---
title: "御製揀魔辨異錄 · 第一"
description: "清世宗雍正皇帝御製揀魔辨異錄是一部重要的佛教論辯著作。作者雍正皇帝以帝王身份介入清初漢傳佛教內部關於臨濟宗天童派與密雲圓悟法嗣漢月法藏一系的法義之爭。該書嚴厲批判法藏及其門人弘忍的禪學觀點，指其悖離正統，並以政令方式支持天童一系，打壓對方。此舉深刻影響了清代佛教的發展走向，強化了朝廷對佛教思想的控制，也成為研究雍正時期宗教政策及禪宗思想史的重要文獻。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcwtfvn027koie04t9iwocpi"
---

## 御製揀魔辨異錄卷一

> Imperial Volume 1: Distinguishing the Demonic

魔忍曰。佛不云乎。吾有正法眼藏。涅槃妙心。實相無相。微妙法門。付囑摩訶大迦葉。夫涅槃妙心。即吾人本具之廣大心體也。正法眼藏。即雙明雙暗。同死同生之金剛眼也。心即眼。眼即心。實相而無相者也。如國之印璽然。無前際。無後際。無中際。一印而文理備焉。

> The demon Endurance says: Did the Buddha not declare, "I have the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye, the wondrous mind of Nirvana, the reality-mark that has no mark, the subtle and wondrous Dharma-gate, which I entrust to Mahākāśyapa." Now, the "wondrous mind of Nirvana" is the vast fundamental mind inherent in each of us. The "Treasury of the True Dharma Eye" is the Vajra Eye that illuminates both light and darkness simultaneously and lives and dies together with all things. Mind is the Eye; the Eye is mind — reality itself without any mark. It is like a royal seal: it has no beginning, no end, no middle; in a single imprint, all patterns and principles are fully contained.

若欲徵心。則雖豎窮三際。橫亘十方。猶徵不盡。豈未讀楞嚴七處徵心耶。可惜世尊於百萬人天中。拈出一花。不在內。不在外。不在中間。直指人心。見性成佛。却被魔忍吾人本具之廣大心體一句鈍置煞了也。盡大地是一隻眼。乃以正法眼藏。為雙明雙暗。同死同生之金剛眼。豈止認奴作郎。明暗生死。如何又是金剛眼。金剛眼。如何又有明暗生死。說明金剛眼尚不得。何況暗金剛眼。說生金剛眼尚不得。何況死金剛眼。無論孟八郎恁麼去。大似韓盧逐塊。縱使說得毫釐無差。方成天地懸隔。正法眼藏。涅槃妙心。實相無相。微妙法門。若可詮註得破。何必迦葉方堪受囑。且三藏十二分。早已說得盛水不漏。又何為末後拈出一花。兩人相對揑怪。誑惑天下後世男女。又謂心即眼。眼即心。然則離眼便非心。離心便非眼耶。盡大地。指何物為不是心。盡大地。指何物為不是眼。將此心眼。自謂法王寶印。正同偽造印信。豈真璽印耶。又以一印而文理備。拈提三際。夫三際者。無際之實際。實際而無際。若譬之一印而文理備。則謂之無前際後際。猶依稀仿佛。如何是無中際。況未印即前際。既印即後際。又何所為無前後際耶。與三際之論。有何交涉。

> If you try to investigate the mind, even if you probe every corner of the past, present, and future, and every direction of the ten realms, you will never exhaust it. Have you not read the \*Shurangama Sutra\*’s seven inquiries into the mind? How regrettable that the World-Honored One, before millions of gods and humans, simply raised a flower—not inside, not outside, not in between, directly pointing to the human mind to see one’s true nature and become a Buddha. Yet this very statement about our inherent vast mind is dulled and stifled by the phrase “the great mind-body inherent in us all.” The entire great earth is but one eye. And yet you call the treasury of the true Dharma eye both dual light and dual darkness, both dying and living together—a vajra eye. Is this not mistaking a servant for the master? How can “light and dark, life and death” be the vajra eye? And how can the vajra eye have light and dark, life and death? You cannot even speak of a live vajra eye, let alone a dead one. Whether you go about this like a reckless brute—like a dog chasing lumps of earth—or you explain it with utmost precision, you are still as far off as heaven is from earth. The treasury of the true Dharma eye, the wondrous mind of nirvana, the formless true form—this subtle, wondrous Dharma gate—if it could be cracked open by mere words, why would it require Mahakashyapa alone to receive the transmission? Furthermore, the entire Tripitaka of twelve divisions has already explained it thoroughly, like water in a watertight vessel. So why, at the very end, did he raise a single flower, and the two of them stand there, acting strangely, fooling people of later generations? Then you say: “Mind is the eye, the eye is mind.” If that is so, is there no mind apart from the eye? Is there no eye apart from mind? In the entire great earth, what can you point to that is not mind? What can you point to that is not eye? To claim this mind-eye as the Dharma king’s precious seal is like forging an official seal—how could it be the true imperial seal? Moreover, you say this single seal contains all patterns and principles, and you lift and point to the three times. The three times are the timeless reality itself, and reality is timeless. If you liken it to a single seal containing all patterns, you might vaguely grasp “no past” and “no future.” But how can there be no present? Furthermore, before being stamped is the past; after being stamped is the future. So what do you mean by “no past or future”? What does any of this have to do with the doctrine of the three times?

魔忍曰。及其弊也。知解橫生。故不得不變而為機鋒。為棒喝。又其弊也。不得不變而定宗旨。宗旨定。若三代之禮樂備焉。雖千聖繼出。不能易矣。夫言論之弊也。弊於心性。而棒喝之弊也。弊於亂統。故從棒喝悟者。知亂統之病。而建同喝四喝。料簡元要。函蓋截流等綱宗。臨濟雲門是也。從機語悟者。知心性之病。而建四禁五位。六相種種三昧門等綱宗。曹洞溈仰法眼是也。

> As the teachings declined, people became consumed by intellectual understanding and analysis, so a shift was necessary—toward direct encounters, sharp exchanges, shouts, and blows. But as these methods also declined, it became necessary to establish clear guiding principles. Once these principles were set, they became as complete as the rites and music of the ancient Three Dynasties—even if a thousand sages were to arise afterward, they could not change them. The flaw of verbal teachings lies in clinging to concepts of mind and nature. The flaw of shouts and blows lies in chaotic, indiscriminate transmission. Therefore, those awakened through shouts and blows recognized the sickness of confusion and disorder, and established systems of inquiry—like Linji's and Yunmen's methods. Those awakened through direct encounters recognized the sickness of intellectual fixation, and established systems of discipline—like Caodong's, Guishan's, and Fayan's approaches.

從上諸祖。終日言而未嘗言。然而何一言離却宗旨。離却宗旨。其言又何足道。乃謂一弊而為機鋒。為棒喝。再弊而為定宗旨。宗旨既定。若三代之禮樂備。雖千聖繼出不能易。勦襲莊子之遺漦。唐突佛祖向上邊事。可乎。如此。則所為機鋒棒喝宗旨者。乃是實法。乃是妄語。乃是揑怪。乃是拖泥帶水。自救不了。魔之所以為魔。如是如是。又謂臨濟雲門。建同喝等綱宗。曹溪溈仰法眼。建四禁等綱宗。硬作主張。妄生區別。鴟鼠嗜糞。牽引鳳凰。與共一坑同食。埋殺五宗矣。

> Throughout history, the patriarchs spoke all day long, yet they never uttered a single word. But how could any of their words stray from the core principle? If it does stray from the core principle, then such words are not even worth mentioning. Some say the first corruption turned into sharp verbal exchanges and physical blows (kōans and shouts and strikes). The second corruption turned into rigidly fixed principles. Once these principles were fixed, they became like the elaborate rites and music of the Three Dynasties—even if a thousand sages followed, they could not change them. But to plagiarize from Zhuangzi's leftover phrases and casually distort the matters of the Buddhas and patriarchs—is that acceptable? If so, then what we call "kōans," "shouts and strikes," and "fixed principles" become merely concrete methods—false speech, fabrications, muddy and tangled affairs that cannot even save oneself. This is what makes a demon a demon—just so, just so. Furthermore, some claim that Linji and Yunmen established the essential teachings of "one shout" and "three gates," and that Caoshan, Weishan, Yangqi, and Fayan established the essential teachings of "four prohibitions." They forcefully assert these as fixed doctrines, creating artificial distinctions. This is like owls and rats feeding on filth, then dragging phoenixes into the same pit to eat together—thus burying alive the Five Houses.

魔忍曰。正法眼藏。果易言哉。惟其不易言也。故先聖秘之而聽其悟。惟其不易悟也。故湮沒而至於不提。夫湮沒既久。必有乘願再來之大士。起而救之。然而救之之際。不無觸諱。故有疑之者。有毀之者。甚至投毒下獄。篆面鞭背。在古人猶所不免。況今日乎。語曰絃急則斷。亦勢之固然也。三峰老人。履固然之禍。而卒免矣。有所不能免者。其在我乎。

> The Demon of Patience said: "The Treasury of the True Dharma Eye—can it really be spoken of lightly? Precisely because it is not easy to speak of, the ancient sages kept it secret, allowing each person to awaken to it on their own. And precisely because it is not easy to awaken to, it has been buried and forgotten, to the point where it is no longer mentioned. Now, after being buried for so long, there must inevitably appear a great being, born with a vow, to rise and rescue it. Yet in the very act of rescue, it is impossible to avoid giving offense. Thus some will doubt, some will slander—some will even resort to poison, imprisonment, branding on the face, and flogging on the back. Even the ancients could not escape such things—how much more so in the present day? As the saying goes, 'If the string is too taut, it will snap.' This is simply the way of things. The Old Man of Three Peaks walked into this inevitable disaster and yet ultimately escaped it. As for what cannot be escaped—that, perhaps, lies with me."

夫此一大事。雖釋迦牟尼佛。亦秘不得。釋迦牟尼佛。亦提不得。說法四十九年。三藏十二部具在。如何秘得。且山河大地。十方虗空具在。如何能取而秘之。然說法四十九年。三藏十二部。不曾說著一箇字。如何提得。山河大地。十方虗空。塵說剎說熾然說。而悟者自悟。迷者自迷。又如何能取而提之。魔忍乃謂惟其不易言。故先聖秘之而聽其悟。惟其不易悟。故湮沒而至於不提。可為白日囈語。此中本自清淨。此土本自極樂。何嘗有造次顛沛。被髮纓冠景象。乃謂伊師魔藏。以此事湮沒不提。乃觸犯忌諱而提之。禍事不了。伊又明知不免。挺身承當而提之。可怜可怜。何苦何苦。

> This is a great matter. Even Shakyamuni Buddha could not keep it secret, nor could he fully express it. He taught for forty-nine years, leaving behind the complete Tripitaka of twelve divisions—how could it be kept secret? Moreover, mountains, rivers, the earth, and the vast empty space of the ten directions all exist—how could anyone take them and hide them away? Yet, in those forty-nine years of teaching and the twelve divisions of the canon, not a single word was truly spoken. How, then, could it ever be expressed? Mountains, rivers, the earth, and all the realms of space speak of it endlessly—by atoms, by realms, with blazing intensity. But those who awaken awaken on their own, and those who are deluded remain deluded on their own. How can anyone seize it and try to force expression? "Mo Ren" claims that precisely because it is hard to put into words, the ancient sages kept it secret, letting people awaken on their own. And precisely because it is hard to awaken, this matter has been buried and left unexpressed. Such talk is nothing but daytime ravings. This very place is originally pure. This very land is originally the Land of Ultimate Bliss. When was it ever found amidst haste, peril, disheveled hair, or frantic rescue? He then claims that his teacher, "Mo Zang," buried this matter and left it unspoken—and that when he dares to speak of it, he touches taboos, inviting endless trouble. He admits he knows this but still bravely steps forward to express it anyway. How pitiable! How pitiable! Why bother? What for?

