---
title: "湛然圓澄禪師語錄 · No. 1444-附 雲門顯聖寺散木禪師宗門或問"
description: "湛然圆澄禅师语录由明代禅宗高僧湛然圆澄所述，其门人明凡记录，丁元公与祁骏佳编撰。该书成书于明末佛教复兴时期，收录圆澄禅师的开示、法语、公案及书信，集中体现其禅学思想与修行指导，倡导直指人心、见性成佛的曹洞宗风。作为明代禅宗重要文献，该语录不仅传承了临济与曹洞宗的精髓，对后世禅修者具有深远影响，是研究明清佛教禅宗思想与实践的重要典籍。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcxr5xsu00ori904j83j47c3"
---

### No. 1444-附雲門顯聖寺散木禪師宗門或問

> Dharma Encounters: Questions on the Chan School

會稽歇庵居士　陶望齡　校正

> Corrected by Tao Wangling, Layman of Xie'an, Kuaiji

參學門人　柳湞朱嘉謨　編

> Hu Ju, Zhu Jiamo, Disciples of the Way, compiled

乙未四月念日有客過訪。縱譚樂甚。不覺話及宗門中事。

> On the twentieth day of the fourth month in the year Yiwu, a visitor came to see me. Our conversation was so enjoyable that, without realizing it, we began discussing matters of the Zen school.

客驚悸起問如獲故物。謂師云。參禪為脩行之要。何以諸方或云念佛為徑超之旨。或云持呪為獨脫之門。廼至看教誦經作福禮拜各分戶庭。是非互立。請師決之。開後學之重昏。為法門之寶鑑。

> The guest was startled and rose, as if he had found something precious he had lost. He said to the master, "Meditation is considered essential for practice. Yet why do some masters say that reciting the Buddha's name is the direct path to liberation, while others say that holding mantras is the unique gateway to freedom? Some advocate studying scriptures, chanting sutras, performing meritorious acts, or prostrating in worship—each establishing their own separate domain, creating divisions and right-versus-wrong debate. Please, master, decide this matter. Illuminate the heavy darkness for those who follow, and be a precious mirror for the Dharma door."

答曰。據佛化門一一無非正教。然則大小殊途。頓漸成異。不分而分。非異而異。子欲委悉。須審發心。為復因念佛發心耶。因持呪發心耶。乃至看教誦經發心耶。曰。吾發心者非持呪看教誦經發心。何以故。某在家初不知有此等法門脩持。亦不因念佛發心。何則在俗亦已念佛。但不知生死。故我發心耳。曰。然如子所言生死者。古云心迷則生死始。心悟則輪迴息。子為生死發心。當知參禪為脩行之要。其餘不待辨而釋然矣。何則。念佛者念此心也。看教者辨此心也。持呪者護此心也。參禪者參此心也。雖則同證此心為本。良由餘門漸而非頓。參禪頓而非漸。所以云。直指人心見性成佛。又云。一念緣起無生。超彼三乘權學。是以諸方說漸說頓。少林得皮得髓。得失同異。自可分也。

> He replied: "According to the Buddha's teaching, every single method is the true teaching. However, the Great and Small Vehicles follow different paths, and the sudden and gradual teachings are distinct. Without distinguishing, distinctions arise; without difference, differences emerge. If you wish to understand fully, you must carefully examine your initial motivation. Did your motivation arise from reciting the Buddha's name? Did it arise from chanting mantras? Or even from studying scriptures and reciting sutras?" The questioner said: "My motivation did not arise from chanting mantras, studying scriptures, or reciting sutras. Why? As a layperson, I initially did not even know about these methods of practice, nor did my motivation come from reciting the Buddha's name. In secular life, I had already recited the Buddha's name, but I did not understand birth and death. That is why I developed my motivation." The reply continued: "Regarding what you say about birth and death, the ancients say: When the mind is confused, birth and death begin; when the mind is awakened, the cycle of rebirth ceases. Since your motivation arises from birth and death, you should know that meditation (Chan) is the essential method of practice. The rest need no further discussion to be clearly understood. Why? Reciting the Buddha's name is reciting this mind; studying scriptures is discerning this mind; chanting mantras is protecting this mind; practicing meditation is contemplating this mind. Although all methods ultimately aim to realize this mind as the foundation, the other gates are gradual rather than sudden, while Chan meditation is sudden rather than gradual. Therefore, it is said: 'Directly point to the human mind, see one's true nature, and become a Buddha.' It is also said: 'One thought of condition-arising is birthless, surpassing those three-vehicles and provisional teachings.' Thus, various schools speak of gradual and sudden; Bodhidharma at Shaolin received the skin and the marrow. Gains and losses, samenesses and differences—these can naturally be distinguished."

客曰。參禪之要。以何為入手之門。

> A visitor asked: In Chan meditation, what is the essential practice for getting started?

