is not one, therefore it completely pervades the ten directions without moving. One position is both far and near, both pervasive and abiding, without obstruction.
Explanation says: This gate re-explains the second gate. The second gate is complete pervasiveness, now the indestructible characteristic has the meaning of non-pervasiveness. Pervasiveness is penetration, non-pervasiveness is limitation. In the text
與理非一故局。非異故通。即遠下結遍即是通。住則是局。
觀曰。五廣陜無礙門。謂諸事法與理非一即非異故。不壞一塵而能廣容十方剎海。由非異即非一故。廣容十方法界。而微塵不大。是則一塵之事。即廣即陜。即大即小。無障無礙。
釋曰。此重釋第三門。三明如理包含。今由與理有非一義。不壞陜相而能廣容。文中非一故陜非異故廣。先明非一即非異。故明不壞。廣容下句反上。是則一塵下結。
觀曰。六遍容無礙門。謂此一塵望於一切。由普遍即是廣容故。遍在一切中時。即復還攝彼一切法。全住自一中。又由廣容即是普遍故。令此一塵還即遍在自內一切差別法中。是故此一塵。自遍他時。即他遍自。能容能入。同時遍攝無礙。思之。
釋曰。此門正合前四五二門。兼合二三。以四五二門釋二三故。廣容普遍不相離。故名中遍即普遍。容即廣容。釋文中。先標。次釋。后結。今初。以一望多有遍容義。以有彼多可得遍故。此一能容。若多望一即無遍容。以所望之一無可言遍。能望之多而容於一。不可得言為廣容故。次由普遍下。釋有二對。初遍即是容。唯一遍一容。后又由下。容即是遍。亦是一容一遍。前中遍即是容者。一遍多時。還攝所遍之多。在我一內。猶如一鏡遍九鏡時
。還攝九鏡在一鏡內。后容即是遍法約反上。謂如一鏡容多鏡時。能容之一鏡。卻遍所容多鏡影中。故云還遍自內一切差別法中。是故下結。可知。
觀曰。七攝入無礙門。謂彼一切望於一法。以入他即是攝他故。一切全入一中之時。即令彼一還覆在自一切之內。同時無礙。又由攝。他即是入他故。一法全在一切中時。還令一切恒在一內。同時無礙思之。
釋曰。釋相之中。先標。后釋。今初。但約以多望一能攝。即前能容入。即前遍而前一為能遍。有多可遍。今入但入於一。不得言遍。前門有多可容故得言容。今一無多可容故但云攝。次以入他即是攝他故。下別釋其相。亦有二對。前對多為能入。故還攝所入之一。在能入多中。如九鏡入於一鏡。還攝所入一鏡。在能入多鏡之中。后對但反前多能入。為多能攝耳。謂多攝一時。多為能攝。一為所攝。而多即能入。故還將此多。入于所攝一法之中。如九鏡為能攝。還將九鏡入所攝一鏡之中。然上二對能入能攝。皆是于多即攝即入。名攝入無礙。而一但為所攝所入。不得能攝能入之名。至第八門方有能攝能入耳。后同時無礙者結也。結上多能入時。即為能攝。故云同時。
觀曰。八交涉無礙門。謂一法望一切。有攝有入。通有四句。謂一攝一切一入一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：還攝九鏡在一鏡內。后容即是遍法約反上。意思是說，就像一面鏡子容納多面鏡子時，能容納的那一面鏡子，卻遍在於所容納的多面鏡子的影像中。所以說，還遍在於自身內在的一切差別法中。因此下面總結說，可知。
觀曰：七攝入無礙門。意思是說，那一切相對於一法而言，以進入他者即是攝取他者。一切完全進入一中之時，即使那一還復存在於自身一切之內，同時無礙。又因為攝取他者即是進入他者，一法完全在一切中時，即使一切恒常在一之內，同時無礙地思考它。
釋曰：解釋相狀之中，先標示，后解釋。現在開始。只是就以多相對於一能夠攝取而言，就是前面的能容入，就是前面的遍，而前面的一作為能遍，有多可以遍及。現在進入只是進入於一，不能說遍。前面的門有多可以容納，所以能夠說容。現在一沒有多可以容納，所以只說攝取。其次以進入他者即是攝取他者，下面分別解釋它的相狀。也有二對。前一對多作為能入，所以還攝取所入的一，在能入的多中，如九鏡進入於一鏡，還攝取所入的一鏡，在能入的多鏡之中。后一對只是反轉前面的多能入，作為多能攝取罷了。意思是說多攝取一時，多作為能攝取，一作為所攝取，而多即是能入。所以還將這多，進入于所攝取的一法之中，如九鏡作為能攝取，還將九鏡進入所攝取的一鏡之中。然而上面二對能入能攝取，都是于多即攝取即進入，名為攝入無礙。而一隻是作為所攝取所進入，沒有能攝取能進入的名稱。到第八門才有能攝取能進入。後面同時無礙是總結。總結上面多能入時，即為能攝取，所以說同時。
觀曰：八交涉無礙門。意思是說一法相對於一切，有攝取有進入，總共有四句。說一攝取一切，一進入一
【English Translation】 English version: 'Still, taking nine mirrors into one mirror. The subsequent containing is the pervasive Dharma, contracting and reverting upwards.' This means, like when one mirror contains multiple mirrors, the mirror that can contain, pervades within the reflections of the multiple mirrors it contains. Therefore, it is said, 'Still pervading within all the differentiated Dharmas within itself.' Hence, the conclusion below is, 'It can be known.'