魔忍曰。夫世之為書者。集點畫而後成字。集字而後成句。集句而後成章。章之成也。必有先後起止之迹。惟印則無之。學道亦爾。有小悟。有大悟。大悟若印。小悟若集書。當是時。不陞巨匠之堂。未有不於點畫字句。生滿足者。是故興化因大覺而見臨濟先師。洛浦由夾山以透牢關一句。黃龍啟廸於文悅。雲門溫研於雪峰。至若灌溪之造末山。妙喜之從佛果。是皆一悟再悟。至於大悟一十八遍。然而豈有他哉。務與從上印文相合而止耳。風穴曰。祖師心印。狀似鐵牛之機。去即印住。住即印破。乃至印泥印水印空。不留朕跡。予嘗深觀之。自拈花至馬祖臨濟。凡三十九傳。而此印再鑄。光𨦵四射。睨之即喪其睛。所謂印水者也。自興化至圓悟大慧虎邱應菴。又十一傳。而諸老愈唱愈高。愈造愈不可測。若龍變虎踞。風馳電轉。所謂印空者也。至華藏而後。此印漸沒矣。嗟乎。三峰先師。穴重泉以出之。磨其光。刮其垢。還其舊觀。以用於今日。所謂印泥者也。何也。老人生臨濟七百年大法滅盡之後。一呼而不應。再呼之。再呼而不應。三呼之。聲為之咽。氣為之絕。四顧徬徨。而未有和之者。故不得不印諸泥上。以待天下後世。其為心亦苦矣。夫所謂印泥者何。謂印文之不能化也。非印文之不能化也。泥之不能化也。嗚呼。吾輩之終日元要。而不透元要之極者。與彼一棒到底。只不百步耳。可不戒哉。可不慎哉。戒之慎之。藏之護之。以俟其人焉。如臨濟者出。焚其符。剖其印。重於空中圖畫五彩。與正法眼藏。暗相脗合。是三峰之願也。亦從上列祖之願也。

> Demon said, “In the world of books, people build up characters from strokes, sentences from characters, and chapters from sentences. A completed chapter always has a sequence of beginnings and endings. But a seal leaves no such traces. The same is true of the spiritual path. There are small awakenings and great awakenings. A great awakening is like a seal; a small awakening is like assembling a book. Unless you have entered the hall of a true master, you cannot help but be satisfied with mere strokes, words, and phrases. That is why Xinghua, after a great awakening, recognized Linji as his teacher; why Luopu, through Jiashan, broke through the final barrier of that single phrase; why Huanglong was awakened by Wenyue; why Yunmen thoroughly trained under Xuefeng. And as for Guanxi, who sought out Moshan, and Miaoxi, who trained under Foguo, each experienced awakening after awakening, until they reached the ultimate enlightenment eighteen times over. Yet what else was there behind it all? Only the desire to align perfectly with the seal of the patriarchs. Fengxue said, ‘The patriarchs’ mind-seal is like the mechanism of an iron ox. If you move away, it seals you in place; if you stay, it breaks you open. It seals mud, water, and even empty space, leaving no trace behind.’ I have deeply contemplated this. From the Flower Sermon down through Mazu and Linji, there were thirty-nine transmissions, during which this seal was forged anew, its brilliance shooting in all directions. If you looked askance at it, it would blind you — that is what is meant by ‘sealing water.’ From Xinghua through Yuanwu, Dahui, Huqiu, and Ying’an, there were another eleven transmissions. The masters of that era sang ever higher, their attainments ever more unfathomable, like dragons soaring or tigers crouching, like wind rushing or lightning flashing — this is what is meant by ‘sealing empty space.’ But after Huazang, this seal gradually faded away. Alas, my late teacher Sanfeng delved deep into the spring of old to retrieve it. He polished its luster, scraped off its tarnish, and restored it to its original form for use today — this is what is meant by ‘sealing mud.’ Why? The old master lived after the Great Dharma of Linji had been extinguished for seven hundred years. He called out once, but no one answered. He called out again — still no answer. He called out a third time, until his voice choked and his breath failed. He looked around in desperation, but none would echo him. So he had no choice but to imprint the mud, waiting for the world to come. How bitter his heart was! What does ‘sealing mud’ mean? It means that the seal’s pattern could not dissolve into everything. But it was not that the seal pattern could not dissolve — it was that the mud itself could not dissolve. Alas! All day long we chase after profundities, yet we never reach the very depth of the profound — this is no different from mastering a single crooked stick; the distance is only a hundred paces. How can we not take heed? How can we not be careful? Guard this and protect it, waiting for the one who will understand. If one like Linji emerges, burn the tally, break the seal, and paint colorful patterns in the empty sky — perfectly aligning with the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye. This is Sanfeng’s wish, and the wish of all the patriarchs before him.”

三印者。一印空。一印水。一印泥。古今提唱。或云。山河大地。悉皆消殞。前後際斷。則曰印空。見山還是山。見水還是水。則曰印水。末後牢關。脚踏實地。則曰印泥。或云。見空見有。尚有見在。則曰印泥。非空非有。猶落中邊。則曰印水。若到一亦不立地位。中邊俱捐。如來如來。如是如是。則曰印空。或云。三印非是三關。竝皆究竟極則。空來空如。則曰印空。有來有如。則曰印泥。非空非有來。非空非有如。則曰印水。三說雖若異同。總不離正知正見。非可情識知解卜度。魔忍乃謂拈花至臨濟而此印再鑄。所謂印水。興化至圓悟。愈唱愈高。愈不可測。所謂印空。至華嚴而失其印。至魔藏復得之重泉之中。磨光刮垢。頓還舊觀。而為印泥。蓋謂此印即同印綬之印。明得自己手中有箇如來佛傳國璽。伊是真正覺王嫡子而已。世法言之。當同叛賊。出世法言之。可謂狂癡矣。夫帝王統緒。亦在奉天承運。不在傳國璽之有無。況乎覺王正令。豈有璽印之可傳哉。如果有之。則是作為實法矣。伊之為外道邪魔。自供自認。

> The Three Seals are: the Seal of Emptiness, the Seal of Water, and the Seal of Mud. Throughout history, various teachers have explained them differently. Some say: When mountains, rivers, and the great earth all vanish, and the chain of past and future is broken—that is the Seal of Emptiness. When mountains are still mountains and water is still water—that is the Seal of Water. When we reach the final barrier and stand firmly on solid ground—that is the Seal of Mud. Others say: Seeing emptiness or seeing existence still involves "seeing"—that is the Seal of Mud. Being neither empty nor existent still falls into the extremes of center and periphery—that is the Seal of Water. But when we reach the state where even "one" is not established, where both center and periphery are abandoned, where it is just "Thus Come, Thus Gone, Thus, Thus"—that is the Seal of Emptiness. Still others say: These three seals are not three barriers; they are all ultimate truths. When emptiness comes and is perfectly empty, that is the Seal of Emptiness. When existence comes and is perfectly as it is, that is the Seal of Mud. When neither emptiness nor existence comes, and neither emptiness nor existence is, that is the Seal of Water. Although these three explanations differ, they never depart from true knowledge and true vision. They cannot be grasped by emotion, intellect, or speculation. Mo Ren claimed that from the Flower Sermon to Linji, this seal was re-cast—this he called the Seal of Water. From Xinghua to Yuanwu, it was sung ever higher and became increasingly unfathomable—this he called the Seal of Emptiness. Then, by Huayan it was lost, and Mo Zang recovered it from the deep, polishing it clean and restoring its original glory, calling it the Seal of Mud. According to him, this seal was like an official seal of authority, implying that one had in their own hand the Imperial Seal of the Thus Come One—making them a true son of the Awakened King. In worldly terms, such a claim deserves to be called treason. In the transcendental Dharma, it can only be called madness and delusion. Even an emperor's succession depends on receiving the mandate of Heaven, not on whether he possesses the Imperial Seal. So how much less can the true command of the Awakened King be passed down through a physical seal? If such a thing existed, then the Dharma would be reduced to a concrete object. By making that claim, Mo Ren exposed himself as a heretic and a demon—freely confessing it with his own words.

魔忍曰。四七二三諸祖師。應機多標理致。而棒喝機鋒。始自馬祖。諸老宿不察三峰之用心。憎其異己。至欲抹殺從上相承之法印。自謂一棒到底。不立窠臼。獨不思棒喝之始自誰乎。若謂此棒直接馬祖之上。則馬祖已上。未嘗用棒喝也。若謂此棒仍承馬祖之下。則馬祖已下。未嘗無宗旨也。是二者何居。若謂自立門庭。不從人得。其如棒喝何。進退推求。實無本據。反欲闢人之扶救慧命者。為無師。為外道。為旁出。其誰曰信然。今三峰往矣。而闢書又一再至。則吾之辨亦安能已耶。非辨也。救也。

> Mo Ren said: "The patriarchs of the four, seven, two, and three generations responded to circumstances by often marking the truth directly. However, the methods of shouts and blows, along with the use of kōans, began with Mazu. The old masters, failing to recognize the intention behind the Three Peaks' approach, resented its divergence from their own ways. They went so far as to try to erase the successive seal of dharma handed down from the past, claiming to 'strike directly to the ground without setting up a nest.' Did they never stop to consider who first used shouts and blows? If they claim such strikes trace directly back to Mazu, then before Mazu, no shouts or blows were used. If they claim these strikes still follow from Mazu onward, then after Mazu, there was never a lack of principle. Which is it? If they say they established their own school, not receiving it from anyone, then how can shouts and blows be accounted for? Pushing forward and pulling back, in truth there is no foundation. Yet they turn around to attack those who rescue the life of wisdom, calling them without a teacher, calling them outsiders, calling them side-branches. Who would call that trustworthy? Now that the Three Peaks are gone, and the condemning writings come again and again, how can I stop my arguments? This is not argument for its own sake; this is rescue."

救者。人有難而吾拯之也。人之乎死而吾生之也。若夫從上佛祖之宗旨。自威音以前無生。彌勒以後無滅。尚非出世閒法。而何有於世諦。何患何難。何得何失。而又何從而救之耶。眾生心無處不緣。惟不能緣於般若之上。今於青天白日。忽起狂華。妄生救心。妄立救相。妄出救言。妄成救境。無論不須救。實亦不受救。而此大妄語成。墮無閒獄。則雖欲自救而不得也。且宗旨之與棒喝。有二乎。無二乎。譬如三峰法藏。棒喝即三峰。宗旨即法藏。乃欲是法藏而非三峰。滅三峰以救法藏。氣急敗壞。被髮纓冠。不謂之狂人不可也。謂棒喝如自馬祖。豈知然燈以前未嘗無乎。且如世尊拈花。拈花非棒喝乎。迦葉微笑。微笑非棒喝乎。推而廣之。天有四時。春秋冬夏。風雨霜露。天之棒喝也。地載神氣。風霆流形。庶物露生。地之棒喝也。鳶飛戾天。魚躍于淵。物之棒喝也。爪生髮長。脉動氣旋。飯過其中。衣裹其外。身之棒喝也。何得云馬祖而後始有。且棒喝亦名相耳。譬如冠然。夏曰收。殷曰冔。周曰弁。秦漢以來曰冠。魏晉以後。始有帽之名。今則冠與帽竝稱。而所謂收冔弁者無稱焉。要而論之。不過是暖此頭。飾此頭之一器耳。何問名之異同。棒喝亦不過是建萬法。消萬法之一機。欲人自明宗旨耳。其落處不涉宗旨。其用處不離宗旨。豈得將棒喝與宗旨斤斤較量。何異將冠與頭斤斤較量。不謂之愚癡不可也。如此而一則曰宗旨。再則曰宗旨。是其所謂宗旨。乃魔說而非宗旨。以魔說為宗旨。安得不絕人慧命乎。