答曰。參禪無別奇特。但於生死之心真切用力。便是入手之門。何則。子所謂生死者。只如古人道。生從何來。死從何往。能無疑否。曰此無疑耳。曰何謂無疑。曰我見楞嚴經曰。晦昧為空。空晦暗中。結暗為色。色雜妄想。想相為身。是知生從不覺而生。又云。世界眾生業果三種妄緣和合而生。緣散則滅。各循本因。受報好醜。生死死生。曾無有息。所以若人命終善惡境現。隨業受生。是知死隨報感而往。何疑之有也。予曰。子知生死而不知無生死也。不覺而生妄也。隨業而往亦妄也。如此以為無疑者。何以聖賢出興󳯝相告報。斷生死入涅槃。絕輪迴證解脫。是豈欺我哉。曰何謂無生死耶。予曰。如經所云則妄色出于頑空。頑空出於晦昧。晦昧出于不覺。未審不覺出于何也。不覺因覺。豈有無因而有不覺者乎。子能知此則輪迴息。迷此則生死始。究此為發心之本。悟此為入道之要。只此便是參禪下手之門。豈別有所謂參禪乎。非特學者以究心為本。諸佛出世亦以此為要。所以經云。諸佛世尊為一大事因緣故出現於世。故弘傳序云。妙法蓮華經者。諸佛降靈之本致也。是佛出世四十九年說法三百六十五會。其間大小偏圓隱顯秘密莫有不指歸一心。故曰惟此一事實。餘二則非真。自佛初生便云。天上天下惟我獨尊。已露這箇消息了也。至乎覩星悟道乃云。奇哉。眾生皆有如來智慧德相。良由妄想執著不能證得。便乃向鹿野苑中雙垂二相。廣轉法輪。良由小機不堪。隱勝現劣。巧說三乘。雖得法華圓入佛乘。猶涉言詮。未為究竟。直至拈花示眾。迦葉破顏。方曰。吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心。一相無相。付囑大迦葉。展轉相承。西天四七。唐土二三。以至天下老和尚以心印心。祖祖密付。其間或有往他國而求嗣。入深山而尋徒。或傳衣而罹難。或航海而傳宗。或斷臂以求自心。或痛心而憂絕嗣。如是者十死九生。孜孜護持。豈非佛祖欲眾生究心為本也。

> He replied, "Meditation is nothing special. If you truly put effort into the question of life and death, that itself is the door to practice. Why is that? What you call 'life and death' is exactly what the ancients meant when they asked: Where does life come from? Where does death go? Can you honestly say you have no doubt about this?" The student said, "I have no doubt about this." I asked, "What do you mean by no doubt?" He said, "I have read in the \*Shurangama Sutra\*: 'Dim darkness becomes empty space. Within that darkness, the dense mingling of darkness forms material objects. Matter is mixed with deluded thoughts, and the combination of thought and form creates the body.' From this, I understand that life arises from ignorance. The sutra also says: 'The world, sentient beings, and karmic results are all produced from three kinds of false conditions coming together. When the conditions disperse, they cease. Based on their original causes, beings receive their due recompense, be it good or bad. Thus, they die and are reborn, dying again, without rest.' So, at death, according to one's good or evil deeds, images appear, and one is reborn accordingly, following karma. From this, I understand that death goes according to karmic retribution. What doubt could there be?" I said, "You understand life and death, but you do not understand the nature where there is no life or death. That birth from ignorance is illusion. That following karma into rebirth is also illusion. If you think this is a matter with no doubt, then why would the sages and saints appear in the world to teach us, to cut off birth and death and enter nirvana, to end the cycle of rebirth and realize liberation? Were they deceiving us?" The student asked, "What is meant by no birth or death?" I replied, "According to the sutra, illusory form arises from empty space. Empty space arises from dim darkness. Dim darkness arises from ignorance. But tell me: from what does ignorance arise? Ignorance arises from awakening. Could ignorance come from nowhere? If you can understand this, the cycle of rebirth ceases. If you are deluded about this, birth and death begin. Investigating this is the root of awakening the mind. Realizing this is the key to entering the Way. This very point is the entrance to meditation practice. Is there some other 'meditation' apart from this? It's not only that practitioners regard investigating the mind as fundamental. All Buddhas appear in the world with this as their essential purpose. Thus, the sutra says, 'The Buddhas, the World-Honored Ones, appear in the world for the sake of one great matter.' Therefore, the \*Preface to the Propagation of the Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra\* says, 'The \*Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra\* is the fundamental intent of the Buddhas' descent into this world.' For forty-nine years, the Buddha taught in 365 assemblies. Whether his teachings were great or small, partial or perfect, hidden or revealed, secret or open, they all pointed directly to the one mind. Thus it is said, 'Only this one truth is real. The other two are not true.' From the moment of his birth, the Buddha declared, 'In the heavens above and the earth below, I alone am the honored one.' He had already revealed this message. Later, upon seeing the morning star and awakening, he exclaimed, 'Wondrous! All sentient beings possess the wisdom and virtuous marks of the Tathagata. It is only due to delusive thoughts and attachments that they cannot realize it.' Then he went to the Deer Park and manifested the dual appearance of his body, broadly turning the wheel of the Dharma. However, because beings of limited capacity could not bear it, he concealed his higher realization and manifested an inferior appearance, skillfully teaching the Three Vehicles. Even when the \*Lotus Sutra\* brought all beings into the one Buddha vehicle, it still relied on words and expressions. It was not the ultimate teaching. It was only when the Buddha held up a flower before the assembly, and Kashyapa broke into a smile, that the Buddha said, 'I possess the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye, the Wondrous Mind of Nirvana, which is the reality of no-form. This I entrust to Mahakashyapa.' Transmission continued from one to another: the twenty-eight Indian patriarchs, the six Chinese patriarchs, and down to all the old masters of the world. They transmitted mind to mind, patriarch to patriarch, in secret. Some traveled to other countries seeking successors. Some entered deep mountains searching for disciples. Some encountered danger transmitting the robe. Some crossed oceans to pass on the tradition. Some cut off their own arms seeking their true mind. Some grieved deeply for fear the lineage would end. In this way, they endured countless trials—dying nine times out of ten—yet tirelessly protected the Dharma. Why? Was it not because all Buddhas and patriarchs wanted sentient beings to take investigating the mind as their fundamental practice?"

