法界圖記叢髓錄 1.138

1.138

大記云：六相者，總別二相表法無盡，同異二相現法無礙，成壞二相示法無側，一乘法義不出此三也。若別釋者，總相直標無住法之自體，別相指無住總之無盡，同相現無盡之無礙，異相釋無礙之無違，成相示無違之無側，壞相表無側之不動也。問：無住法之自體云何？答：法界之法混為一身是。問：法界之法為是動故成一身耶？答：只由不動成一身耳。若約此一堂論，則椽等諸緣各自不動方得成一總相堂耳。問：別相表無盡等者何耶？答：別相者，椽等諸緣各差別故，現一總相堂中非一之德，故云別相指總相之無盡也。椽等緣中須同相，則丈二之椽稱二十步堂，餘緣亦爾，故云同相現無盡之無礙也。又此緣中須異相，則丈二之椽雖稱於二十步堂，而不動自丈二位，餘緣亦爾，故云異相明無礙之無違也。見其丈二椽之成此堂時，側無餘緣，故此一椽即是無側，餘緣亦爾，故云成相示無違之無側也。壞於成處壞故云壞相，表無側之不動也。問：何故唯六，不多不小？答：總別一對上根得入，同異一對中根得入，成壞一對下根得入。良以下根於同異中不能得總，故不減至四五也。雖是下根，歷學成壞必得入總，故不增至七八也。康藏云：總相者一含多德故，別相者多德非一故。別依止總，滿彼總故（已上）。問一含多德者，總總多德？別別多德？答：二義俱得。謂攬別成總故，云別別多德亦得。然其總中所具別德，一一皆全盡總故，云總總多德亦得。問：若爾，應立無盡總耶？答：雖云多德，非是一外之多，故無此難也。問：既云總相者一含多德，故所含多德與能含一義門各異，何云非是一外之多耶？答：但其多德合處目為能含一總耳，是故非是一外之多、多外之一也。別依止總滿彼總者，問：若以類各分六相，則總同成為一際，別異壞為一際也。既與總為一類，故同有同總義、成有成總義，何故別相與異壞為一類而有滿總之義耶？答：若得總相不須別相，但於未得機中欲示總相故開也。開別之時總義已現，是故別中有滿總義。問：及滿耶？不及耶？答：及滿也。問：此是別相釋義故，應不及滿本總，何云及耶？答：既分總之時，由開總故現彼別德，還以別滿總之時及滿也。問：若爾，總中有別貌耶？答：無也。何者？本於無別貌之總中所開故，雖其別相及滿本總，總中無別貌也。問：若爾，與三乘泯差別俗歸平等真何異耶？答：一乘中分別全無分別、無分別全分別，非泯分別方歸無分別，是故異也。同相者，欲現總德故開別相。既開別已，恐有惑人謂其別相逈別於總故，欲令其知彼別相全同於總故，於別相之次明同相也。同有多義，謂上同下同、內同外同。若約此舍論者，諸緣同於總舍者上同，總舍同於諸緣者下同。就上同中，諸緣同於舍者內向同，諸緣相望成舍力義齊同者外向同也。又有分同、滿同二義，謂一尺之瓦出一尺之力，同於二十步堂者，分同。一尺瓦出二十步力，同於二十步堂者，滿同也。異相者，示其能成諸緣形類差別各位不動之義也。問：若實異者，應非同耶？答：只由異故，得有同義。若不異者，瓦既一尺、椽亦一尺，違本緣位，失前齊同作舍之義。問：若爾，一尺之瓦出二十步力同於二十步堂，椽亦如是者，此亦豈非失本緣位耶？答：瓦若動自一尺之位同於椽之丈二之位，然後出二十步力，椽亦如是者，應失本位。瓦自不動本一尺位，椽亦不動丈二之位，而各出二十步力同於堂故，雖並出二十步力，瓦非丈二、椽非一尺，各住自位，故不違也。成相者，明不作之作，謂諸緣等各位不動得成舍也。前同相中，椽等諸緣相望相攝成舍力義齊同。又約椽等諸緣望於總則舍帶於椽總，望於緣則椽帶於舍，故有相望相攝相帶之義。此成相中，隨約一緣即正是總絕待無側，能成緣外無別所成，是故不說相望相攝之義。壞相者，明作之不作，謂椽等諸緣各住自法本來不動也。問：此中不動與前異相中不動何別？答：前異相中位不動故。瓦一尺位與椽丈二位各雖不動，而有相望之義，此中體不動故，法法各各不相知也。約成相堂詰於諸緣柱成耶？乃至瓦成耶？如是遍詰，無有一物成彼堂。由如是故，成相堂究竟也，即作而不作故。壞相即成，非滅壞之壞也。

The Great Record says: As for the six characteristics, the two characteristics of universal and particular express that phenomena are inexhaustible; the two characteristics of identical and distinct manifest that phenomena are unhindered; the two characteristics of integrating and disintegrating show that phenomena are without flanking [others]. The doctrinal meaning of the One Vehicle does not go beyond these three. If explained separately: the universal characteristic directly points to the self-substance of the non-abiding Dharma; the particular characteristic indicates the inexhaustibility of the non-abiding universal; the identical characteristic manifests the unhindered nature of inexhaustibility; the distinct characteristic explains that unhinderedness does not contradict [diversity]; the integrating characteristic shows that non-contradiction is without flanking [others]; the disintegrating characteristic expresses that being without flanking is unmoved. Question: What is the self-substance of the non-abiding Dharma? Answer: It is that the phenomena of the dharmadhātu blend into a single body. Question: Do the phenomena of the dharmadhātu become a single body because they move? Answer: It is only because they do not move that they become a single body. If discussed in terms of this single hall, then each of the various conditions such as rafters does not move on its own, and only then can a single hall of universal characteristic be accomplished. Question: Why is it said that the particular characteristic expresses inexhaustibility and so forth? Answer: As for the particular characteristic, because the various conditions such as rafters are individually distinct, they manifest the qualities of not being one within the single hall of universal characteristic; therefore, it is said that the particular characteristic points to the inexhaustibility of the universal characteristic. Among conditions such as rafters, there must be the identical characteristic: a twelve-foot rafter corresponds to a twenty-pace hall, and other conditions are also like this; therefore, it is said that the identical characteristic manifests the unhindered nature of inexhaustibility. Furthermore, among these conditions there must be the distinct characteristic: although a twelve-foot rafter corresponds to a twenty-pace hall, it does not move from its own twelve-foot position, and other conditions are also like this; therefore, it is said that the distinct characteristic clarifies that unhinderedness does not contradict [diversity]. When one sees that this twelve-foot rafter accomplishes this hall, on its flanks there are no other conditions; therefore, this single rafter is itself without flanking [others], and other conditions are also like this; therefore, it is said that the integrating characteristic shows that non-contradiction is without flanking [others]. Because disintegration takes place right where integration