> "Salvation" means that when someone is in trouble, I rescue them. When someone is dying, I give them life. But consider the true essence of the Buddhas and patriarchs from the past: before the era of Weiyin, there was no birth; after Maitreya, there is no extinction. This is beyond even the worldly and transcendental dharmas, so how could it be bound by worldly truths? What trouble is there? What difficulty? What gain or loss? And where would there be a need to save? The minds of sentient beings cling to everything—except the wisdom of prajñā. Now, in broad daylight, suddenly illusory flowers appear. Falsely, one gives rise to a "saving mind," falsely establishes a "saving appearance," falsely utters "saving words," and falsely creates a "saving realm." Not only is there no need to save, but in reality, nothing can be saved. And yet, this great falsehood becomes a grave offense, leading to the hell of endless suffering—and then, even trying to save oneself becomes impossible. Now, is there a difference between the essential teaching and the methods of shout and stick? Or are they the same? For example, consider the relationship between Sanfeng and Fazang: the shout and stick are Sanfeng; the essential teaching is Fazang. To insist on favoring Fazang while rejecting Sanfeng, to destroy Sanfeng to save Fazang—this is reckless and frantic, like someone running wild with disheveled hair and a hat on backward. You cannot help but call such a person mad. Do people think the use of shout and stick began with Mazu? Do they not realize that before the Lamp of Dīpaṃkara, these methods had always existed? Consider the World-Honored One holding up a flower: was that not a shout and stick? When Kāśyapa smiled, was that not also a shout and stick? Extend this idea further: Heaven has four seasons—spring, summer, autumn, winter—and its wind, rain, frost, and dew are Heaven's shout and stick. Earth carries divine energy, and its wind and thunder transform all forms, bringing forth the myriad things—Earth's shout and stick. Kites soar to the sky, fish leap in the depths—these are the shout and stick of all things. Fingernails grow, hair lengthens, pulses move and breath circulates, food enters the stomach, clothes wrap the body—this is the body's own shout and stick. So how can you say that shout and stick only existed after Mazu? Furthermore, "shout and stick" are merely names and appearances. Consider the hat used for the head: in the Xia dynasty, it was called "shou"; in the Shang, "xu"; in the Zhou, "bian"; from the Qin and Han onward, it became "guan"; after the Wei and Jin, the name "mao" appeared. Today, "guan" and "mao" are used interchangeably, while the old names like "shou," "xu," and "bian" are forgotten. In essence, it is just something to keep the head warm and adorn it—why argue over the differences in names? Similarly, "shout and stick" is simply a method to establish all dharmas and dissolve all dharmas, intended to help people realize the essential teaching for themselves. When it does not land on the essential teaching, it still never departs from it. How can you pit shout and stick against the essential teaching in a petty comparison? This is like comparing a hat to a head—can you avoid calling such a person foolish? If someone then says, "The essential teaching is this, the essential teaching is that," then what they call the essential teaching is actually a demonic teaching, not the true teaching. And if you mistake demonic teachings for the essential teaching, how can you avoid cutting off the lifeblood of wisdom for all beings?

魔忍曰。四十九年說法。皆隨機遮護。至拈花一著。始盡天上天下獨尊之旨。先師謂一花拈出。圓證吾人心法廣大。非臆談也。闢書以一棒為全提獨尊。謂此外別有。即同魔說。豈吾所謂全提獨尊之旨哉。吾所謂獨尊者。如天子為萬國之獨尊。吾所謂全提者。如萬國皆在天子王化之中。而一令而天下肅。發一言而天下應。除一官授一職。而天下被其澤。天下之教教化化皆歸之。故謂之獨尊。非天下之外。別有獨尊。而獨尊之外。別有天下也。心法亦然。洞宗有五位。以君位為尊。臨濟有四賓主。以主中主為貴。雲門有全提半提。以全提為究竟。教中有海印三昧。謂萬象森羅。皆在海光之中。無前際後際。而一時俱現。所謂全提獨尊者也。若夫闢書之一棒。謂之法外之心。謂之乾慧。特孤獨之獨耳。獨可也。尊則吾不知矣。

> Mo Ren said: "The teachings given over forty-nine years were all skillful means tailored to the needs of sentient beings. Only when the flower was held up did the true meaning of 'the honored one under heaven and above heaven' become fully clear. My late teacher said that when that flower was held up, it perfectly revealed that our inherent mind-nature is vast and boundless. This is no empty talk. However, the refuting text claims that a single strike is the complete expression and sole honor, implying that anything beyond it is demonic speech. Is this truly the meaning of 'complete expression and sole honor'? What I call 'sole honor' is like the Son of Heaven being the unique sovereign over all nations. What I call 'complete expression' is like all nations being under the transforming influence of the Son of Heaven—when he issues a command, the world is in awe; when he speaks a word, the world responds; when he appoints or removes an official, the world receives his grace. All teachings and transformations return to him. This is what 'sole honor' means. It does not mean there is a sole honor apart from the world, nor a world apart from the sole honor. The principle of mind-nature is the same. The Caodong school has five ranks, with the ruler's position being most honored. Linji has four guest-host relations, with the 'host within the host' being most precious. Yunmen has 'complete expression' and 'partial expression,' with 'complete expression' being ultimate. The scriptures speak of the 'Ocean Seal Samadhi,' where the myriad phenomena of the world appear simultaneously within the light of the ocean, without past or future. This is the 'complete expression and sole honor.' As for the single strike in the refuting text, it is called a mind beyond the teachings, a dry wisdom—a solitary kind of 'sole' indeed. Solitary? Perhaps. But as for 'honor'? That, I do not understand.

世尊初生。一手指天。一手指地。周行七步。天上天下。唯我獨尊。雲門云。若使老僧看見。一棒打煞。與狗子喫。貴圖天下太平。雪竇云。雲門此語有兩負門。有一門不共戴天。有一門恩大難酬。古德提唱。究竟是何心行。且西天記此公案。又是何心行。若解不得。入地獄如箭射。若解得。亦入地獄如箭射。解得解不得。天下總然太平。何以故。天上天下。唯我獨尊故。密雲以一棒為全提獨尊。尚復依稀似曲。若魔忍之喻。真乃烏焉成馬。有甚了期。又復牽合五位君臣四賓主。謂五位以君位為尊。四賓主以主中主為貴。不特與獨尊之旨。毫無交涉。且五位中。又可有四卑而一尊。四賓主中。又可有三賤而一貴耶。五位猶一手五指。四賓主猶一室四隅。莫非東看為西。南觀成北。同中有異異中同。豈可實實作一二三四五會。若夫指斥密雲一棒為乾慧。為孤獨之獨。直是逆心熾然。妄呵肆罵其祖。更無可論矣　佛祖語言。竝是直心直行。只是向人直說。而會者自會。不會者自不會耳。何嘗隨機遮護。若隨機遮護。便是眾生相。并不到聖處。何為佛語。

> When the World-Honored One was born, he pointed one hand to the sky and one hand to the ground, walked seven steps, and declared: "Above the heavens and below the heavens, I alone am the honored one." Yunmen said: "If I had seen him, I would have struck him dead with one blow and fed him to the dogs—just to bring peace to the world." Xuedou said: "Yunmen’s words have two faults. One is an offense beyond endurance; the other is a kindness too great to repay." The ancient masters raised this case. What was their true intent? And what was the intent behind recording this story in the Western heavens? If you don’t understand, you will fall into hell as quickly as an arrow flies. If you do understand, you will also fall into hell as quickly as an arrow flies. Whether you understand or not, peace reigns throughout the world. Why? Because "above the heavens and below the heavens, I alone am the honored one." When Miyun claimed that the single blow fully expressed this sole honor, he still sang only a faint tune. As for the devil’s simile, that truly twists black into white. Where is the end? He further forced the five positions of lord and vassal and the four guests and hosts into this, saying the lord position in the five positions is honored, and the host within the host in the four guests and hosts is valued. Not only does this have nothing to do with the meaning of "sole honor," but can there be four lowly ones and one exalted in the five positions? Or three base ones and one noble in the four guests and hosts? The five positions are like the five fingers of one hand; the four guests and hosts are like the four corners of a single room. They are nothing but east seen as west, south viewed as north, sameness within difference, difference within sameness. How can they be forced into a literal one, two, three, four, five? As for those denouncing Miyun’s single blow as "dry wisdom" and a "lonely solitude," they are merely burning with defiance, recklessly slandering their own ancestor—no more need be said. The words of the Buddhas and patriarchs are direct in heart and deed. They simply speak directly to people, and those who get it, get it; those who don’t, don’t. They never use expedient protection to cover things up. If they did, that would be the mark of sentient beings, and they would never reach the holy state. How then could it be the speech of a Buddha?

魔忍曰。凡先聖或示此○相。或示此●相之類。若虙羲之卦畫也。雖無文字。而天地萬物之理備焉。而七佛列祖傳法偈。若文王之繫辭也。所云雙頭獨結。無文密印等。其爻象乎。蓋以此○相統言詮。以言詮入此○相。不相害也。昔臨濟大師初住鎮州。即謂普化克符曰。我欲於此建立黃檗宗旨。汝二人成褫我。二人稟旨上問。濟於三段二打之後。以四料簡明之。於是便有元要賓主照用等宗旨立焉。夫黃檗接臨濟。不過三頓痛棒。而濟乃建立若是。豈非三頓之象彖乎。然卦無象彖。卦之理固自若也。使由卦以知象彖。由象彖以知卦。卦之理亦固自若也。今有人焉。執一晝以為乾。問其乾之所以乾。則嗔目大怒。至欲焚其書。絕其人。止存一書。以教天下後世。是果知乾乎。

> Mo Ren said: When ancient sages displayed this symbol "○" or "●", it was like Fu Xi's hexagrams. Even without written words, the principles of heaven, earth, and all things were fully contained within them. The transmission verses of the Seven Buddhas and Patriarchs are like King Wen's explanations to the hexagrams. What is called "the double-headed single knot" or "the wordless secret seal"—are these not equivalent to the lines and images of the hexagrams? Thus, the symbol "○" encompasses verbal expression, and verbal expression leads into this symbol "○". They do not obstruct each other. In the past, when Chan Master Linji first took up residence in Zhenzhou, he said to Puhua and Kefu: "I wish to establish Huangbo's teachings here. Both of you must assist me." The two received his instruction and asked him about it. After Linji had struck them three times and twice with his staff, he clarified the teaching through the Four Discernments. From this arose the principles of "host and guest," "illumination and function," and so on. Now, Huangbo's connection with Linji was simply through three heavy blows of the staff, yet Linji established such a profound teaching. Is this not like the images and explanations of the three strokes? Yet, even without images or explanations, the principle of the hexagram remains exactly as it is. If one comes to know the images and explanations through the hexagram, and knows the hexagram through the images and explanations, the principle of the hexagram still remains exactly as it is. If there is a person today who takes a single line drawing and insists it is the Qian hexagram, yet when asked what makes Qian \*Qian\*, he glares with rage and even wants to burn the books and sever all ties—leaving only that single drawing to teach all people throughout the ages—does such a person truly understand the Qian hexagram?