客曰。如來胡不直指明心入道。何以却說三學萬行之門疑惑後學。佛心當不其然。

> The visitor asked, "Why didn't the Tathāgata directly point to the mind and show the way to enlightenment, instead of teaching the three trainings and ten thousand practices, causing confusion for later learners? Surely the Buddha's mind cannot be like this."

答曰。佛本欲以一乘化眾生無有餘門。故曰若以小乘化乃至于一人。我則墮慳貪。此事為不可。良由小機不堪。三七思維。循諸方便。故曰我若讚佛乘。眾生沒在苦。破法不信故。墜於三惡道。我寧不說法。疾入於涅槃。尋念過去佛。所行方便力。亦應說三乘。作是思維時。十方佛皆現。梵音慰諭我。善哉釋迦文。第一之導師。是知三乘是權。一乘是實。一乘豈非一心也。故楞伽曰。欲說真實者。彼心無真實。故如來雖則權說三乘。終歸真實。故法華曰。是法於久後。要當說真實。真實離於文字。非究心親證之指。其他孰能知之。

> The Buddha’s original intention was to guide all beings toward liberation through the One Vehicle alone, with no other paths. That is why it is said: “If I were to teach even a single person using the Lesser Vehicle, I would be guilty of stinginess and greed—that is not permissible.” The reason for this is simply that beings of lesser capacity could not bear the truth. After three times seven days of contemplation, the Buddha resorted to skillful means. That is why it is said: “If I praised the Buddha Vehicle, beings would be sunk in suffering, rejecting the Dharma out of disbelief, and thus fall into the three evil paths. I would rather not preach at all and quickly enter Nirvana.” Then, remembering how the Buddhas of the past had taught through the power of skillful means, the Buddha realized that he could also teach the Three Vehicles. While he was thinking in this way, all the Buddhas in the ten directions appeared and, with their Brahma-like voices, comforted and advised him: “Well done, Shakyamuni, foremost teacher!” From this we know that the Three Vehicles are expedient, while the One Vehicle is the ultimate truth. Can the One Vehicle be anything other than the One Mind? Hence, the \*Lankavatara Sutra\* says: “To speak of ultimate reality is already to lose it, for in that mind there is no real reality.” Thus, although the Tathagata expediently taught the Three Vehicles, they all ultimately return to the truth. As the \*Lotus Sutra\* states: “After a long time, this Dharma must be taught as it truly is.” The truth transcends words—without the direct personal realization pointed to by the mind, who else can truly know it?

客曰。究心為入道徑旨。何以從上先德或看教明心。或誦經悟道。乃至念佛持呪廣興福緣種種行門各各解脫。彼則何也。

> The student asked, "If focusing the mind is the direct path to enlightenment, then why is it that previous masters have attained awakening through various means... some by studying the scriptures to illuminate the mind, some by reciting sutras to realize the Way, and others by chanting the Buddha's name, holding mantras, or performing extensive virtuous deeds? Each of them found liberation through these different practices. What explains this?"

予曰。此是如來神力方便之所建立。經不云乎。時諸佛世尊更以異方便助顯第一義。但云助不云正。旨甚明矣。予非臆說。楞嚴云。圓根與不圓根。日劫相倍。若論漸則諸門無不圓通。若取頓須求直指。故經云。聖性無不通。逆順皆方便。此方真教體。清淨在音聞。盖音塵圓消離于生滅。可為悟心之門。是知諸皆方便。惟悟心為能得也。

> I said: "This was established through the Tathagata's spiritual powers and skillful means. Does the scripture not say: 'At that time, the Buddhas and World-Honored Ones further used special skillful means to help reveal the ultimate truth'? It says 'help reveal,' not 'directly reveal'—the meaning is very clear. I am not speaking from mere conjecture. The \*Shurangama Sutra\* says: 'Compared to incomplete faculties, complete faculties bring a thousandfold progress in a single day.' If we speak of gradual cultivation, then every method leads to perfect penetration. If we seek sudden enlightenment, we must go straight to the point. Therefore, the sutra says: 'The holy nature is universally accessible; both direct and indirect approaches are skillful means. In this land, the true vehicle of teaching is pure perception through sound listening.' Indeed, when sound and dust completely dissolve, apart from arising and ceasing, this can serve as a gateway to awakening the mind. From this we know that all methods are just skillful means—only awakening the mind is what truly counts."

客曰。師引二十五圓通證成。則知餘皆方便。不再疑也。柰何彼中以觀音當機耳根為教體。師以迦葉親承悟心為緊務。是二者勢相矛盾。未審如何會入。

> The student asked: "Master, you cited the twenty-five methods of perfect penetration to confirm this. I now understand that the others are expedient means and no longer doubt this. However, why does that tradition regard Guanyin's faculty of hearing as the essence of teaching, while you regard Kasyapa's direct realization of the mind through personal transmission as the urgent task? These two seem contradictory. How can they be reconciled?"