Contemplation says: 'The seventh, the unimpeded gate of inclusion and absorption. This means that all those, in relation to one Dharma (法, Dharma), by entering another, is to absorb that other. When all completely enters into one, it causes that one to return and exist within all of itself, simultaneously without obstruction. Furthermore, because absorbing another is entering another, when one Dharma is completely within all, it causes all to constantly be within one, simultaneously contemplating it without obstruction.'
Explanation says: 'Within the explanation of characteristics, first indicate, then explain. Now beginning. It only speaks of the many in relation to the one being able to absorb, which is the previous 'able to contain and enter,' which is the previous 'pervasive,' and the previous one is the 'able to pervade,' with many that can be pervaded. Now entering is only entering into one, and cannot be said to be pervasive. The previous gate had many that could be contained, so it could be said to 'contain.' Now one does not have many that can be contained, so it is only said to 'absorb.' Secondly, because entering another is absorbing another, below separately explain its characteristics. There are also two pairs. The first pair takes the many as the 'able to enter,' so it still absorbs the one that is entered, within the many that are able to enter, like nine mirrors entering into one mirror, still absorbing the one mirror that is entered, within the many mirrors that are able to enter. The latter pair simply reverses the previous many that are able to enter, as the many that are able to absorb. This means that when the many absorb at once, the many are the 'able to absorb,' and the one is the 'absorbed,' and the many are the 'able to enter.' Therefore, it still takes this many, entering into the one Dharma that is absorbed, like nine mirrors being the 'able to absorb,' it still takes the nine mirrors into the one mirror that is absorbed. However, the above two pairs of 'able to enter' and 'able to absorb,' are all about the many that simultaneously absorb and enter, named the unimpededness of inclusion and absorption. And the one is only the 'absorbed' and 'entered,' without the name of 'able to absorb' and 'able to enter.' It is not until the eighth gate that there is 'able to absorb' and 'able to enter.' The latter 'simultaneously without obstruction' is the conclusion. Concluding that when the many are able to enter, they are the 'able to absorb,' so it is said to be simultaneous.'
Contemplation says: 'The eighth, the unimpeded gate of interpenetration. This means that one Dharma in relation to all, has absorption and entry, totaling four phrases. Saying one absorbs all, one enters one.'