伏羲時無文字。所謂

者。即是乾字。非伏羲畫此象。而文王以乾元亨利貞注釋之也。至於○。則是何文字乎。又可作文字邊會乎。易之為書。雖天地萬物之理備。然此是其餘事。若論其旨要。皆所以盡人倫。人倫之內。萬有不齊。一一隨時變易。以期適得其宜。必有道矣。聖人欲如善見毗婆沙律之一一分而列之。而不勝其𦣱也。於是多方設喻以該之。四聖各自作易。道則同而義不相襲也。與佛門相較。於律門最相似。於此不明。往往牽引易語。為似佛祖教外別傳者。此兩家門庭。皆未曾涉足者之說也。譬如藏內律文。何條有礙宗旨。擬指何條與宗旨相似。魔忍乃以○為卦畫。以七佛列祖傳法偈等為繫辭。而以其師所揑造之雙頭獨結。無文密印為爻象。真所為扣槃捫燭。無端衊聖污賢。至以臨濟打克符普化。以四料簡明之。於是便有元要賓主照用等宗旨立焉。為黃檗三頓棒之彖象等語。此邪魔外道之尤者。祖師機緣。如清凉風。如大火聚。捉不得。近不得。豈有今日棒喝。而明日揑幾句話頭以疏通證明之。知此祖師。雖令洗脚。亦不需也。宗旨二字。即同教外別傳。皆是不可名而強名。出於無奈。者箇原不受這等塗污埋沒。今乃以四料簡元要賓主照用為宗旨。豈但迷頭認影。且認脚影為頭矣。豈但元要等葛藤。即三藏十二分。亦豈瞿曇宗旨。若云瞿曇以此為宗旨。則為謗佛。

> In the time of Fu Xi, there were no written characters. What is referred to as the trigram <figure><graphic url="../figures/X/X65p0196\_01.gif"/></figure> is simply the character for "qian." It is not that Fu Xi drew this symbol and then King Wen later interpreted it with the phrase "qian: yuan, heng, li, zhen." As for the symbol ○, what kind of written character is that? Can it be considered part of the writing system at all? The \*Book of Changes\* as a text contains the principles of all things in heaven and earth, but this is merely incidental. If we discuss its essential meaning, it is entirely about fulfilling human relationships. Within human relationships, there are countless variations, each changing with time to seek what is appropriate. There must be a principle guiding this. The sages wished to list them one by one, like the rules in the \*Shan Jian Pi Po Sha Lü\*, but it became too vast to handle. Thus, they used many metaphors to encompass them. The four sages each composed their own \*Classic of Changes\*; their principles were the same, but their expressions did not repeat one another. Compared to Buddhism, this is most similar to the Vinaya (ethical precepts) school. If one does not understand this, they often drag the language of the \*Changes\* into Buddhism, claiming it is akin to the "special transmission outside the teachings" of the Buddha and patriarchs. This is the talk of those who have never set foot in either tradition. For example, within the Buddhist canon's Vinaya texts, which rule contradicts the core teaching? And to which rule could one point to say it resembles the core teaching? Malicious and deluded people then take ○ as a trigram symbol, and the transmission verses of the Seven Buddhas and patriarchs as the "Appended Judgments" of the \*Changes\*. They take the "double-headed, single-knot, wordless secret seal" fabricated by their teacher as the line images. This is truly like groping a basin or touching a candle—randomly defaming sages and wise ones. Furthermore, they use Linji's beating of Kefu and Puhua, and clarify this with the "Four Alternatives." From this, the teaching of the "fundamental essentials," "host and guest," and "illuminating and using" was established, along with statements like "Huangbo's three staff-strikes are the image and judgment." This is the height of heresy and evil. The karmic opportunities of the patriarchs are like a cool breeze or a blazing fire—you cannot grasp them, nor can you approach them. How could today's shouts and beatings, followed by fabricating a few gong'an tomorrow to explain and prove them, be sufficient? If the patriarchs knew about this, they would not even need to have you wash their feet! The term "core teaching" (\*zongzhi\*) is like the "special transmission outside the teachings"—it is an unavoidable, forced name for what cannot be named. \*This\* is originally not subject to such defilement and burial. Now, if you take the "Four Alternatives," "fundamental essentials," "host and guest," and "illuminating and using" as the core teaching, is this not merely "mistaking the head for the reflection"? You are even mistaking the reflection of your foot for your head! Not only are the "fundamental essentials" and such entanglements incorrect, but even the entire Tripitaka and the twelve divisions of teachings—are they the core teaching of Gautama? If you claim that Gautama's core teaching is this, that would be slandering the Buddha.

魔藏頌世尊陞座。文殊白椎公案云。人人都向世尊未陞座前會取。早已錯了也。復頌云。雨過空山水碓聲。文殊何處著槌鳴。脚頭脚底無勞問。寶座從他下與陞。

> A verse on the hidden demon: The World-Honored One ascended the Dharma seat. In the case of Manjushri striking the wooden fish, it is said: If everyone tries to grasp the truth before the World-Honored One ascends the seat, they have already made a mistake. Then it is further chanted: After the rain, in the empty mountain, the sound of the water-powered pestle is heard. Where could Manjushri strike with his mallet? Don't trouble yourself asking about what is at your feet. Let the jeweled seat ascend and descend as it will.

世尊陞座。文殊白椎云。諦觀法王法。法王法如是。世尊便下座。夫既陞座。則法王法。絕覆藏矣。文殊既白椎竟。四至分明訖。又復作多口阿婆。丁寧囑付。曰諦觀法王法。法王法如是。所為以慈悲之故。有落草之談也。魔藏既知空山水碓。即是文殊白椎。何以又不向世尊陞座處。張眼明明看取。却云脚頭脚底何勞問。寶座從他下與陞。豈不以外道伎倆。妄測世尊耶。如此。豈不仍是向世尊未陞座前會取耶。然則其所謂空山水碓者。却與文殊白椎。天地懸隔。空山在眼。何嘗覩無見之妙見。碓聲在耳。何嘗入不聞之圓聞哉。

> The World-Honored One ascended the seat. Manjushri struck the gavel and said, "Carefully observe the Dharma King’s Dharma—the Dharma King’s Dharma is thus." The World-Honored One then descended from the seat. Now, once he ascended the seat, the Dharma King’s Dharma was already fully revealed, with nothing hidden. After Manjushri struck the gavel and clarified the matter completely, he still spoke like a meddling old woman, earnestly admonishing: "Carefully observe the Dharma King’s Dharma—the Dharma King’s Dharma is thus." This was done out of compassion, like someone coming down into the weeds to guide others. If Mozang knew that the "water-powered pestle in the empty mountain" was itself Manjushri striking the gavel, why didn’t he open his eyes and clearly see it right where the World-Honored One ascended the seat? Instead, he said things like, "Why bother asking about coming and going? Let the jeweled throne be ascended or descended as it may." Isn’t this merely using the tricks of non-Buddhist paths to speculate about the World-Honored One? If so, isn’t he still trying to grasp it before the World-Honored One even ascended the seat? That being the case, his so-called "water-powered pestle in the empty mountain" is as far from Manjushri striking the gavel as heaven is from earth. The empty mountain is right before his eyes, yet he never sees the wondrous seeing that sees nothing. The sound of the pestle is in his ears, yet he never hears the perfect hearing that hears nothing.

魔藏頌靈山拈花公案云。大地花開勝國春。碧池窺洞笑相親。自從惹得燕鶯語。話到於今轉失真。

> The demon's hidden praise of the Ling Mountain flower-raising koan says: The earth blossoms, surpassing the splendor of spring in any land. In the jade-green pond, one peeks into the cave and shares a knowing smile. But since then, the chatter of swallows and orioles has stirred, And the tale, passed down to this day, has grown ever more distorted.

拈花公案。燕鶯恰恰道著。燕鶯即是花。語即是拈。無二無別。而三峰藏云。自從惹得燕鶯語。話到於今轉失真。連箇燕鶯之見。尚未得一如在。道甚真與不真。

> The Flower-Gesture Koan: The oriole’s song speaks directly. The oriole is the flower. The word is the gesture of picking— no separation, no difference. But Master Sanfeng Zang says: "Ever since the oriole's tune was heard, the story has grown more distorted." If you still hold onto the idea of the oriole as something other than the moment itself, what’s the use of speaking of truth or falsehood?

魔忍曰。六祖入黃梅之室。亦以袈裟遮圍。徵其前悟。至應無所住而生其心。言下大徹。乃曰。一切萬法。不離自性。何期自性本自清淨。何期自性本不生滅。何期自性本不動搖。何期自性能生萬法。黃梅知其徹悟。遂以衣鉢付之。先師謂袈裟縷縷。明示法數。非苟然也。蓋袈裟自一條至二十五條。每條各五。各各四長一短。顛倒參錯。開闔變化。默印吾人本具之廣大心體。圓融行布。不滯一偏。始盡此心此法之奧。非心外別有所謂密付者也。如六祖偈曰。菩提本無樹。明鏡亦非臺。本來無一物。何處惹塵埃。豈非滯在淨處。而於心法有所未圓者乎。請試言之。若此偈便為究竟。則三鼓入室。不應復有言下大徹等語。既有此語。則偈旨之偏。雖盧公再出。亦當首肯。今之人悟不及此。遂謂先師以宗旨定在衣上。不亦欺世之甚乎。且初祖亦曰。內傳法印以契證心。外付袈裟以定宗旨。若以衣表宗旨。而宗旨遂在衣上。則靈雲見桃花。水潦被馬師一踏。二公之悟。應在樹頭之上。鞋跟之下耶。蓋未肯深思爾。何則。請觀世尊拈花之際。普告大眾曰。吾有正法眼藏。涅槃妙心。付與摩訶迦葉。當是時。人天百萬。未有若秀公之徒起爭端者。世尊不即此時。付以金縷。却於多子塔前重增公案。何哉。則袈裟遮圍。分座令坐之事。有旨無旨。不待辯而較然黑白矣。噫。物之最大者天地是也。理之最幽者陰陽是也。而聖人迎日推䇿。畫八卦。考河圖。測以渾天之儀。載以曆象之書。然後天地之動靜。日月之行度。星辰之區分。陰陽寒暑之數。閏餘盈縮之變。鬼神幽冥之情狀。灼見而指諸掌。由是而觀。聖人之智慮過人遠矣。使匹夫匹婦從而論之。又烏得不增其昧昧哉。

> Master Mo Ren said: When the Sixth Patriarch entered the Fifth Patriarch’s chamber, the Fifth Patriarch also covered them with a robe while inquiring about the Patriarch’s earlier enlightenment. When the Sixth Patriarch heard the line, “Abiding nowhere, yet giving rise to the mind,” he was suddenly and completely awakened. He then said, “All dharmas are inseparable from one’s own nature. How unexpected—the self-nature is originally pure. How unexpected—the self-nature is originally unborn and undying. How unexpected—the self-nature is originally unmoving. How unexpected—the self-nature gives rise to all dharmas.” The Fifth Patriarch, knowing he had reached full awakening, then transmitted to him the robe and bowl. My late teacher said that the robe’s threads are not arbitrary; they clearly signify the Dharma’s enumerations. The robe’s design ranges from one stripe to twenty-five stripes, with each stripe consisting of five sections—four long and one short—arranged in interlocking patterns. These openings and closings, these shifting forms, silently correspond to the vast mind-essence inherent in each of us. They embody perfect interpenetration within active cultivation, never clinging to one extreme, thereby revealing the profound mystery of this mind and this Dharma. There is no secret transmission beyond the mind itself. For instance, when the Sixth Patriarch wrote, “Bodhi originally has no tree, / The bright mirror also has no stand. / Originally there is not a single thing, / Where can dust alight?” Is this not clinging to a state of purity, leaving the mind-Dharma incomplete? Let’s examine this carefully. If this verse represented full realization, then when he entered the chamber in the third watch, he wouldn’t have needed later to achieve great awakening upon hearing those words. But since such an awakening is recorded, this verse shows only a partial understanding—a point that even the Sixth Patriarch himself, if alive today, would acknowledge. Those today who lack such insight claim that the essential teaching resides in the robe itself, which is nothing short of a serious deception. The First Patriarch also said, “I transmit the Seal of Dharma inwardly to awaken the mind; I give the robe outwardly to affirm the teaching.” If the robe alone embodies the teaching, then when Master Lingyun saw peach blossoms, or when Water Buffalo was kicked by Master Mazu, their awakening should have been on the treetop or beneath the shoe—but do such things truly represent the teaching? Few have reflected deeply on this. Why? Consider the Buddha’s flower-holding gesture. At that moment, he proclaimed to the vast assembly, “I have the treasury of the true Dharma eye, the wondrous mind of Nirvāṇa. I entrust this to Mahākāśyapa.” At that time, among the millions in the human and heavenly realms, no one like later Scholar Xiu stirred up disputes. Why then did the Buddha not hand over the golden-stitched robe then, instead elaborating the case at Many Sons Stupa? The fact of being covered with the robe, seated separately, and directed to a seat—whether this contained a teaching or not—is as clear as black and white and needs no further argument. Alas! Among all things, heaven and earth are the greatest. Among all principles, yin and yang are the most subtle. Yet the sages, by observing the sun, calculating cyclical patterns, drawing the eight trigrams, consulting the River Chart, measuring with the armillary sphere, and recording with calendars, achieve such clarity that they perceive all movements of heaven and earth, the travels of the sun and moon, the divisions of the constellations, the interactions of yin and yang, heat and cold, the cyclical intercalations, the expansions and contractions, and even the hidden states of spirits and ghosts. All this becomes perfectly visible, as if pointing to patterns on the palm. Thus, the sages’ wisdom far surpasses that of ordinary people. If common men and women try to argue about these matters, how can they avoid adding to their own confusion?