答。彼中正陳方便。作教家之標的。此則直究自心。乃入道之弘規。觀音雖述耳根圓通。其入由於聞思三慧。故云彼佛教我從聞思脩入三摩地。迦葉雖欵意根得道。傳法實由示眾拈花。故曰正法眼藏用付迦葉。然非觀音毋以顯頓漸之門。非迦葉毋以弘徑直之旨。如是則觀音示能入之宗。迦葉傳所歸之趣。是二者如動靜之不能離也。子毋以是非自負。唐喪光陰。但崇參叩。入有因緣。如香岩擊竹。靈雲見桃。玄沙祝指。溈山撥火。是等於十八界悟道。莫不皆從參叩而得也。故云。有疑有悟。不疑不悟。儒云。用力之久。一旦豁然。當深信焉。以是而知。二十五聖所脩之法皆方便。而遲速成其異矣。二十五聖所獲之果皆自心。而淺深所以別也。然達磨之宗出於淺深遲速之外。故云教外別傳。實為尊貴。非易聞耳。

> Yes. The expedient means taught by the central teachings serve as the standard for the teaching schools. This path, however, directly investigates the mind itself and is the great method for entering the Way. Although Guanyin described the perfect penetration of the ear faculty, his entry came through the three kinds of wisdom: hearing, contemplation, and cultivation. Thus he said, "The Buddha taught me to enter samadhi through hearing, contemplation, and cultivation." Although Kasyapa acknowledged attaining the Way through the mind faculty, the transmission of the Dharma actually occurred through holding up a flower before the assembly. Hence it is said, "The Treasury of the True Dharma Eye is entrusted to Kasyapa." Yet without Guanyin, there would be no way to reveal the gateway of sudden and gradual teachings. Without Kasyapa, there would be no way to propagate the direct and straightforward principle. In this way, Guanyin demonstrates the essential approach for entry, while Kasyapa transmits the ultimate meaning to be realized. These two are inseparable, like motion and stillness. Do not cling to ideas of right and wrong and waste your precious time. Simply devote yourself to inquiry and contemplation, and the conditions for entry will appear. For example, Xiangyan enlightened upon hearing the sound of a bamboo being struck; Lingyun awakened upon seeing a peach blossom; Xuansha became enlightened when his finger was struck; Weishan awakened while stirring the embers. All these enlightened to the Way through the eighteen realms, yet every one attained it through inquiry and contemplation. Thus it is said, "With doubt comes awakening; without doubt, no awakening." The Confucians say, "After long and sustained effort, there comes a moment of sudden clarity." You must deeply believe in this. Now, we can see that the practices of the twenty-five sages were all expedient means, differing only in speed or slowness. The fruits they attained all came from their own minds, differing only in depth or shallowness. However, the tradition of Bodhidharma lies beyond depth, shallowness, speed, and slowness. Hence it is called "a separate transmission outside the teachings." Truly it is noble and rare, not easily heard.

客曰。近來知識例云。欲明心地須當廣愽教乘。依教脩行方離魔業。若不識教盡屬盲脩。師云究心不在看教。得不悖於理也。

> A visitor asked, "These days, spiritual teachers often say that to understand the nature of mind, you must first study the scriptures extensively. Only by practicing based on the teachings can you avoid falling into demonic paths. Without knowing the scriptures, all practice is blind." The Master replied: "Studying the mind is not about reading scriptures; wouldn't that contradict the principle?"

答曰。子不聞佛呵阿難云。人間稱汝多聞第一。以此積劫多聞。不能免離摩登伽難。又汝雖歷劫憶持十方如來秘密妙嚴。不如一日脩無漏業。遠離世間憎愛二苦。又云。將聞持佛佛。何不自聞聞。返聞聞自性。性成無上道。又古云。千劫學定不如一日學慧。千劫學慧不如一日學道。惟則老人曰。結責多聞勸脩無漏。如是等語非一經一教所載。子胡不之信。却云必須識教修行。不爾則盲脩無用。此真閭巷之談耳。不然則六祖非得髓之徒。神秀為的傳之嗣。今之識教者豈有過于德山。此老初云。一毛吞海。海性無虧。纖芥投鋒。鋒利不動。學與無學。惟我知焉。出家兒。千劫學佛細行。萬劫學佛威儀。不得成佛。南方一類魔子敢言直指人心見性成佛。我當摟其窠穴。絕其狐種。遂擔鈔疏出蜀。路逢婆子買點心。婆指擔曰這箇是甚麼文字。曰青龍疏鈔。婆曰講何經。曰金剛經。婆曰。某有一問答。道得則施與點心。若道不得且請別買。曰但問。婆曰。過去心不可得。現在心不可得。未來心不可得。未審上座點那箇心。德山杜口無言。便覺鋒銳稍挫。婆指見龍潭。聽法夜深。潭曰胡不放參去。德曰外面黑不可去。潭燃紙燭與之。德方接過手。潭與之吹滅。德山豁然大悟。便禮拜。潭曰子見恁麼道理便什麼。德曰自今不疑天下老和尚舌頭也。次日堆疏鈔于法堂。手執炬曰。窮諸玄辨。似一毫入于大虗。竭世樞機。如一滴投于巨壑。焚之。夫悟心可以焚疏。則脩心不在識教。不待辨而明矣。