occurs, it is called the disintegrating characteristic, expressing that being without flanking is unmoved. Question: Why are there only six, neither more nor fewer? Answer: The pair of universal and particular allows those of superior capacity to enter; the pair of identical and distinct allows those of middling capacity to enter; the pair of integrating and disintegrating allows those of inferior capacity to enter. Precisely because those of inferior capacity cannot attain the universal within identity and distinctness, they are not reduced to four or five. Although they are of inferior capacity, through progressively practicing integration and disintegration they will certainly attain entry into the universal; therefore, they are not increased to seven or eight. Kangzang says: "The universal characteristic is because the one contains many qualities; the particular characteristic is because the many qualities are not one. The particulars rely upon the universal and complete that universal" (end of quotation). Question: Regarding "the one contains many qualities," does the universal universalize many qualities, or do the particulars particularize many qualities? Answer: Both meanings obtain. That is, because particulars are gathered to accomplish the universal, to say that particulars particularize many qualities also obtains. Yet, as for the particular qualities possessed within that universal, each and every one completely exhausts the universal; hence, to say that the universal universalizes many qualities also obtains. Question: If so, should an inexhaustible universal be established? Answer: Although it is called "many qualities," they are not a "many" outside the one; thus, this objection does not apply. Question: Since it is said that the universal characteristic is that the one contains many qualities, the many qualities contained and the containing one differ in doctrinal aspect; why say that they are not a "many" outside the one? Answer: It is merely that the locus where the many qualities unite is designated as the containing single universal; therefore, they are neither a many outside the one, nor an one outside the many. Regarding "the particulars rely upon the universal and complete that universal": Question: If the six characteristics are categorized by type, universal, identical, and integrating form one domain, while particular, distinct, and disintegrating form another domain. Since they are of the same type as the universal, the identical has the meaning of being identical to the universal, and the integrating has the meaning of integrating the universal; why then does the particular characteristic, while being of the same type as distinct and disintegrating, have the meaning of completing the universal? Answer: If one attains the universal characteristic, there is no need for the particular characteristic; it is only to show the universal characteristic to those capacities who have not yet attained it that it is opened up. At the time of opening up the particular, the meaning of the universal is already manifested; therefore, within the particular there is the meaning of completing the universal. Question: Does it reach completion, or does it not reach completion? Answer: It reaches completion. Question: Since this is an explanation of the particular characteristic, it should not reach completion of the original universal; why say it reaches it? Answer: Since at the time of dividing the universal, the particular qualities are manifested by opening up the universal, when the particulars in turn complete the universal, it reaches completion. Question: If so, is there a particular appearance within the universal? Answer: There is not. Why? Because it was originally opened up within the universal that has no particular appearance; though its particular characteristics reach completion of the original universal, there is no particular appearance within the universal. Question: If so, how does this differ from the three vehicles' eliminating conventional distinctions to return to equal truth? Answer: In the One Vehicle, distinction is entirely non-distinction, and non-distinction is entirely distinction; it is not by eliminating distinction that one returns to non-distinction; therefore, they differ. As for the identical characteristic: wishing to manifest the qualities of the universal, one opens up the particular characteristic. Once the particulars are opened up, fearing that deluded people might think those particular characteristics are vastly distinct from the