儒者即數以顯理。謂理數不相離也。然理是形。數是影。夫數實理虗。而謂理形數影者。何也。理得而數隨之。則是無定者乃一定。而一定者乃無定也。數無定。而隨理之有定者以為大小。故以形影喻也。此皆是儒門邊事。若夫禪門。先去理障。直標心宗。理尚不可說。何況於數。魔忍乃謂袈裟自一條至二十五條。每條各五。各各四長一短。顛倒參錯。開闔變化。默印吾人本具之廣大心體。圓融行布。不滯一偏。始盡此心此法之奧。非心外別有所謂密付者。真是魔說。伊不過略涉世典。見乾數二十有五。坤數三十。坤之三十。即是二十有五而再五之。坤統於乾。陽實陰虗。坤為虗數。惟乾之二十有五為實數。故乾數該萬有之數。乾。生生也。生生者。天地之心也。天地無心。人為天地之心。故生生之數二十有五。而心之數亦二十有五也。袈裟二十五條。偶然符合。遂謂以此表五人廣大之心體。無論與無生法忍。毫無交涉。即以易論。孔子所謂天數二十有五者。又何嘗預知後人之推測到此哉。不過理必與數符。自然恰合耳。有何奇特。至若所謂直標心宗者。豈是這箇心。不見楞嚴經云。此非汝心。且又與袈裟何涉。如曰即此是。不知才說是。即已不是。是亦不立。況伊固非謂即此是乎。以此誘惑士大夫之無學者。俾羣稱妙諦。為之外護。如此心行。真乃污濁祖庭。既謂袈裟二十五條。默印心體。又自覺其說之迂怪也。於是又謂不是將宗旨定在衣上。妄引靈雲桃花等公案為證。總無落處。至謂世尊拈花。迦葉微笑。未是授受。必待多子塔前。袈裟圍繞。而後密付宗旨。鬼窟裏作活計。塗污世尊。結成魔界。應隨無閒獄矣。狂吠不了。忽又轉入世諦。謂物之最大者天地。理之最幽者陰陽。又謂聖人迎日推䇿。畫卦考圖。而得其秘奧。聖人智慮過人。特地讚歎聖人一番。又謂使匹夫匹婦從而論之。烏得不增其昧昧等語。暗指伊師法藏為聖人。而密雲天隱為匹夫匹婦。暗用韓愈送浮屠文暢序意義。借此向迂儒俗士打箇關節。真所為脅肩諂笑。病於夏畦者。此種議論。宗門語中何處著落。本無足辨。但恐後世無識之徒。或謂伊於儒門義理。尚有可取。不得不亦為蛇足一上。夫天地曰兩大。尊稱之辭也。然雖蟭螟之細。其氣皆是天。其質皆是地。固亦可曰莫小於天地。豈得但曰物莫大於天地。至於理最幽於陰陽之說。即知伊連箇陰陽也不識。但可言莫顯於陰陽耳。夫陰陽以對待言。則男陽女陰。晝陽夜陰。推之萬物皆然。塵塵剎剎。具在目前。可曰齒乎。以互根言。則男陰女陽。晝陰夜陽。推之萬物。又莫不皆然。亦塵塵剎剎。具在目前。可曰幽乎。連箇幽之一字。尚在陰陽甲裏。必得與顯為對。然後可以論陰陽。如論其象。則顯而在外者陽也。幽而在內者陰也。如論其根。則顯而昭著於外。有形之可指者陰也。幽而主運於內。無迹之可尋者陽也。何得云理最幽於陰陽。況乎天地亦不是物。陰陽亦不是理。即此二語。其於世典。亦是邪魔外道。何論禪宗。聖人之所以為聖人者。以其明人倫耳。孟子曰。聖人。人倫之至也。大學曰。為人君。止於仁。為人臣。止於敬。為人子。止於孝。為人父。止於慈。惟能以三達德。行五達道。故曰聖人。若夫迎日推䇿。畫卦考圖。而知天地日月之行度等類。乃是聖人之多能。聖不聖。於此全無交涉。若於此等處。謂是聖人之所以為聖。則是西洋回回之能曆法者。皆是聖人矣。況周孔之曆在春秋。堯舜之曆在尚書。以算術考之。竝皆疎濶而舛訛。不及今之時憲曆處甚多。若以此為聖。則是昔之南懷仁。今之戴進賢。勝於堯舜周孔矣。豈不是盲人觀象。妄生議論　謂世尊多子塔前。袈裟圍繞。別無義味。慮行者三鼓入室。仍是何處惹塵埃見地。固是顢頇。若如魔忍所說。又屬外道。學者既具正知正見。切須於此著精彩。

> Confucians discuss principle through numbers, believing that principle and numbers are inseparable. However, principle is like a form, and numbers are like a shadow. Numbers have substance while principle is empty—so why call principle the form and numbers the shadow? Because when principle is understood, numbers follow along. What has no fixed form then becomes certain, and what is certain becomes unfixed. Numbers have no fixed quality; they adjust themselves according to the fixed nature of principle, like large and small forms and their shadows. All this is Confucian business. As for the Chan school, it first removes the barrier of principle itself, pointing directly to the mind. Principle is already beyond words—how much less numbers! The demonic "Mo Ren" claims that the monk's robe, from one strip to twenty-five strips, each set of five has four long and one short, arranged in a complex pattern of opening and closing and transformation, silently imprinting the naturally vast mind-body we all inherently possess—perfectly integrated and unobstructed in its function, not stuck to any one side. Only then, he says, can we fully realize the profundity of this mind and this teaching. This is not some separately transmitted secret teaching outside the mind. This is truly demonic talk! This person has only a superficial acquaintance with worldly classics. He has seen that the Qian (Heaven) hexagram consists of twenty-five, and the Kun (Earth) hexagram consists of thirty. He argues that the thirty of Kun is actually just twenty-five plus another five. Kun is subordinate to Qian; Yang is solid and Yin is empty. Kun represents empty numbers, only Qian's twenty-five is the solid number. So Qian's number encompasses all existence. Qian is ceaseless creativity—the heart of Heaven and Earth. But Heaven and Earth have no heart; humans are the heart of Heaven and Earth. Therefore, the number of ceaseless creativity is twenty-five, and the number of the mind-essence is also twenty-five. The monk's robe with twenty-five strips just happens to coincide with this. He then claims it represents the vast mind-body of five people. Not only is this completely unrelated to the "unborn patience" of enlightened non-attachment, even in terms of the \*Yijing\*—when Confucius said "the number of Heaven is twenty-five," did he have any idea that later people would stretch it to this? It is merely that principle naturally matches number; there is no special mystery. Regarding the so-called "direct pointing to the mind-essence"—is this the mind? Don't you see the \*Shurangama Sutra\* says, "This is not your mind." And what does this have to do with the robe? If someone says, "This \*is\* it"—the moment you say "it is," it is already not. Even "it is" is not established. And he doesn't even say that this \*is\* it! He uses this to seduce unlearned scholars and gentlemen, making them call it a profound teaching and serve as his outer protectors. Such an attitude truly defiles the ancestral hall of Buddhism. After saying that the twenty-five strips of the robe silently imprint the mind-essence, he himself feels it sounds forced. So he adds, "I am not saying that the essence of the teaching is fixed on the robe," and recklessly cites the case of Lingyun seeing a peach blossom and awakening, as proof. None of it hits the mark. He even says that when the Buddha held up a flower and Kashyapa smiled, that was not the transmission. Only later, in front of the Many Sons Stupa, with the robe wrapped around them, was the secret teaching secretly transmitted. This is working in a ghost cave, defiling the World-Honored One, and forming a demonic realm. He deserves the unending hell! Unable to stop his barking, he suddenly shifts to worldly truths, saying that the largest things are Heaven and Earth, and the most subtle principle is Yin and Yang. He also says that the sages used the sun and calendar, drew hexagrams and examined diagrams, to obtain mysterious secrets. He praises the sages' wisdom, and then says that if common men and women discuss these things, they only become more confused. He is hinting that his own teacher, Fazang, is the sage, while Miyun and Tianyin are common fools. He is covertly using Han Yu's "Preface to the Monk Wenchang's Departure," trying to curry favor with narrow-minded Confucians and vulgar scholars. This is truly "forcing a smile and fawning, sicker than working in the summer fields." Where does such talk belong in the language of Chan Buddhism? It is not worth refuting, but I fear that in later generations, ignorant people might say he had some valid points about Confucian teachings. So I have to add this note. Heaven and Earth are called the "Two Greats"—this is a term of respect. But even the tiniest mote shares the same energy (Qi) as Heaven and the same matter as Earth. So it is just as valid to say "nothing is smaller than Heaven and Earth." It cannot be simply stated that "no thing is larger than Heaven and Earth." As for saying "the most subtle principle is in Yin and Yang"—this shows he does not even understand what Yin and Yang are. One should only say "the most manifest thing is Yin and Yang." When Yin and Yang are considered as opposites, then male is Yang and female is Yin, day is Yang and night is Yin. This applies to all things—every particle and every realm it is right before our eyes. Can this be called "subtle"? When considered as mutually dependent, then male can be Yin and female Yang, day can be Yin and night Yang. Apply this to all things, and it is the same. It, too, is in every particle and realm, right before our eyes. Can this be called "hidden"? The word "hidden" is still within the realm of Yin and Yang. Only when we contrast it with "manifest" can we discuss Yin and Yang. In terms of appearance, what is manifest and external is Yang; what is hidden and internal is Yin. In terms of roots, what is obviously displayed outside, with a form that can be pointed to, is Yin; what is hidden and governs from within, with no trace to be found, is Yang. How can one say "the most subtle principle is in Yin and Yang"? Moreover, Heaven and Earth are not "things," and Yin and Yang are not "principle." With these two statements alone, he is a heretic even within worldly teachings, let alone Zen. What made the sages sages was their clarity on human relationships. Mencius said, "The sage is the consummation of human relationships." The \*Great Learning\* says, "As a ruler, rest in benevolence. As a minister, rest in respect. As a son, rest in filial piety. As a father, rest in kindness." Only by practicing the three universal virtues in the five universal paths can one be called a sage. As for using the sun and calendar, drawing hexagrams and examining diagrams to understand the movements of Heaven, Earth, the sun and moon—this is the sage's \*skill\*, not his sagehood. Sagehood has nothing to do with this. If being a sage were based on such things, then the calendar-makers from Europe and the Muslim world would be sages! Moreover, the calendars of Zhou Gong and Confucius are recorded in the \*Spring and Autumn Annals\*, and those of Yao and Shun in the \*Book of Documents\*. When checked by calculation, they are rough and inaccurate—far inferior to our modern calendar. If this made one a sage, then the old Jesuit missionaries like Ferdinand Verbiest and the modern ones like Ignaz Kögler would surpass Yao, Shun, and Confucius! What blindness—talking nonsense about omens. Regarding the World-Honored One, at the Many Sons Stupa, wrapping the robe around him—there is no other meaning in that. As for the traditional story of a disciple entering the master's room at the third watch, it is still the same understanding as "where could dust alight?" It is fundamentally muddled. But what the demonic Mo Ren says is even more heretical. A student who has the right view and right understanding must pay close attention to this.

魔忍曰。金剛舍利。建塔立廟。乃人天植福之田耳。結集法眼者。使真金剛。真舍利。照天照地。而光明種子。世世不絕。真續佛慧命者事也。今乃抹殺臨濟正法眼藏。謂之學解。觀尊者此語。寧不惕然。

> A demon-hater said: "Creating pagodas and temples for the Buddha's relics is merely a way for humans and celestial beings to cultivate merit. The true purpose of gathering the Dharma eye is to make the real vajra and real relics illuminate heaven and earth, so that the seeds of wisdom continue generation after generation without end—this is the genuine work of sustaining the Buddha's wisdom life. But now you ignore the Linji school's true Dharma eye, calling it intellectual understanding. Seeing the Venerable One's words, how can you not feel alarmed?"