> The reply said: Haven't you heard that the Buddha rebuked Ananda, saying: "In the human world, you are called the foremost in erudition. Yet despite your vast learning accumulated over countless eons, you could not escape the calamity of Matangi's daughter. Moreover, although you have memorized and upheld the secret, sublime teachings of the Thus-Come Ones for eons, this is not equal to one day of cultivating the undefiled path, freeing yourself from the two sufferings of worldly attachment and aversion." He also said: "Rather than using your hearing to uphold the Buddha's teachings, why not use your hearing to hear your own nature? By turning back your hearing to hear your own nature, your nature becomes the supreme path." The ancients also said: "A thousand eons of meditative concentration are inferior to one day of wisdom. A thousand eons of wisdom are inferior to one day of the path." The elder Weize said: "The condemnation of erudition and the exhortation to cultivate the undefiled path—such teachings are not confined to a single sutra or teaching. Why do you not believe them, but instead insist that one must understand the teachings to practice? Otherwise, you say, blind cultivation is useless. This is truly a provincial view. If not, then the Sixth Patriarch was not the true heir, and Shenxiu would be the legitimate successor. Who among today's 'experts on the teachings' can surpass Deshan? In his early days, he said: 'A single hair can swallow the sea—the sea's nature remains undiminished. A tiny mote of dust touches the sword's edge—the edge remains unmoved. The learned and the unlearned—only I know what they are. For a renunciant, a thousand eons of studying the Buddha's subtle practices, ten thousand eons of studying the Buddha's dignified conduct—still, one cannot attain Buddhahood. But a pack of heretics in the south dare to claim that pointing directly to the mind reveals one's nature and attains Buddhahood. I will smash their nests and exterminate their fox-spawn!' Thereupon he carried his commentaries out of Shu. On the road, he met an old woman selling refreshments. She pointed to his load and asked: 'What scriptures are these?' He replied: 'The Blue Dragon Commentary.' She asked: 'Which sutra does it explain?' He said: 'The Diamond Sutra.' She said: 'I have a question. If you can answer it, I'll give you some refreshments. If not, please buy them elsewhere.' He said: 'Ask away.' She said: 'The past mind cannot be grasped, the present mind cannot be grasped, the future mind cannot be grasped. Which mind, reverend sir, are you going to refresh?' Deshan was speechless. His sharpness was somewhat blunted. The old woman directed him to Longtan. He listened to the teaching until late at night. Longtan said: 'Why don't you go back?' Deshan replied: 'It's dark outside—I cannot go.' Longtan lit a paper torch and handed it to him. As Deshan reached out to take it, Longtan blew it out. Deshan was suddenly and deeply enlightened. He bowed. Longtan asked: 'What realization have you had, that you act this way?' Deshan replied: 'From now on, I will never doubt the words of the old masters under heaven.' The next day, he piled his commentaries in the Dharma Hall, lit a torch, and said: 'Exhausting all profound theories is like a hair thrown into infinite space. Depleting all the world's essential knowledge is like a drop of water tossed into a vast chasm.' He burned them all. If realizing the mind can allow one to burn the scriptures, then cultivating the mind does not depend on intellectual understanding of the teachings. This is clear without further debate.

客曰。從上禪德說法如雷奔電掃。對機似風捲星馳。豈有不從愽學強記而得。否則何由使之然也。

> A visitor asked, "Throughout history, Zen masters have taught like thunder roaring and lightning striking, and responded to others' situations like wind sweeping away stars. Surely they must have gained this through extensive study and a strong memory. Otherwise, how could they be so effective?"

答曰。寶藏論云。愽學謂之聞。絕學謂之隣。過此二者謂之真過。絕學尚謂之隣。豈愽學而可凝哉。香岩大師在百丈會中強記第一。答十答百曾無擬滯。溈山問曰。我不問子禪。不問子道。但向父母未生前道取一句看。岩默然不能加答。曰却請和尚道。溈曰。我道得是我的三昧。於汝有何交涉。岩退省舊日所看之書。並無一句答得。遂焚書籍。乃云。今生不做學佛法僧也。休止白崖山三載。一日出垢。拾瓦礫拋之。擊竹作聲。豁然大悟。遂作偈曰。一擊忘所知。更不假脩持。動容揚古路。不墮悄然機。處處無踪跡。聲色外威儀。諸方達道者。咸言上上機。上白溈山。山曰子徹也。仰山曰。不然。此心機意識著述所成。更作一偈看。岩復作一偈。去年貧。未是貧。今年貧。始是貧。去年貧。無卓錐之地。今年貧。錐也無。仰曰。如來禪許師弟會。祖師禪未夢見在。岩復作偈曰。我有一機。瞬目視伊。若人不會。別喚沙彌。仰曰且喜師弟會祖師禪也。溈曰不可更道意識著述也。且道此事若在愽學。為什麼當時答不得。若不待悟明。後來為什麼連難無疑。古云。壺中有世界。別是一乾坤。斯言信矣。故六祖云。道在心悟。何關文字。且如一人看書。得曉一󳬛之景致。所謂某山某塔某寺無不備識。人或問之。未必不指東為西喚南作北。還他當地小兒初不識字人。或問之。彼答一一諦實一一無差。愽學耶。強記耶。辨才耶。聖智耶。以其親見故也。是二人較之。不啻霄壤明矣。子謂悟心須籍愽學。則小兒焉能指路。故云。只恐不是佛。是佛何愁不解語。