切。一切攝一一切入一。一攝一法一入一法。一切攝一切一切入一切。同時交參無礙。有本后二句入在頭。
釋曰。釋文亦三。初標所依。次釋。三結。初中但一望多。有攝有入。次通有四句下釋。以一望一切故一在初。然第六門。亦一望多。但有容遍二句而無攝入。第七門但多望一。有攝有入亦唯二句。今第八門。雖一望一切。而一與多俱為能攝能入。得交涉名。又交涉者。前第七門多能攝一。即多亦為能入。今第八門。多攝於一。所攝之一亦能攝多故。能攝之多卻為所攝。故入一中得交涉名。既一之與多俱為能攝能入便有四句。雖似八句二二合故。故但四句。四句皆具攝之。與入第一句云。一攝一切一入一切者。謂上句一為能攝一切為所攝。而所攝一切。亦得為能攝。即上能攝之一。卻為所攝故。上之一卻入一切之中故。云一入一切。第二句云。一切攝一一切入一者。上句一切為。能攝一為所攝。而所攝一亦為能攝。故上之一。切卻為所攝云一切入一。此句但反上第一句耳。三即以一望他一。四即第三句中。一切復望別一切。以其四句為能攝邊。同理之包為能入邊。同理之遍故。又四句皆由與理非一非異故。由與理非一。有一多體可為攝入。由與理非異便能攝入。若以十鏡為喻。一鏡為一。九鏡為多。謂初
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 切（Sarva，一切）。一切攝一，一切入一。一攝一法，一入一法。一切攝一切，一切入一切。同時交參無礙。有版本后兩句放在開頭。
解釋：解釋分為三部分。首先標明所依據的，其次是解釋，最後是總結。首先只是一對多，有攝和入。其次是四句解釋。因為以一來看一切，所以一在開頭。然而，第六門也是一對多，但只有容遍兩句而沒有攝入。第七門只是多對一，有攝和入也只有兩句。現在第八門，雖然是一對一切，但一和多都可以作為能攝和能入，所以叫做交涉。而且，所謂交涉，就是前第七門多能攝一，即多也可以作為能入。現在第八門，多攝於一，所攝之一也能攝多，所以能攝之多反而成為所攝，所以入一中叫做交涉。既然一和多都可以作為能攝能入，便有四句。雖然看似八句，但兩兩合併，所以只有四句。四句都包含攝和入。第一句說，『一攝一切，一入一切』，意思是上一句的一作為能攝，一切作為所攝。而所攝的一切，也可以作為能攝，即上面的能攝之一，反而成為所攝，所以說一入一切。第二句說，『一切攝一，一切入一』，上一句的一切作為能攝，一作為所攝。而所攝的一也可以作為能攝，所以上面的一反而成為所攝，說一切入一。這句只是反過來說第一句。第三句是以一來看另一個一。第四句是第三句中的一切再看另一個一切。因為這四句作為能攝的一方，道理相同，作為能入的一方，道理相通。而且，這四句都是因為與理非一非異。因為與理非一，有一多體可以作為攝入。因為與理非異，便能攝入。如果用十面鏡子來比喻，一面鏡子為一，九面鏡子為多。所謂最初
【English Translation】 English version: Sarva (切, Everything). Everything encompasses one, everything enters one. One encompasses one dharma (法, law/phenomenon), one enters one dharma. Everything encompasses everything, everything enters everything. Simultaneously interpenetrating without obstruction. Some versions place the last two sentences at the beginning.
Explanation: The explanation is in three parts. First, it identifies the basis; second, it explains; and third, it concludes. The first part is simply one in relation to many, with encompassing and entering. The second part explains with four sentences. Because one views everything, one is at the beginning. However, the sixth gate is also one in relation to many, but only has the sentences of containing and pervading without encompassing and entering. The seventh gate is simply many in relation to one, with encompassing and entering, and only has two sentences. Now, the eighth gate, although it is one in relation to everything, both one and many can serve as the encompasser and the entered, so it is called interpenetration. Moreover, so-called interpenetration is that in the previous seventh gate, many can encompass one, that is, many can also serve as the entered. Now, in the eighth gate, many encompass one, and the encompassed one can also encompass many, so the encompassing many instead become the encompassed, so entering into one is called interpenetration. Since both one and many can serve as the encompasser and the entered, there are four sentences. Although it seems like eight sentences, they are combined in pairs, so there are only four sentences. All four sentences contain encompassing and entering. The first sentence says, 'One encompasses everything, one enters everything,' meaning that the one in the previous sentence serves as the encompasser, and everything serves as the encompassed. And the encompassed everything can also serve as the