金剛舍利。建塔立廟。亦不得但作人天植福會。會得。則所為正法眼藏。即金剛舍利。建塔立廟。會不得。則所為結集法眼。續佛慧命。豈止不及人天植福之因。即是滅慧命而續魔命。豈得不以善因而招惡果。夫金剛舍利。即是法眼。如將金剛舍利。建塔立廟。與法眼慧命。話成兩橛。即屬脚跟不點地漢。況法眼豈由結集而成。如使可以結集。則尚安得謂之真金剛。真舍利。只結集二字。非止學解。直是魔外耳。魔忍自立為臨濟嫡宗。與其祖師密雲為難。思壓倒密雲。驅出祖席。全是好勝心。瞋恚意。尚何慧命。尚何法眼。不如樸樸實實。拜塔禮廟。熏此善種。以待來生。尚不錯過。何必託語言文字。橫造無窮之業。

> The vajra relic, the building of pagodas and temples—these should not be treated merely as a means to accumulate worldly blessings. If you truly understand, then what is called the treasury of the true Dharma-eye is the vajra relic, the building of pagodas and temples. If you do not understand, then what is called the compilation of the Dharma-eye, continuing the Buddha’s wisdom-life, not only falls short of even the mundane causes of planting blessings, but actually extinguishes wisdom-life and continues the demonic life. How could this not be turning a good cause into a bad result? The vajra relic is the Dharma-eye. If you treat building a pagoda or temple for it as separate from the Dharma-eye and wisdom-life, you are someone whose feet do not touch the ground. How could the Dharma-eye be created through compilation? If it could be compiled, then how could it still be called the true vajra and true relic? The very word “compilation” does not merely refer to scholarly understanding—it is the work of demons. These demons arrogantly claim to be the true lineage of Linji, opposing their master Miyun, seeking to suppress him and drive him from his seat. This is entirely born of a competitive mind and a vengeful heart. Where is the wisdom-life? Where is the Dharma-eye? It is far better to be simple and sincere: bow to pagodas, worship in temples, and nurture these good seeds for a future life. That would not be a waste. Why must you rely on words and language to recklessly create endless negative karma?

魔忍曰。古今以聰明睿智僨事者實多。而神堯神禹不礙為聖君。周公孔子。不礙為聖人。七十子之徒。俱不礙為賢人。未聞田舍翁。致君堯舜而垂範百世者也。吾道亦然。故如來稱一切智人。而華嚴菩薩。於百工技藝。星相圖緯之學。莫不精究。第觀其用心何如耳。闢書於三峰所說之法不可測。遂貶為旁出。稱瑞光頂兄為類己。頃見瑞光之錄又不可測。而闢書旋至。甚至以瑞光為假󰂛不識字之名。嗟乎。不識字者。所謂飽食終日。無所用心。有何佳名而假󰂛之耶。但瑞光不幸而墮此數中。又幸而得在先師鑪錘之下。發其覆。淘其滯。開其宿慧。使至於今日。輒前是而後非。法眼何嘗定歟。且西天諸祖說法如雲湧河決。至於馬鳴迦毗摩羅龍樹等。各著論百餘卷。亦呼為聰明旁出。可乎哉。

> Mo Ren remarked: "Throughout history, many who were clever and wise have wrecked their endeavors. Yet, Emperor Yao and Emperor Yu were still considered sage rulers, the Duke of Zhou and Confucius were still regarded as sages, and their seventy disciples were still honored as worthy individuals. I have never heard of a country farmer being compared to Yao and Shun or leaving an example for a hundred generations. The same holds true for our Path. Thus, the Tathagata is called the All-Knowing One, and the Bodhisattvas of the Avatamsaka Sutra meticulously studied all crafts, skills, astronomy, astrology, and diagrams—only depending on the intention behind their pursuit. The \*Pi Shu\* (Refutation Treatise) claims that the teachings of Sanfeng are immeasurable and thus dismisses them as a divergent branch. It praises Ding Guang Brother Ding’guang as a peer, yet not long after, encountering Ding Guang’s records, which again prove immeasurable, the \*Pi Shu\* promptly appeared, even going so far as to claim that Ding Guang had impersonated the reputation of an 'illiterate person.' Alas! An 'illiterate person' is someone who eats their fill all day and uses their mind for nothing—what good reputation is there to impersonate? It was simply Ding Guang’s misfortune to fall into this category, but his fortune came from being forged under the hammer and tongs of our late master. There, his coverings were removed, his blockages cleared away, and his innate wisdom awakened, enabling him to reach where he is today. To affirm the past and deny the present—when is the Dharma Eye ever fixed? Moreover, the patriarchs of the Western Regions poured forth teachings like clouds surging and rivers bursting. Masters like Asvaghosa, Kapimala, Nagarjuna, and others each composed over a hundred treatises. Would it be reasonable to call them merely 'clever' or 'divergent branches'?"

亘古亘今。未聞以聰明睿智而僨事者也。論出世間法。無明本性即佛性。聰明睿智。又豈得不是佛性。謂之無心道人。亦謂之無事之人。尚不得說箇事。說什麼僨事不僨事。論世間法。聽而聖曰聰。視而聖曰明。思而聖曰睿。合而言之曰智。聰明睿智。便是聖人。安得僨事。今曰古今以聰明睿智僨事者實多。則不知其說為何等魔說也。趙州出院。路逢一婆子。問和尚住什麼處。師云。趙州東院西。婆子無語。師歸院。問眾僧。合使那箇西字。或言東西字。或言棲泊字。師云。汝等總作得鹽鐵判官。僧曰。和尚為什麼恁麼道。師曰。為汝總識字。觀此則密雲斥瑞光假冒不識字之名。豈無落處。且不識字人。又如何定是飽食終日。無所用心者。販夫賈豎。一字不識。其心日夜營營。豈能休去歇去。以世諦言。亦屬不解。況孔子所謂飽食終日。無所用心。難矣哉者。葢䇿勵下學之辭。若向上事。不又曰。飯蔬食飲水。曲肱而枕之。樂亦在其中矣乎。如使尚有心可用。安得樂在其中。至於宗門。終日喫飯。不曾晈著一粒米。然後到得飽食終日無所用心地位。此正是絕學無為閑道人也。魔忍乃曰有何佳名而假冒之。不特不曾證此實際。并不會聞此佳名矣。又譏密雲以魔藏所說之法不可測。遂貶為旁出。稱瑞光為類己。頃見瑞光之錄又不可測。而闢書旋至。夫佛祖語言。所為如語真語實語。不妄語不誑語。木頭即是木頭。碌磚即是碌磚。明明道得七花八裂。而聽者不悟。則依圓囫圇。所以說者。不由心意識。而聽者亦不得向心意識邊摸索。有什麼可測與不可測。魔藏魔光之不可測。正是密雲之所痛心疾首。不忍不闢。不得不闢者也。魔忍乃復賣弄伊父兄之不可測。正莊周所云。鴟鼠嗜糞。鵷鶵過之。鴟鼠仰而曰嚇者矣。且伊等之語。亦何不可測之有。凡不可測者。惟此正法眼藏。涅槃妙心。則惟證乃知難可測。葢以纔用測時。便落心意識。既落心意識。便如用墨染絹而求其白。其染愈深。其白愈黑故也。若伊等之所謂四法交加。雙頭獨結。勒成無文密印者。不過穿鑿傳會四字盡之。何不可測之有。極其微妙。總歸一○耳。亦既○之。則亦既測之矣。充其伎倆。能舉陳年葛藤。配合得枝。枝相對。葉葉相當耳。夫此葛藤。所當付之一炬。如其付之一炬。則亦既測之矣。能將諸子百家。四庫萬卷。種種無明窠窟。資其譚鋒舌劒耳。夫此譚鋒舌劍。等於鵲噪鴉啼。如其等之於鵲噪鴉啼。則亦既測之矣。然則更有何不可測者。乃敢附會馬鳴迦毗摩羅龍樹諸大士耶。詩云。巧言如簧。顏之厚矣。

> From ancient times to the present, it has never been known that a person of keen intelligence and wisdom has caused ruin. In terms of the transcendental Dharma, the fundamental ignorance of sentient beings is precisely their Buddha-nature. How could keen intelligence and wisdom not be Buddha-nature? This is what is meant by "the mindless Wayfarer" or "the person of no concerns." If one may not even speak of a "concern," what is there to say about causing ruin or not causing ruin? In terms of worldly Dharma: hearing and comprehending is called "keenness"; seeing and comprehending is called "clarity"; thinking and comprehending is called "wisdom"; and uniting these is called "intelligence." If one possesses keen intelligence and wisdom, that person is a sage. How could such a sage cause ruin? Nowadays someone says that throughout history, many people with keen intelligence and wisdom have indeed caused ruin. I do not know what kind of demonic teaching this is. When the Zen master Zhaozhou left his monastery, he met an old woman on the road. She asked him, "Venerable, where are you staying?" The master said, "West of Zhaozhou's eastern hall." The old woman was speechless. When the master returned to the monastery, he asked the monks, "Which character for 'west' should be used?" Some said it meant "west" in terms of direction; others said it meant "to lodge." The master said, "All of you could serve as inspectors of salt and iron." A monk asked, "Why does the master say that?" The master replied, "Because all of you recognize characters." From this, we can see that when Miyun criticized Ruiguang for falsely claiming to be illiterate, was there not a clear basis for it? Furthermore, how can an illiterate person be called "spending the whole day eating and doing nothing"? A peddler or shopkeeper may not know a single character, yet his mind is busy day and night—how could he be free from activity and rest? Even from a worldly perspective, this interpretation is not valid. Moreover, Confucius said, "Spending the whole day eating, without applying the mind—isn't that difficult?" This was a remark urging the common learner onward. As for the ultimate truth, did he not also say, "Eating coarse rice, drinking water, pillowing one's head on one's bent arm—happiness lies within this"? If one still had a mind to apply, how could happiness be found within? As for the Zen school, only when one eats all day without having bitten a single grain of rice does one arrive at the state of "spending the whole day eating and doing nothing." This is precisely the "empty Wayfarer who has abandoned learning and ceased all activity." The demon Ren says, "What fine name could there be for falsely claiming it?" Not only has he never realized this reality, he has not even heard of this fine name. He further criticizes Miyun for saying that the teachings of the demon Cang are unfathomable, thus demoting him to a side lineage, while declaring that Ruiguang is his equal. Then he sees Ruiguang's recorded sayings, also unfathomable, and hastily issues a critique. The words of the Buddhas and patriarchs are "true words, actual words, real words, words that do not deceive, words that do not lie." Wood is wood; brick is brick. They say things quite clearly, seven flowers and eight splits, yet the listener does not awaken. Then one resorts to vague wholesomeness because the speaker speaks without relying on mind, consciousness, or intellect, and the listener must also not grope along the path of mind, consciousness, or intellect. What is there to be "fathomable" or "unfathomable"? The unfathomability of the demon Cang and demon Guang is precisely what causes Miyun's heartfelt pain and anguish, so great that he cannot bear not to refute them and must refute them. Yet the demon Ren goes on to flaunt the unfathomability of his father and elder brother. This is exactly what Zhuangzi described: "An owl delights in rotting rats; when the divine phoenix passes over, the owl looks up and cries, 'Shh!'" Moreover, what is so unfathomable about their words? All that is truly unfathomable is this Right Dharma-Eye Treasury and the Marvelous Mind of Nirvana—only through personal realization can it be known and is difficult to fathom. Why? Because the very moment one tries to fathom it, one falls into mind, consciousness, and intellect. Once one falls into mind, consciousness, and intellect, it becomes like trying to whiten silk by dyeing it with ink—the more one dyes, the darker it gets; the whiteness only grows blacker. As for what they call the "Four Dharmas intertwined, the single knot of duality, bound into an unwritten secret seal"—the words "contrived" and "forced" cover it all. What is so unfathomable about it? The utmost subtlety in these things boils down to a mere circle (○). Once it is circled, it is already fathomed. Exhausting their tricks, they can do no more than take up old kudzu vines and fit them together branch by branch, leaf by leaf. These kudzu vines should be fed to a single fire. If they were fed to the fire, they would then be measured. They can draw upon all the schools and traditions, the myriad volumes of the Four Treasuries, every nest of ignorance, to fuel their tongues of debate and swords of argument. But these tongues of debate and swords of argument are nothing but the cawing of crows and the chattering of magpies. If they were treated as such, they would be measured. So what further unfathomable thing remains? And yet they dare to attach themselves to great masters like Asvaghosa, Kapimala, and Nagarjuna? The Book of Songs says, "Smooth words like a reed pipe—how thick-skinned they are!"