> \*\*Answer:\*\* The \*Treasure Store Treatise\* says: "Extensive learning is called hearing; transcending learning is called nearing; going beyond both is called true transcendence." If even transcending learning is only called "nearing," how could extensive learning ever be enough? Master Xiangyan was once in Baizhang's assembly, renowned for his unparalleled memory. He could answer ten or even a hundred questions without hesitation. One day, Guishan asked him, "I'm not asking about meditation or the Way—just say one phrase from before your parents gave birth to you." Xiangyan fell silent, unable to respond. Finally he said, "Please, Master, say it for me." Guishan replied, "What I say is my realization—what does it have to do with you?" Xiangyan retreated and reviewed all the books he had studied, but not a single line could answer the question. So he burned his books and declared, "In this life, I will no longer study the Dharma or be a monk!" He retired to White Cliff Mountain for three years. One day, while cleaning, he picked up a pebble and tossed it. It struck a bamboo stalk, and the sound awakened him completely. He composed a verse: "One strike, and knowing vanishes— No need for further cultivation. Every movement follows the ancient path, Not falling into stillness's trap. No trace anywhere, Dignity beyond sight and sound. All who have realized the Way Call this the highest vehicle." He presented this to Guishan, who said, "You have penetrated it." But Yangshan disagreed: "This was still crafted by mind, consciousness, and intellect. Write another verse." So Xiangyan wrote: "Last year's poverty wasn't real poverty— This year's poverty is truly poverty. Last year, I had no ground to stand a needle— This year, I don't even have the needle." Yangshan commented, "This confirms you understand the Tathagata's Zen, but you haven't even dreamed of the Patriarch's Zen." Xiangyan then wrote: "I have a mechanism— If you blink at it, And still don't get it, Just call the novice." Yangshan said, "Now I'm delighted—you've finally understood the Patriarch's Zen." Guishan remarked, "Can we still say this was crafted by intellect and consciousness?" Then he asked, "If this matter were about extensive learning, why couldn't Xiangyan answer at the time? And if awakening didn't require realization, why later could he answer without hesitation?" An ancient saying goes: "Within a pot lies another world—a separate universe." This is truly true. Thus the Sixth Patriarch said: "The Way is realized in the mind—what does it have to do with words?" Consider this: One person reads a book and learns all the scenic spots—every mountain, pagoda, and temple. But if asked, they might point east as west and call south north. Yet a local child who has never learned to read—if asked the same question—answers correctly every time, without error. Is that extensive learning? Powerful memory? Eloquence? Sacred wisdom? No—it's because the child has seen it firsthand. Comparing these two, the difference is like heaven and earth. If you insist that awakening requires extensive learning, then how could an illiterate child possibly give directions? So it's said: "Just be afraid you're not a Buddha—if you are a Buddha, what worry is there about not understanding words?"

客曰。上古禪德。祖祖相承師師密印。故可印證自心。近來末法澆漓。師承少遇。倘得悟心。誰為印證。

> The visitor asked: "In ancient times, Chan masters passed down their realization from one patriarch to the next, teacher to student through secret seals. That’s how they could confirm their own awakened mind. But in these recent times of the ending Dharma, the tradition has become diluted, and genuine teachers are rare. If someone were to awaken to their true mind today, who would confirm it for them?"

答曰。譬如有人久忘故物。一日忽憶尋覔不已。倘或得見疑惑氷消。是人更欲求別人證否。又如演若達多怖頭狂走。忽然狂息見頭如故。豈有更欲問人此是我頭耶非我頭耶。若欲更問。何異于狂。本分自心如能得悟。豈有更欲求人證許方乃消疑耳。如玄沙出嶺參禪。偶傷足指。作念云。是身無我。痛從何來。是身是苦。畢竟無生。休休。遂回雪峰。峯問曰。備闍黎。何不遍參去。沙答曰。達磨不來東土。二祖不往西天。峰然其語。不聞玄沙欲求人印證者也。寶壽隔江見歸宗。宗以扇招之。壽則橫趨而去。宗復召之。壽竟不回顧。寶壽胡不過江求證。或謂三祖不見二祖。但悟得二祖安心因緣乃繼祖燈。故法華云。後世無佛。若見此經。則為見佛。大丈夫漢當自強其道。豈愁無人印證。況祖師機緣語錄俻載方冊。皆可鏡心。故郁山主等未聞其有印證之師。會元亦收于祖錄。可不知乎。

> Answer: For example, someone has long forgotten an old possession. One day, they suddenly recall it and search tirelessly. If they happen to find it, their doubt melts away like ice. Would such a person still seek confirmation from someone else? Another example: Yajñadatta, terrified that he had lost his head, ran around in a frenzy. Suddenly his panic ceased, and he saw his head was right where it had always been. Would he then need to ask someone else, "Is this my head or not?" To ask such a question would be no different from his earlier insanity. If one's own natural mind can awaken, why would one need to seek someone else's approval to dispel doubt? Consider Xuansha, who set out for meditation practice but accidentally injured his toe. He thought: "This body has no self. Where does the pain come from? This body is suffering. Ultimately, there is no arising. Enough, enough." He then returned to Xuefeng. Xuefeng asked him, "Bei, why don't you go on a pilgrimage?" Xuansha replied, "Bodhidharma did not come to the East, the Second Patriarch did not go to the West." Xuefeng agreed. Have we ever heard that Xuansha sought someone else's confirmation? Similarly, Baoshou saw Guizong across the river. Guizong waved his fan to beckon him. Baoshou crossed quickly and departed. Guizong called him again, but Baoshou did not look back. Why didn't Baoshou cross the river to seek verification? Some say the Third Patriarch never met the Second Patriarch. He simply awakened through the story of the Second Patriarch's peace of mind, and thereby inherited the ancestral lamp. Thus, the Lotus Sutra says, "In the absence of a Buddha, if one sees this sutra, it is as if seeing the Buddha." A true man should strengthen his own path. Why worry about having no one to confirm his realization? Besides, all the Patriarchs' teachings and dialogues are fully recorded in texts—they can all serve as mirrors for the mind. Have we ever heard of Master Yushan having a verification teacher? Yet his record is included in the \*Compendium of Five Lamps\*. Shouldn't we know this?

客曰。若然者。何玄䇿對智煌禪師曰。空劫已前。無師自悟即得。空劫已後。無師自悟盡屬天然外道。復何謂也。

> The guest asked: "If that's the case, why did Xuan Ce say to Master Zhi Huang, 'If one attains enlightenment through their own realization before the beginning of the cosmos, that is acceptable. But after the cosmos began, any claim of self-realization without a teacher falls entirely under the category of naturalist heretics.' What does this mean?"