encompasser, that is, the encompassing one above instead becomes the encompassed, so it is said that one enters everything. The second sentence says, 'Everything encompasses one, everything enters one,' the everything in the previous sentence serves as the encompasser, and one serves as the encompassed. And the encompassed one can also serve as the encompasser, so the one above instead becomes the encompassed, saying everything enters one. This sentence simply reverses the first sentence. The third sentence is viewing one in relation to another one. The fourth sentence is everything in the third sentence viewing another everything. Because these four sentences, as the encompassing side, have the same principle, and as the entering side, have the same pervasiveness. Moreover, these four sentences are all because they are neither one nor different from the principle. Because they are not one with the principle, there is one-many entity that can serve as encompassing and entering. Because they are not different from the principle, they can encompass and enter. If we use ten mirrors as a metaphor, one mirror is one, and nine mirrors are many. The so-called initial
句云。一攝一切一入一切者。應云一鏡攝九鏡。一鏡入九鏡。謂上一鏡為能攝。則九鏡為所攝。而所攝九鏡亦為能攝故。上能攝之一鏡。卻入九鏡之中。云一鏡入九鏡。下三例然。第二句云一切攝一一切入一者。應云九鏡攝一鏡。九鏡入一鏡。謂上九鏡為能攝。則一鏡是所攝。以所攝一鏡亦為能攝故。上能攝之九鏡。卻入所攝一鏡中。云九鏡入一鏡。第三句一攝一法一入一法者。應云一鏡攝一鏡一鏡入一鏡。謂第一一鏡攝第二一鏡。第一一鏡亦入第二一鏡。第四句云。一切攝一切一切入一切者。應言十鏡各攝於九鏡。十鏡皆入於九鏡。而所入所攝但云九鏡者。留一為攝入故。言有本云后二句入在頭者。云一入一法一攝一法。一切入一切一切攝一切。以不例前故。依現本四句。皆攝在初。
觀曰。九相在無礙門。謂一切望一亦有入有攝。亦有四句。謂攝一入一。攝一切入一。攝一入一切。攝一切入一切。同時交參無障無礙。
釋曰。初標名。云相在者。自己攝法入他法中。他又攝法在我己中。故云相在。至下句中當見。釋中亦三。謂標釋結。標云。一切望一者。一切在初正反第八。二亦有四句下釋。釋四句中。上標既云一切望一則有四句。四句之首皆合有一切之言以為能攝。今並略耳。但取所攝所入以成四
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 經文中說：『一攝一切，一入一切』，應該理解為一面鏡子攝入九面鏡子，一面鏡子進入九面鏡子。意思是說，上面的一面鏡子作為能攝者，那麼九面鏡子就是所攝者。而這所攝的九面鏡子也同樣可以作為能攝者，因此，上面能攝的一面鏡子，反而進入了九面鏡子之中，所以說『一鏡入九鏡』。下面的三種情況也是如此。第二句說：『一切攝一，一切入一』，應該理解為九面鏡子攝入一面鏡子，九面鏡子進入一面鏡子。意思是說，上面的九面鏡子作為能攝者，那麼一面鏡子就是所攝者。因為這所攝的一面鏡子也可以作為能攝者，因此，上面能攝的九面鏡子，反而進入了所攝的一面鏡子之中，所以說『九鏡入一鏡』。第三句說：『一攝一法，一入一法』，應該理解為一面鏡子攝入一面鏡子，一面鏡子進入一面鏡子。意思是說，第一面鏡子攝入第二面鏡子，第一面鏡子也進入第二面鏡子。第四句說：『一切攝一切，一切入一切』，應該說成是十面鏡子各自攝入九面鏡子，十面鏡子都進入九面鏡子。而所進入和所攝入的只說是九面鏡子，是因為留下一面鏡子作為攝入者。有版本說后兩句的『入』字放在前面，說成是『一入一法，一攝一法，一切入一切，一切攝一切』，因為這與前面的例子不一致，所以按照現在的版本，四句話都將『攝』字放在前面。
觀中說：九相在無礙門中，意思是說一切望一也有入有攝，也有四句，即攝一入一，攝一切入一，攝一入一切，攝一切入一切，同時交錯參與，沒有障礙和阻礙。
解釋說：首先標明名稱，說『相在』，意思是自己所攝的法進入他法之中，他法又攝入在我自己之中，所以說『相在』。在下面的句子中將會看到。解釋中也有三個部分，即標、釋、結。標明說：『一切望一』，一切在初正反第八。第二部分『也有四句』是解釋。解釋四句中，上面標明已經說了『一切望一』，所以有四句，四句的開頭都應該有『一切』的說法作為能攝者，現在都省略了。只是取所攝所入來構成四句。
【English Translation】 English version: It is said: 'One embraces all, one enters all,' which should be understood as one mirror embracing nine mirrors, one mirror entering nine mirrors. This means that the upper mirror, as the embracer, then the nine mirrors are what is embraced. And these embraced nine mirrors can also serve as the embracer, therefore, the upper embracing mirror, on the contrary, enters into the nine mirrors, hence the saying 'one mirror enters nine mirrors.' The following three cases are similar. The second sentence says: 'All embrace one, all enter one,' which should be understood as nine