魔忍曰。童子持鑑出遊。以表諸佛圓智。從來象示。不可誣矣。至如龍樹現自在身。而提婆謂眾曰。無相三昧。形如滿月。夫元黃未兆之際。聖凡罔立之先。果可以規規小見徵之耶。永嘉曰。大千沙界海中󴂻。一切聖賢如電拂。般若曰。一切諸佛。及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法。皆從此經出。然則先師謂無象一○相。為千佛萬佛之祖。其理固未嘗悖也。

> Mòrěn said: “The child holds a mirror as he goes out, symbolizing the圆满 wisdom of all Buddhas. This has always been shown through signs and cannot be mistaken. As for Nāgārjuna manifesting in his own form, and Āryadeva telling the assembly, ‘The samādhi of signlessness is like a full moon.’ In the time before the primal light appeared, before the division of sacred and ordinary, can this truly be measured by narrow, limited views? Yǒngjiā said: ‘Countless worlds are like foam in the ocean; all saints and sages are like lightning flashes.’ The Prajñā-sūtra says: ‘All Buddhas and the unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment of all Buddhas arise from this sūtra.’ Thus, my late teacher’s teaching that the formless ‘circle’ is the ancestor of a thousand Buddhas and ten thousand Buddhas—its principle has never been contradictory.”

○。不在內。不在外。不在中間。○。前無始。後無終。現在無現在。○。不是心。不是佛。不是物。夫此○者。不過言思絕處。不得已而為之。然此言思絕處。不得已而為之之○。只合供仰山一脚抹去。古德云。達摩西來。只為欲覓箇不受惑的人。若見於○。即已非○。若契於○。○更何立。若立一○。即惑於○。若惑於○。即是謗○。今乃以○為千佛萬佛之祖。然則千佛萬佛。乃○之子孫耶。童子持鑑。鑑與童子。是同是異。諸佛圓智與鑑。又是同是異。如何可作象示人。若然。則心如明鏡臺之句。能大師何以不肯。且既謂此鑑為諸佛圓智之象矣。又曰。此無象一○。為千佛萬佛之祖。○則象存。又何言無象耶。

> ○. It is not within, not without, and not in between. ○. It has no beginning in the past, no end in the future, and no present moment as it is. ○. It is not mind, not buddha, and not any object. This ○ is merely the point where words and thoughts end, depicted only because there is no other way. But this very point—where words and thoughts end, and this ○ drawn reluctantly—can only be swept away in one move by Yangshan. An ancient master said, "Bodhidharma came from the West solely to find someone not fooled by appearances." If you see ○, it is already not ○. If you realize ○, what need is there to establish it? If you set up one ○, you are fooled by ○. If you are fooled by ○, you are slandering ○. Now some claim that ○ is the ancestor of all buddhas—but then are all buddhas the descendants of ○? A child holds a mirror: are the mirror and the child the same or different? Are the perfect wisdom of all buddhas and that mirror the same or different? How can you use such an image to show people? If so, then why did the Sixth Patriarch reject the phrase "The mind is like a bright mirror stand"? Moreover, if you say this mirror is an image of the perfect wisdom of all buddhas, you also say this formless ○ is the ancestor of all buddhas. But ○ already contains an image—how can you call it formless?

魔忍曰。達摩初破六宗。其意銳甚。及東來震旦。六番受毒而不言。謗議沸騰而不辨。不契於梁。不聞於魏。不容於流支之徒。機亦危矣。稍有爭論。安能默坐九年。以俟二祖耶　又曰。天童當今第一名宿也。撥無宗旨者。孰不借口。予將使天下後世。知天童盛怒之日。已有犯顏死爭者如某。庶亂統之弊。其少懲乎。

> \[Master\] Mòrěn said: “When Bodhidharma first refuted the Six Schools, his determination was fierce. Yet when he came to China, he was poisoned six times without complaint, endured a storm of slander without defending himself. He found no understanding with Emperor Wu of Liang, gained no recognition in Wei, and was rejected by Bodhiruci and his followers. His situation was truly precarious. If he had been inclined to argue, how could he have sat silently in meditation for nine years, waiting for the Second Patriarch?” He also said: “Tiantong is now regarded as the foremost teacher of our time. Who among those who dismiss the essential teachings does not use him as an excuse? I want the world and future generations to know that even on the day of Tiantong's greatest fury, there was someone like me who dared to oppose him and fight for the truth at the risk of his own life. Perhaps this will serve as a small warning against the ills of corrupting the lineage.”

佛祖之開人迷雲。提示要旨。莫非慈悲之故。所為無門解脫之門。無意道人之意。豈其有爭論是非。必欲己之勝彼。如臧三耳之說耶。此等凡夫見。尚不可塗污聖賢。何況佛祖。乃謂達摩初破六宗。其意銳甚。達摩意作麼生。魔忍於何見之。意尚不可得。何況於銳。豈有舌戰勝人之香至哉。苦哉香至。受此大謗。況乎西天貝葉。大都譬喻。彼小乘禪觀。有此六種各封己解之流。達摩一一剖明化導。俾之舍小趣大。然此六宗之徒。即謂之莫須有。亦可也。又安得有初破六宗。意氣橫溢。若武夫斬將搴旗。秀才狀元及第時境象哉。擔屎潑佛。斯之謂矣　明哲保身。在儒門亦非趨利避害之謂。險莫險於嗜欲。而患難不與焉。醜莫醜於凶德。而六極不與焉。明哲者。明哲於見理。非明哲於趨避也。況乎宗門。善惡齊屏。吉凶齊致。有無齊等。生死齊際。身亦非身。何有於保。乃謂達摩履危機而默坐九年。何其謬也。唐時無名老宿有云。祖師九年面壁。為訪知音。若恁麼會。喫鐵棒有日在。魔忍乃謂面壁九年以俟二祖。魔外心腸。無名老宿於千百年前。早為󳬇破而抉示矣。夫亂統固是宗徒陋獘。然與作為實法。妄建宗旨者。彼為五十步。此為百步。蓋亂統之害。易分雪裏粉。妄建宗旨之害。難辨墨中煤故也。夫曰法喜。曰禪悅。曰樂土。曰淨因。曰閑道人。曰無事人。佛祖心行。如是如是。今乃曰。將使天下後世。知天童盛怒之日。已有犯顏死爭者如某。此是何等言語。何等心行耶。恐天下後世之不知有魔忍也。恐人謂見與師齊。減師半德。必欲冒見過於師之名也。恐天童之名在己上。思天下惟羿為愈己。於是殺羿也。恐天下後世之或是天童而非己也。恐天童之我先。而天下後世之不以我為善知識也。恐天下後世之知其然。終不以是歸己。以非歸天童。執祖孫之義以相誚。非託父有諍子之義。不是以壓倒天童。使天下後世。皆盜跖天童而龍逢我也。究竟何為而然。則曰為宋旨云爾。為是非不立。空有雙融。聖凡情盡。人我同根之宗旨云爾。能不捧腹絕倒耶。

> The Buddha clears away the clouds of confusion for people and reveals the essential meaning, all out of compassion. This is the gate of liberation without a gate, the meaning of the Way beyond intention. How could there be disputes over right and wrong, with a determination to defeat others, like the sophistry of "Zang's three ears"? Such mundane views should not even be used to defile sages, let alone the Buddha. To say that Bodhidharma initially refuted the Six Schools with a sharp intent—what was his actual intent? Where does the demon of arrogance see this? Intent cannot be grasped, let alone sharpness. How could there be such a thing as winning people over through verbal debate? The Perfume of Fragrance! How pitiful, to suffer such slander! Moreover, the palm-leaf scriptures of the West are mostly parables. Those of the Lesser Vehicle's meditative contemplation confine themselves to their own interpretations. Bodhidharma clarified and guided them one by one, enabling them to abandon the small and pursue the great. Yet the followers of these Six Schools can be dismissed as "groundless accusations." How could there be an "initial refutation of the Six Schools," full of ambition like a warrior capturing a banner or a scholar becoming the top candidate in the imperial exams? This is like splashing feces on the Buddha—that's what this amounts to. "Wisdom protects oneself" in Confucianism does not mean pursuing gain or avoiding harm. There is no greater danger than desire, and hardship is not included. There is no greater ugliness than evil deeds, and the six extremes are not included. The wise are wise in understanding principles, not in avoiding dangers. How much more so in the Chan school, where good and evil are both set aside, fortune and misfortune are both accepted, existence and nonexistence are equal, and life and death are the same. The body is not even the body—what is there to protect? To say that Bodhidharma silently sat for nine years to face a crisis—how absurd! During the Tang dynasty, an old cultivator named Wuming said, "The patriarch faced the wall for nine years to seek a kindred spirit. If you understand it this way, you will be beaten with an iron staff one day." The demon of arrogance claims that Bodhidharma faced the wall for nine years to await the Second Patriarch. That's the mindset of a demon! Wuming, a thousand years ago, had already exposed and revealed this. Confusion itself is indeed a flaw among Chan practitioners, but treating it as a real method and falsely establishing doctrines is like someone running fifty steps away comparing to someone running a hundred steps away. The harm of confusion is as easy to distinguish as white snow, but the harm of falsely establishing doctrines is as hard to discern as coal dust in ink. It is said that Dharma joy, meditative delight, the Pure Land, the pure cause, the leisurely practitioner, the person of no affairs—these are the actions of the Buddhas and patriarchs, exactly like this. Yet now it is said, "I will ensure that the world and future generations know that on the day when Tiantong was furious, there was someone who dared to risk life and death in defiance, someone like me." What kind of words are these? What kind of actions? Are you afraid that the world and future generations will not know of the demon of arrogance? Are you afraid that people will say your insight equals your teacher's, reducing his virtue by half, so you must assume the title of surpassing him? Are you afraid that Tiantong's name is above yours, thinking that only Yi was better than you in archery, and thus you must kill Yi? Are you afraid that the world and future generations might approve of Tiantong and disapprove of you? Are you afraid that Tiantong precedes you, and future generations will not regard you as a true teacher? Are you afraid that the world and future generations will know the truth, and will ultimately not attribute right to yourself and wrong to Tiantong, but will instead accuse you based on the principle of master-disciple hierarchy? Without using the principle of "a father has a son who remonstrates," you cannot overpower Tiantong. You want the world to regard Tiantong as Robber Zhi and yourself as Dragon Feng. In the end, what is the reason for all this? It is said to be for the sake of the school's teachings. It is for the sake of the doctrine of "neither right nor wrong, emptiness and existence merging as one, the end of sage and common distinctions, the root of self and other being the same." How can one keep from laughing till one's stomach hurts?

魔忍曰。無然不識。塗毒鼓聲也。雪竇以本語作頌。可謂白珪無玷矣。後人向左右顧視處。妄下註脚。而自謂不存知解。不亦難乎。東坡居士曰。本草謂芋為土芝。能充饑益氣。惠州富此物。人食之者不免瘴。非芋之罪也。芋當去皮。濕紙包。煨之火。過熱乃熟。噉之則鬆而膩。能益氣克饑。今惠人皆和皮水煮冷噉。堅頑少味。其發瘴固宜。夫直指人心。見性成佛之言猶竽。而綱宗則紙包火煨之法也。令諸窮子展轉求食者。如法噉之。不復饑餓。若夫抹殺宗旨。以揚眉瞬目見解。執悟中迷。發為狂打潑罵之瘴。非所謂水煮和皮者耶。

> Mo Ren said: "Don't be ignorant. This is the sound of a poison-coated drum." Xue窦 used the original words in his verse—truly a flawless piece of jade. Later people, looking left and right for hidden meanings, made baseless annotations, claiming to be free from intellectual understanding. Isn't that difficult? Scholar Dongpo said: "The \*Bencao\* (Materia Medica) calls taro 'earth's灵芝'—it can satisfy hunger and boost energy. Huizhou is rich in this food, yet those who eat it there often suffer from miasma. That is not taro's fault. Taro should be peeled, wrapped in wet paper, and roasted over fire until thoroughly cooked. When eaten, it is soft and rich, capable of boosting energy and satisfying hunger. Nowadays, people in Huizhou boil it in water with the skin on and eat it cold. It's hard, bland, and lacking flavor—no wonder it triggers miasma." The teaching of "directly pointing to the mind, seeing one's nature and attaining Buddhahood" is like taro. The essential principles are the method of wrapping in paper and roasting over fire. For those "poor sons" seeking sustenance, if they eat it properly, they won't go hungry. But if they erase the core teaching, clinging to mere intellectual views like raising an eyebrow or blinking, mistaking delusion for awakening, they generate the miasma of wild shouting and abusive scolding—isn't that just like boiling taro with its skin in water?