universal, and wishing to make them realize that those particular characteristics are entirely identical to the universal, the identical characteristic is clarified next to the particular characteristic. Identity has multiple meanings: identity with what is above and identity with what is below, internal identity and external identity. If discussed in terms of this house: that the various conditions are identical to the universal house is identity with what is above; that the universal house is identical to the various conditions is identity with what is below. Within identity with what is above: that the various conditions are identical to the house is inward-facing identity; that the various conditions, viewed in relation to one another, are equal in their functional meaning of accomplishing the house is outward-facing identity. Furthermore, there are two meanings: partial identity and full identity. A one-foot tile producing one foot's worth of power, being identical to the twenty-pace hall, is partial identity. A one-foot tile producing twenty paces' worth of power, being identical to the twenty-pace hall, is full identity. As for the distinct characteristic: it shows the meaning that the various conditions that can accomplish it are distinct in shape and type, yet do not move from their respective positions. Question: If they are truly distinct, should they not be non-identical? Answer: It is precisely because they are distinct that the meaning of identity can exist. If they were not distinct, the tile being one foot, the rafter would also be one foot, which would contradict their original conditional positions and lose the prior meaning of acting together in equality to make the house. Question: If so, when a one-foot tile produces twenty paces' worth of power identical to the twenty-pace hall, and the rafter is also like this, does this not also lose their original conditional positions? Answer: If the tile moved from its own one-foot position to become identical to the rafter's twelve-foot position and only then produced twenty paces of power, and the rafter were also like this, they would lose their original positions. But the tile itself does not move from its original one-foot position, and the rafter does not move from its twelve-foot position, yet each produces twenty paces' worth of power identical to the hall; therefore, although they both produce twenty paces' worth of power, the tile is not twelve feet and the rafter is not one foot, but each abides in its own position; hence, they do not contradict each other. As for the integrating characteristic: it clarifies non-acting action; that is, the various conditions, without moving from their respective positions, can accomplish the house. In the previous identical characteristic, the various conditions such as rafters, looking toward and subsuming one another, are equal in their functional meaning of accomplishing the house. Furthermore, regarding the various conditions such as rafters viewed in relation to the universal, the house carries the rafters; viewed from the universal to the conditions, the rafter carries the house; thus, there are the meanings of mutually viewing, mutually subsuming, and mutually carrying. In this integrating characteristic, in accordance with any single condition, it is precisely the universal, absolute and without flanking [others]; outside the conditions that can accomplish it there is no other accomplished [house]; therefore, the meanings of mutual viewing and mutual subsuming are not spoken of. As for the disintegrating characteristic: it clarifies the non-action of action; that is, the various conditions such as rafters each abide in their own phenomena and are originally unmoved. Question: What is the difference between the unmoved here and the unmoved in the previous distinct characteristic? Answer: Because in the previous distinct characteristic positions are unmoved, though the one-foot position of the tile and the twelve-foot position of the rafter each do not move, there is the meaning of mutual viewing. Here, because their essence is unmoved, phenomenon and phenomenon each do not know one another. Questioning the various conditions regarding the integrated hall: is it the pillar that accomplishes it? Up to: is it the tile that accomplishes it? Questioning everywhere like this, there is not a single thing that accomplishes that hall. Because of this, the integrated hall is ultimate; that is, acting yet not acting. Disintegration is precisely integration, not the disintegration of destruction.