mirrors embracing one mirror, nine mirrors entering one mirror. This means that the upper nine mirrors, as the embracer, then one mirror is what is embraced. Because this embraced one mirror can also serve as the embracer, therefore, the upper embracing nine mirrors, on the contrary, enter into the embraced one mirror, hence the saying 'nine mirrors enter one mirror.' The third sentence says: 'One embraces one dharma (法) [Dharma: the teachings of the Buddha], one enters one dharma,' which should be understood as one mirror embracing one mirror, one mirror entering one mirror. This means that the first mirror embraces the second mirror, and the first mirror also enters the second mirror. The fourth sentence says: 'All embrace all, all enter all,' which should be said as ten mirrors each embracing nine mirrors, ten mirrors all entering nine mirrors. And what is entered and embraced is only said to be nine mirrors, because one mirror is left as the embracer. Some versions say that the 'enter' in the last two sentences is placed in front, saying 'one enters one dharma, one embraces one dharma, all enter all, all embrace all,' because this is inconsistent with the previous examples, so according to the current version, all four sentences put 'embrace' in front.
The contemplation says: The nine aspects are in the gate of unobstructedness, meaning that all towards one also has entering and embracing, and also has four sentences, namely embracing one entering one, embracing all entering one, embracing one entering all, embracing all entering all, simultaneously intertwined and participating, without obstruction or hindrance.
The explanation says: First, state the name, saying 'mutual presence (相在),' meaning that the dharma embraced by oneself enters into the dharma of others, and the dharma of others embraces into oneself, hence the saying 'mutual presence.' This will be seen in the following sentences. There are also three parts in the explanation, namely stating, explaining, and concluding. Stating says: 'All towards one,' all is in the initial correct and reverse eighth. The second part 'also has four sentences' is the explanation. In explaining the four sentences, the above statement has already said 'all towards one,' so there are four sentences, and the beginning of the four sentences should all have the saying 'all' as the embracer, which are now omitted. Only what is embraced and entered is taken to form the four sentences.
句。然此四句與前全異。如前一攝一法一入一法。但明自一隨對他一。自一攝他一時。亦入他一耳。今則不然。謂第一句云攝一入一者。此謂一切隨攝一法將入一法。約十鏡說。總以九鏡為能攝。第一句者。九鏡攝第一。一鏡入第二一鏡之中。二攝一切入一者。謂九鏡皆攝九鏡入一鏡中。三攝一入一切者。九鏡各攝一鏡遍入九鏡之中。四攝一切入一切者。九鏡皆攝九鏡各入九鏡之中攝。將隨一入彼一中。復攝彼一在此多中等故名相在。約法一一作者。且約諸佛望眾生說。總以諸佛為一切是能攝。眾生為所攝所入。第一句者。諸佛攝一眾生入一眾生中。二者諸佛攝一切眾生入一眾生中。三者諸佛身攝一眾生。入一切眾生身毛中。四者諸佛各攝一切眾生。入一切眾生中。余法相望一多皆爾。三同時下。總結。由此互攝互在故。有帝網重重之義。問此一切望一。皆一切在初。則一望一切。何不四句皆一在初。答若但一在初唯有兩句。謂一攝一切一入一切為一句。一攝一法一入一法為兩句耳。今由相涉第二句一切。是前所攝為能攝故。第三句互一相對。第四句唯一切對故。成四句耳。故不得四句皆一在初。然正義如前。更有一意。如攝一入一。謂一切正攝一時。即能入一等。若爾何異第八。第八一攝一一入一者。一入所攝一中
。今趣舉一其一皆入。以正同理廣容。即同理普遍故。若爾何異第七。第七但有二句。亦自入所攝一中故。此中一切正攝一亦入。餘一亦入一切等故。若約十鏡作者。一鏡為一。九鏡為一切。一者九鏡攝一鏡。九鏡亦能入一鏡。二者九鏡攝九鏡。九鏡入一鏡。三者九鏡攝一鏡。九鏡即入九鏡。四者九鏡攝九鏡。九鏡亦即入九鏡。為攝一切入一切。雖通此釋今不取之。亦有云。前第八門是復四句。一攝一一入一。兩句方成一句故。今一攝一者。但攝其一入我一中。二但攝一切入我一中等。若爾但有一攝句耳。亦無入義故不取之。