休相憶。清風帀地有何極。顧視左右云。這裏有祖師麼。喚來與老僧洗脚。雪竇此語。與丹霞燒木佛。大相懸絕。既云清風帀地。則不喚洗脚者則已。如喚洗脚者。則欲求一不是祖師。與之洗脚。固不可得也。是以密雲示人。於左右顧視處著眼。正是雪竇所頌。而魔忍斥為妄下註脚。既不識密雲所謂。即不識雪竇所頌。不識雪竇所頌。即不識達摩所對矣。且廓然無聖及不識二語。正是如語。實語。真語。不妄語。不誑語。乃謂是塗毒鼓聲。然則以此二語為權語耶。又舉東坡煨芋說。而以直指人心。見性成佛為芋。以綱宗為紙包火煨之法。益屬謬論。夫惟者箇。不落圈䙡。非修持之所可到。故曰直指人心見性成佛。古德提持。惟處處將此芋放人口邊。而人不能食。何甞有紙包火煨之實法可說耶。此芋天然異味。食之無欠無餘。不在春生夏長秋收冬藏之內。何須紙包火煨。盡大地作一張紙。亦包不得。徧虗空是一團火。亦煨不得。但要人喫得。便九轉大還。一超直入。有何烹炮調和。如法不如法耶。乃斥密雲為狂打潑罵之瘴。不如密雲一棒到底。正是剝好此芋。放伊口中。伊不解喫。轉目之為瘴氣。伊師雙頭獨結。無文密印之鳩毒。轉以為調和此芋之鹽梅。將見入口而慧命已絕。又豈止水煑和皮。能發瘴氣已哉。

> Do not cling to memories. The clear breeze fills the earth—what limit is there? Glancing left and right, he said, "Is there a patriarch here? Call one to wash my feet." Xuedou's words here differ vastly from Danxia's burning of the wooden Buddha. Since it is said that "the clear breeze fills the earth," then without calling for a foot-washer, nothing happens. But if one is called, it becomes impossible to find anyone who is \*not\* a patriarch to wash his feet. Thus, Miyun taught people to pay attention to the glancing left and right—this is precisely what Xuedou was praising. But Moren criticized it as a "groundless annotation," failing to understand Miyun's meaning—and thus failing to grasp Xuedou's verse. And not grasping Xuedou's verse means not understanding what Bodhidharma replied. Moreover, the two responses, "vast and empty, with nothing sacred" and "I don't know," are precisely truthful words, real words, genuine words—not false, not deceptive. Yet he calls them "the sound of a poison drum." In that case, does he consider these two phrases to be merely expedient teachings? He also cites Su Dongpo's "roasting taro" analogy, claiming that "pointing directly to the mind, seeing one's nature and becoming a Buddha" is the taro, while "the essential principles" are the method of wrapping it in paper and roasting with fire. This is even more absurd. Because "this very thing" does not fall into any framework and cannot be reached through practice or cultivation, it is called "directly pointing to the mind, seeing one's nature and becoming a Buddha." The ancient masters only placed this taro at the edge of people's mouths at every opportunity—yet people could not eat it. Was there ever any concrete method of wrapping in paper and roasting with fire? This taro has a naturally extraordinary flavor. When eaten, it is neither lacking nor excessive—it is not within the cycle of planting in spring, growing in summer, harvesting in autumn, and storing in winter. So why would it need paper wrapping or fire roasting? Even if the whole earth were one sheet of paper, it couldn't wrap it; even if all of space were a single ball of fire, couldn't roast it. The only thing needed is for people to \*eat\* it—then they immediately achieve the Great Elixir, leaping directly into realization. What need is there for cooking, seasoning, and following methods? Yet he condemns Miyun as a wild and vulgar madman. But in fact, Miyun's "strike with the stick" is precisely peeling this taro and placing it right in the man's mouth. The man doesn't know how to eat it—instead, he calls it poisonous air. As for his teacher's "double-knot alone, secret seal without words"—that is the real poison. He mistakes \*that\* for the salt and plum seasoning of this taro. Once it enters the mouth, one's wisdom-life is immediately cut off. And \*this\*—is it merely like "boiling with its skin on," able to cause miasma?

魔忍曰。永明壽禪師垂誡云。學道之門。別無奇特。只要洗滌根塵下無量劫來業識種子。汝等但能消除情念。斷絕妄緣。對世間一切愛欲境界。心如木石相似。直饒未明道眼。自然成就淨身。又云。深嗟末世。誰說一禪。只學虛頭。全無實解。步步行有。口口談空。自不責業力所牽。更教人撥無因果。便說飲酒食肉。不礙菩提。行盜行淫。無妨般若。生遭王法。死陷阿鼻。諸佛出來。也無救你處。若割心肝如木石相似。便可食肉。若喫酒如喫屎尿相似。便可飲酒。若見端正男女。如死屍相似。便可行淫。若見己財他財。如糞土相似。便可侵盜。饒你鍊得到此田地。亦未可順汝意在。直待證無量聖身。始可行世間逆順事。古聖施設。豈有他心。只為末世僧尼少持禁戒。恐賺他向善俗子多退道心。所以廣行遮護。千經所說。萬論所陳。若不去淫。斷一切清淨種。乃至若不去酒。斷一切智慧種。如何後學。略不聽從。自毀正因。反行魔說。夫永明。無量壽之應身。其埀誡與楞嚴三決定議。同一慨切。後代魔子。或借二祖調心之言為口實。如刻糞作檀。佛說名為可憐憫者。昔玉泉皓禪師製犢鼻裩。書歷代祖師名字。有狂僧效之。皓見而詬曰。汝具何道理。敢以為戲事耶。嘔血無及矣。僧尋於鹿門如所言而逝。夫酒仙蜆子。皆散聖中人。應時而出。以救一期之病。非傳佛心宗者所宜效顰也。至於末後一段光明。轉疑為信。今之大言不慚者。能如是乎。

> The demon says: Master Yongming Yanshou gave this teaching — "The path of spiritual practice has no special mystery. It simply requires washing away the karmic seeds of ignorance accumulated through countless eons under the roots of the senses. If you can eliminate emotional attachments, cut off false conditions, and face all worldly desires and sensory realms with a mind as unwavering as wood and stone, even without yet awakening the eye of wisdom, you will naturally achieve a purified body." He also said: "How I grieve for this final age! Who truly practices Chan meditation? People merely learn empty talk, with no real understanding. Step by step they walk in attachment, while on their lips they speak of emptiness. They never hold themselves accountable for the force of their karma; instead they teach others to deny cause and effect entirely. They say, 'Drinking and eating meat do not hinder enlightenment; stealing and adultery do not obstruct prajna wisdom.' But such people will suffer the king's law in this life, and sink into Avici Hell in the next. Even if all Buddhas appear, they cannot save you." "If your mind becomes like wood or stone toward cutting out your own heart and liver, then you may eat meat. If drinking alcohol is no different for you than swallowing excrement, then you may drink. If you see beautiful men and women as nothing but corpses, then you may engage in lust. If you see your own wealth and others' wealth as no different from dirt, then you may steal. But even if you reach this level of attainment, your cravings are still not satisfied. Only when you realize the infinite holy body can you act freely amidst the world's favorable and unfavorable circumstances." The ancient sages made these arrangements not out of any ulterior motive. They only worried that monks and nuns in this final age would fail to uphold precepts, and feared that good lay people would retreat from the path. So they broadly taught protective measures. A thousand sutras explain this, ten thousand treatises state it: If you do not abandon lust, you cut off all seeds of purity. If you do not abandon alcohol, you cut off all seeds of wisdom. How can later students refuse to listen? They destroy their own true causes for enlightenment and instead propagate demonic teachings. Master Yongming was the manifestation of Amitabha Buddha's compassion. His teachings, like the three decisive resolutions in the Shurangama Sutra, are equally sincere and pressing. Later demonic followers may quote the Second Patriarch's teaching on calming the mind as an excuse, but this is like carving excrement into sandalwood. The Buddha says such people are to be pitied. Long ago, Master Yuquan Zhaohui made an undergarment and wrote the names of patriarchs on it. A mad monk imitated him. Seeing this, Zhaohui scolded: "What understanding do you have, to dare treat this as a joke? You won't even have time to regret before vomiting blood!" The monk later died in Deer Gate Mountain exactly as foretold. The Wine Immortal and Clam Monk were holy beings who appeared at the right time to cure specific ailments of their age; those who transmit the mind-seal of the Buddha should not imitate them thoughtlessly. As for their final moment's radiance — can those today who speak so arrogantly without shame achieve even that?

此篇舉永明之語。儆戒依託宗門。不持五戒之流。孔子所謂不以人廢言。緇流所宜猛省。雖然魔忍言此其造業更甚於飲酒食肉。盜財行淫。則又不可不為誅心之論。何則。密雲患風。漢月乃誘令以川牛膝浸酒飲。治有驗。密雲隨其計。漢月乃遍告諸方。斥密雲破戒。煽惑當時士大夫。以奪其外護。如是心行。父作之。子述之。又假永明之言。粉飾點綴。末乃微辭刺譏密雲。以奪其宗席。於戲。富貴利達之場。陷溺人心。愈巧愈深。愈變愈幻。失却自心。自食自肉。所賴一登菩提之門。更蟬蛻於濁穢。乃流俗日下。將得宗旨與不得宗旨。又如得富貴與不得富貴。害人以自利。辱人以自榮。變幻萬端。深巧百計。釋迦視之。真同出佛身血矣。莊子所謂竊金者誅。竊國者侯。聖人以仁義治國。乃并其仁義而竊之。其斯之謂歟。較之飲酒食肉。盜財行淫。種種諸業。猶一羽之較一鈞。輕重懸殊矣。

> This passage cites Master Yongming’s words to warn those who claim to follow the Chan tradition yet do not uphold the five precepts. As Confucius said, “Do not reject a person’s words because of who they are.” Monastics must take this to heart. Nonetheless, when such “demonically patient” individuals speak of these matters, the karma they create is far heavier than drinking alcohol, eating meat, stealing, or indulging in lust. And so we must go further and expose their hidden intentions. Why is this? Mi’yun encountered illness from wind-dampness, and Han’shan lured him into drinking wine mixed with Achyranthes root as a “cure.” When this treatment appeared effective, Mi’yun followed the suggestion. Han’shan then spread word everywhere, denouncing Mi’yun for breaking the precepts and inciting the scholarly elites of the time to revoke their support for Mi’yun. Such were his actions. When the father does this, the son follows suit. They further borrowed Yongming’s words as a decoration, adding polish while subtly inserting barbs to attack Mi’yun in order to seize his position as the master of the lineage. Alas! In the realm of wealth, status, and gain, people’s hearts are sunk ever deeper in increasingly cunning and illusory ways. Losing one’s own mind is like eating one’s own flesh. Once one has entered the gate of enlightenment, one should cast off this filth like a cicada sheds its shell. Yet as vulgar customs daily worsen, whether or not one attains the true essence of the teachings becomes like whether or not one attains riches and status: harming others for personal gain, humiliating others for personal glory, endless transformations and ingenious schemes. In Shakyamuni’s eyes, this is truly the same as shedding the Buddha’s blood. As Zhuangzi said, “One who steals a hook is executed; one who steals a state becomes a marquis.” The sages governed the state through benevolence and righteousness, but now people steal even benevolence and righteousness themselves. Is this not exactly what is happening? When compared to drinking wine, eating meat, stealing, and indulging in lust—these various karmic deeds—it is like comparing a single feather to a heavy ton: the difference in gravity is immense.

## 御製揀魔辨異錄卷一

> Imperial Volume 1: Distinguishing the Demonic