答曰。彼時有師不求印證固非也。此時無師而不欲學者亦非也。空劫無佛可也。末法無師亦可也。無佛無師言異而義一。時別而心同。比夫人之幼而無力。須得父母看成。倘幼而喪親者。為復自成其身而創立家業耶。為復自棄其生而付諸水火耶。歷觀古人立大功業者。多有幼而無怙長而自成其身。豈曰無親而不欲全其生。

> \*\*Answer:\*\* At that time, having a teacher but not seeking verification was certainly wrong. Similarly, in the present day, if one has no teacher yet does not wish to learn, that is also wrong. In the age of emptiness, it might be acceptable to have no Buddha; in the age of declining Dharma, it might be acceptable to have no teacher. "No Buddha" and "no teacher" are different in words but the same in meaning; the times differ, yet the mind is the same. Consider a child who is weak and powerless—they need their parents' care. If a child loses their parents when young, will they then build themselves up and establish a career, or will they abandon their life and throw themselves into water or fire? Looking through history at those who accomplished great deeds, many lost their parents when young but grew up to build themselves up as adults. How could it be said that without parents, one should not wish to preserve their life?

客曰。佛在時諸大聲聞尚然得少為足。乃至邪悟邪脩。佛莫之救。況末法無師。得無悞耶。

> The guest said, "Even during the Buddha's time, the great \*śrāvakas\* (disciples) were content with only partial realization, and some even fell into wrong views and practices that the Buddha Himself could not remedy. How much more so in this degenerate age, without a teacher, could we not also go astray?"

答曰。此非真人之所為也。彼大聲聞正恐後世不知學道分齊。故乃興權啟發未悟。法華云。內秘菩薩行。外現是聲聞。可謂打鼓弄琵琶。相逢一會家。若謂聲聞實乃如此。豈非謗耶。譬有人失却一兩金。各處尋獲。或別得三五數乃至九錢九分。不見本金。是人能息其心否。曰。是人不得本金。終不能息。予曰。然。若能見其原金。則尋覔之心不求息而自息矣。何況妙明元心不獲妙悟。中間豈能自息疑心。如獲真正悟明。然後考諸方冊了了無疑。如鏡照鏡。似心合心。豈有不知其時者哉。古人云。萬象之中獨現身。惟人自肯乃方親。當初謬向途中覔今。日方知火裡氷。可以決疑矣。

> Answer: This is not the conduct of a true person of realization. Those great Hearers (Śrāvakas) were actually concerned that later generations would not understand the proper boundaries of spiritual practice. Thus, they employed skillful means to awaken those who had not yet understood. The Lotus Sutra says: "Inwardly they practice the Bodhisattva path, outwardly they appear as Hearers." This is like beating a drum while playing the lute—meeting each other in the same family of practice—isn't it slander to say that the Hearers were truly like that? For example, suppose someone loses an ounce of gold and searches everywhere to recover it. They may find three, five, or even nine-tenths of an ounce, but not the full amount. Can this person rest their mind? Reply: "Unless they recover the original gold, they will never rest." I said: "Exactly. If they could see the original gold, the mind searching for it would naturally come to rest without effort. How much more so with the wonderful, bright, original mind—without attaining true awakening, how could the mind's doubt ever cease by itself? Only after realizing true awakening can one examine the scriptures and teachings without any doubt, like mirror reflecting mirror, mind meeting mind. How could one fail to know the right time? The ancients said: 'In the midst of the ten thousand things, only one manifests; one must truly accept oneself before becoming intimate. In the beginning, I mistakenly searched along the path; today, I finally realize the ice in the fire.' This can resolve all doubt."

客曰。據師所論。學道不在多聞。悟心不愁無證。於理頗當。何以前來引古云。千劫學定不如一日學慧。千劫學慧不如一日學道。則定慧當非正脩之門矣。何以法華曰。如來所得法。定慧力莊嚴。又古人云。定慧二門。如車之二輪。鳥之二羽。苟缺一則不免其顛仆。脩心離於定慧。恐不能入于菩提之鄉。義同撥無。予實疑也。

> The guest asked: "According to what you, Master, have taught, the path of learning does not lie in extensive knowledge, and awakening the mind does not require worrying about attaining realization. This seems reasonable. But why then did you previously quote the ancient saying: 'Learning concentration for a thousand kalpas is not as good as learning wisdom for one day; learning wisdom for a thousand kalpas is not as good as learning the path for one day'? This suggests that concentration and wisdom are not the proper gates of cultivation. Yet the Lotus Sutra says: 'The Dharma attained by the Tathagata is adorned with the power of concentration and wisdom.' And the ancients also said: 'Concentration and wisdom are like the two wheels of a cart or the two wings of a bird; if one is missing, it inevitably falls.' If one cultivates the mind apart from concentration and wisdom, I fear one cannot enter the realm of enlightenment. This seems like a denial of them altogether. I am truly troubled by this."

答曰。如悟自心。此心即定即慧。非心外別有所謂定慧也。何則。定慧乃是無相之門。心外無定。定外無心。乃至慧外無心。心外無慧。若以相求。便屬邪道。所以金剛云。般若波羅蜜。即非般若波羅蜜。是名般若波羅蜜。豈別有定慧待汝脩也。譬如空之虗洞。妙含萬象。非無象外之空。實無空外之象。須知即空即象。即象即空。豈別有所謂空。別有所謂象也。故六祖云。但論見性不論禪定解脫。若見性則禪定解脫皆舉之矣。

> The answer is: Realize your own mind. This mind itself is both concentration and wisdom; there is no so-called concentration or wisdom apart from the mind. Why is that? Concentration and wisdom are the gateway of no-form. There is no concentration outside the mind, and no mind outside concentration. Likewise, there is no wisdom outside the mind, and no mind outside wisdom. If you seek them through appearances, you are following a wrong path. That’s why the Diamond Sutra says: “The perfection of wisdom is not the perfection of wisdom; it is merely called the perfection of wisdom.” How could there be a separate concentration or wisdom waiting for you to cultivate? For example, emptiness is vast and empty, yet it marvelously contains all phenomena. There is no emptiness beyond phenomena, and truly no phenomena beyond emptiness. You should understand that emptiness is precisely phenomena, and phenomena are precisely emptiness. How could there be a separate emptiness or separate phenomena? Therefore, the Sixth Patriarch said: “Only speak of seeing your true nature; do not speak of meditative concentration or liberation. If you see your true nature, then meditative concentration and liberation are all included.”