觀曰。十普融無礙門。謂一切及一普皆同時。更互相望一一具前兩重四句。普融無礙準前思之。
釋曰。此第十門總融。前九近且收三。第八門一望一切。第九門一切望一。今具此二。以一望一切。有第八門四句。以一切望一。有第九門四句。其第七門雖不具四句。而是一切攝一中收故。近收三。言總收九者。九門不出一多故。由其初門理如事故。一可為多。由第二門事如理故多可為一。二四如理之遍。三五如理之包。二即二而不二。四即不二而二。以不壞相故。三即非廣而廣。五即廣即非廣。亦以不壞相故。六即雙含一多容遍無礙。七便攝入自在。八含一多交涉。九含攝入自在。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：現在我們來探討『一』如何融入『一切』，以及如何以正確的道理來廣泛包容。這是因為『同理』是普遍存在的。如果這樣，這與第七門（指『諸法相即自在門』）有什麼不同呢？第七門只有兩句話，也包含在『一』所攝的範圍中。這裡的一切正可以攝入『一』，『一』也可以融入『一切』等等。如果按照十鏡作者的觀點，一鏡代表『一』，九鏡代表『一切』。第一種情況是九鏡攝入一鏡，九鏡也能融入一鏡。第二種情況是九鏡攝入九鏡，九鏡融入一鏡。第三種情況是九鏡攝入一鏡，九鏡即融入九鏡。第四種情況是九鏡攝入九鏡，九鏡也即融入九鏡。爲了攝一切入一切，雖然可以這樣解釋，但現在不採用。也有人說，前面的第八門（指『託事顯法生解門』）是重複的四句，『一』攝『一』入『一』，兩句話才能構成一句。現在說『一』攝『一』，只是攝取那個『一』進入我的『一』中，或者只是攝取『一切』進入我的『一』中等等。如果這樣，就只有『攝』的含義，而沒有『入』的含義，所以不採用這種說法。
觀曰：十普融無礙門，指的是『一切』和『一』普遍同時存在，互相觀望，一一具備前面兩重的四句。普融無礙可以參照前面的內容來思考。
釋曰：這第十門是總體的融合。前面九門，靠近的可以收攝三個。第八門是從『一』的角度觀察『一切』，第九門是從『一切』的角度觀察『一』。現在同時具備這兩種觀察角度。從『一』的角度觀察『一切』，有第八門的四句。從『一切』的角度觀察『一』，有第九門的四句。第七門雖然不具備四句，但是包含在『一切』攝『一』之中，所以靠近的可以收攝三個。說總體收攝九門，是因為九門沒有超出『一』和『多』的範疇。由於第一門（指『理法成周遍門』）的道理如同事物一樣，所以『一』可以成為『多』。由於第二門（指『事法有周遍門』）的事物如同道理一樣，所以『多』可以成為『一』。第二門和第四門（指『理事無礙門』）如同道理一樣周遍，第三門（指『依正同然觀門』）和第五門（指『體用關係觀門』）如同道理一樣包容。第二門是『即二而不二』，第四門是『即不二而二』，因為沒有破壞事物的本相。第三門是『即非廣而廣』，第五門是『即廣即非廣』，也是因為沒有破壞事物的本相。第六門（指『廣狹自在無礙門』）是雙重包含『一』和『多』，容納周遍而沒有障礙。第七門就攝入自在。第八門包含『一』和『多』的交涉。第九門包含攝入自在。
【English Translation】 English version: Now, let's discuss how 'one' enters into 'all,' and how to broadly encompass with correct principles. This is because 'the same principle' (同理) is universally present. If so, how is this different from the seventh gate (referring to 'all dharmas are identical and free gate' 諸法相即自在門)? The seventh gate only has two sentences, and it is also included in the scope of what 'one' encompasses. Here, all that is correct can be incorporated into 'one,' and 'one' can also merge into 'all,' and so on. If according to the view of the ten-mirror author, one mirror represents 'one,' and nine mirrors represent 'all.' The first situation is that the nine mirrors encompass one mirror, and the nine mirrors can also merge into one mirror. The second situation is that the nine mirrors encompass the nine mirrors, and the nine mirrors merge into one mirror. The third situation is that the nine mirrors encompass one mirror, and the nine mirrors immediately merge into the nine mirrors. The fourth situation is that the nine mirrors encompass the nine mirrors, and the nine mirrors also immediately merge into the nine mirrors. In order to encompass all into all, although it can be explained this way, it is not adopted now. Some also say that the previous eighth gate (referring to 'relying on phenomena to reveal dharma and generate understanding gate' 託事顯法生解門) is a repeated four-sentence structure, 'one' encompasses 'one' into 'one,' and two sentences are needed to form one sentence. Now, saying 'one' encompasses 'one' only means taking that 'one' into my 'one,' or only taking 'all' into my 'one,' and so on. If so, there is only the meaning of 'encompassing,' but not the meaning of 'entering,' so this statement is not adopted.
Observation: The tenth universal interpenetration without obstruction gate (十普融無礙門) refers to 'all' and 'one' universally existing simultaneously, observing each other, and each possessing the previous two-fold four-sentence structure. Universal interpenetration without obstruction can be considered in reference to the previous content.
Explanation: This tenth gate is the overall integration. Of the previous nine gates, the closest can encompass three. The eighth gate is observing 'all' from the perspective of 'one,' and the ninth gate is observing 'one' from the perspective of 'all.' Now, both perspectives are present. Observing 'all' from the perspective of 'one' has the four sentences of the eighth gate. Observing 'one' from the perspective of 'all' has the four sentences of the ninth gate. Although the seventh gate does not have the four sentences, it is included in 'all' encompassing 'one,' so the closest can encompass three. Saying that it overall encompasses the nine gates is because the nine gates do not go beyond the scope of 'one' and 'many.' Because the principle of the first gate (referring to 'principle dharma completes pervasion gate' 理法成周遍門) is like things, 'one' can become 'many.' Because the things of the second gate (referring to 'phenomena dharma has pervasion gate' 事法有周遍門) are like principle, 'many' can become 'one.' The second and fourth gates (referring to 'principle and phenomena without obstruction gate' 理事無礙門) are pervasive like principle, and the third (referring to 'dependent and proper are the same gate' 依正同然觀門) and fifth gates (referring to 'essence and function relationship gate' 體用關係觀門) are encompassing like principle. The second gate is 'is two but not two,' and the fourth gate is 'is not two but two,' because the inherent characteristics of things are not destroyed. The third gate is 'is not broad but broad,' and the fifth gate is 'is broad and not broad,' also because the inherent characteristics of things are not destroyed. The sixth gate (referring to 'broad and narrow freely without obstruction gate' 廣狹自在無礙門) is doubly containing 'one' and 'many,' accommodating pervasiveness without obstruction. The seventh gate then encompasses freedom. The eighth gate contains the interaction of 'one' and 'many.' The ninth gate contains encompassing freedom.
十即融成一致故。第十門即同時具足相應門。九即因陀羅網境界門。由第八交涉互為能所。有隱顯門。其第七門相即相入門。五即廣陜門。四不離一處。即遍有相即門。三事含理事故。有微細門。六具相即廣陜二門。前三總成諸門事理相如。故有鈍雜門隨十為首。有主伴門顯。於時中有十世門故。初心究竟攝多劫于剎那。信滿道圓一念該於佛地。以諸法皆爾故。有託事門。是故十玄亦自此出。
觀曰。令圓明顯現。稱行境界無障無礙。深思之。令現在前也。
釋曰。第三結勸修學。謂若圓明在心。依解生行行起解絕。雖絕而現解行雙融。修而無修。非唯周遍一門。實亦三觀齊致。無心體極無間常行。何障不消。何法能礙。斯觀顯現聖遠乎哉。體之則神矣。體非權小聖亦難思矣。故初生王宮貴極臣佐。離此成觀安造茲玄。余久深玄籍注想華嚴。此之一觀久而究盡。不鏡方寸虛負性靈。故名法界玄鏡。時已從心之歲矣。本文結雲華嚴法亦玄一卷(有本無玄字今依有本也)。今夾本文在內。別題雲華嚴法界玄鏡。
華嚴法界玄鏡卷下(終)
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 十即是融合成為一致的緣故。第十門即是同時具足相應門。九即是因陀羅網（Indra's net，帝釋天之網，比喻宇宙萬物相互關聯）境界門。由於第八交涉互為能所，有隱顯門。其第七門是相即相入門。五即是廣陜門。四不離一處，即是遍有相即門。三事包含理事故，有微細門。六具相即廣陜二門。前三總成諸門事理相如，所以有鈍雜門，隨十為首。有主伴門顯，於時中有十世門故。初心究竟攝多劫于剎那，信滿道圓一念該於佛地。以諸法皆是如此，所以有託事門。是故十玄亦自此而出。
觀曰：令圓明明顯現，稱行境界無障無礙，深思之，令現在前也。
釋曰：第三結勸修學。謂若圓明在心，依解生行行起解絕，雖絕而現解行雙融，修而無修，非唯周遍一門，實亦三觀齊致。無心體極無間常行，何障不消，何法能礙。斯觀顯現聖遠乎哉。體之則神矣。體非權小聖亦難思矣。故初生王宮貴極臣佐，離此成觀安造茲玄。余久深玄籍注想華嚴，此之一觀久而究盡。不鏡方寸虛負性靈，故名法界玄鏡。時已從心之歲矣。本文結雲華嚴法亦玄一卷(有本無玄字今依有本也)。今夾本文在內。別題雲華嚴法界玄鏡。
華嚴法界玄鏡卷下(終)
【English Translation】 English version Ten means that they are fused into one. The tenth door is the Door of Simultaneous Completeness and Correspondence. Nine is the realm of Indra's net (Indra's net, a metaphor for the interconnectedness of all things in the universe). Because the eighth, interaction, mutually serves as the capable and the served, there is the Door of Concealment and Manifestation. The seventh door is the Door of Mutual Identity and Entry. Five is the Door of Broadness and Narrowness. Four, not separated from one place, is the Door of Universal Identity. Because three matters contain principle, there is the Door of Subtlety. Six possesses both the Door of Mutual Identity and the Door of Broadness and Narrowness. The first three collectively form the principle and phenomena of all doors being like each other, so there is the Door of Dullness and Complexity, with ten as the head. There is the Door of Principal and Accompaniment manifested, because there are ten worlds within time. The initial aspiration ultimately encompasses many kalpas in a moment, and the perfection of faith and the completion of the path encompass the Buddha-ground in a single thought. Because all dharmas are like this, there is the Door of Entrusting to Affairs. Therefore, the Ten Profound Principles also emerge from this.
Observation says: Cause perfect clarity to manifestly appear, corresponding to the realm of practice without obstruction or hindrance. Deeply contemplate it, causing it to appear before you.
Explanation says: The third concludes with encouraging study and practice. It means that if perfect clarity is in the mind, practice arises based on understanding, and understanding arises when practice ceases. Although it ceases, it manifests as the dual fusion of understanding and practice, cultivating without cultivation. It is not only pervasive in one door, but in reality, the three contemplations are simultaneously achieved. The mind-essence is extremely without interval and constantly active. What obstacles will not be eliminated? What dharma can hinder it? This contemplation manifests as sacred and far-reaching! To embody it is divine! To embody it is not a provisional or small matter; even sages find it difficult to conceive. Therefore, being born in the royal palace with extreme nobility and serving as ministers, apart from this accomplishment of contemplation, how could one create this profundity? I have long delved into the profound texts and contemplated the Avatamsaka Sutra. This one contemplation has been thoroughly exhausted over a long time. Not reflecting on the square inch of the mind is to vainly betray one's spiritual nature. Therefore, it is named the Profound Mirror of the Dharma Realm. The time has already been the year following the mind. The text concludes with 'The Avatamsaka Dharma is also profound, one scroll' (some versions do not have the word 'profound'; we follow the version that has it). Now, the text is included within, and it is separately titled 'Profound Mirror of the Avatamsaka Dharma Realm'.
Avatamsaka Dharma Realm Profound Mirror, Volume Two (End)