客曰。若然。則所謂戒。所謂定與慧。皆虗名耶。不必諦信。

> The guest said, "If that is the case, then are what we call precepts, concentration, and wisdom all just empty names? Is there no need to truly believe in them?"

答曰。非謂虗有其名而不必信之。但因百千異號同具本心。所以云。設事有千差。合理還歸一。當時世尊因權教菩薩乃至有學聲聞等迷理失事。故將一大乘分別說三。後來法華會權入實。拂其羊鹿牛名。惟一大乘。等賜諸子。猶涉名言。直至拈花始稱本懷。當是時。所謂心性亦無著脚處。何況其他焉。有拂位而不拂法乎。所以道至忘言則全體戒定慧。豈謂無戒定慧耶。何則。譬如有人不識耳目。問諸別人何者是耳何者是目。彼人報曰。見者是目。聞者是耳。其人當以因見識目。因聞悟耳。不可執其所見所聞以為自己之耳目也。何以故。自眼不能自見。自耳不能自聞。聞見因塵。認緣失真。得無悞耶。如能返觀無見無聞。方是真識耳目。則全見全聞曾非外物。豈謂無見聞耶。

> It is not that these are mere empty names unworthy of belief. Rather, it is because the hundreds and thousands of different names all point to the same fundamental mind. As it is said: "Though phenomena may differ in a thousand ways, when traced back to principle, they return to one." At that time, the World-Honored One, seeing that those taught by expedient means—including bodhisattvas and voice-hearers still in training—were confused about principle and lost in phenomena, took the one Great Vehicle and explained it as three. Later, in the Lotus Sutra, he gathered the expedient teachings back into the ultimate truth, brushing aside the names of the goat-cart, deer-cart, and ox-cart. Only the one Great Vehicle remained, equally granted to all his children. Yet even this was still entangled in words and concepts. It was not until the Flower Sermon, when the Buddha held up a flower, that his true intention was finally revealed. At that moment, even the terms "mind" and "nature" had nowhere to land—let alone anything else. How could there still be a "stage" to be brushed aside, apart from the "teachings" themselves? Therefore, it is said: When we reach the point where words are abandoned, the entire body is precepts, concentration, and wisdom. Does this mean there is no precepts, concentration, or wisdom? Not at all. Consider this: Suppose someone does not know what eyes and ears are. He asks another person, "Which is the ear? Which is the eye?" The other replies, "What sees is the eye; what hears is the ear." That person then recognizes the eye through seeing, and understands the ear through hearing. But he must not cling to what he has seen and heard as being his own eyes and ears. Why? Because the eye cannot see itself, and the ear cannot hear itself. Seeing and hearing depend on external objects; to grasp at them through these objects is to lose their true nature. Would that not be a mistake? If instead he can turn inward and reflect on what is beyond seeing and beyond hearing, then he will truly recognize eyes and ears. In doing so, all seeing and all hearing are never separate from oneself. Does this mean there is no seeing or hearing?

客曰。悟心便全體戒定慧。於理或當。若不廣集福德。烏得便同於佛。況我世尊脩六度行各五百生。方名滿足。其餘難行苦行不可具舉。

> The guest said: "Realizing the mind encompasses the entire practice of precepts, meditation, and wisdom. This may be correct in principle, but without broadly accumulating merit and virtue, how can one instantly attain the same state as the Buddha? Moreover, our World-Honored One practiced the six perfections for five hundred lifetimes before being called 'fulfilled.' Beyond that, there are countless difficult and ascetic practices that cannot be fully enumerated."

答曰。如來福德者乃無為相也。若有為相者乃人天果報。所以經云。若住於相行于布施。如人入暗即無所見。若不住相布施如人有目。日光明照見種種色。又云。忍辱波羅密即非忍辱波羅密。是名忍辱波羅密。是知如來六度皆無為相也。又玄覺曰。住相布施生天福。猶如仰箭射虗空。勢力盡。箭還墜。招得來生不如意。爭是無為實相門。一超直入如來地。若無為實相之門非悟心頓超之旨。吾不知也。

> Answer: The blessings of the Tathagata are the form of non-action. If there is a form of action, it is the reward of human and heavenly realms. Therefore, the sutra says: "If one practices giving while attached to forms, it is like a person entering darkness and seeing nothing. If one practices giving without attachment to forms, it is like a person with eyes, who, under the bright sunlight, sees all kinds of forms." It also says: "The perfection of patience is not the perfection of patience; it is merely called the perfection of patience." Thus, one should know that the Tathagata's six perfections are all the form of non-action. Additionally, Xuanjue says: "Giving while attached to forms, the heavenly blessing it brings is like shooting an arrow upward into empty space. When the arrow's force is spent, it falls back to the ground, bringing forth unfortunate results in the next life. How can this compare to the gate of non-action's true form? One leap directly into the Tathagata's state. If there were no such gate of non-action's true form—the teaching of sudden enlightenment through awakening the mind—I would not know it."

客曰。若然。則不必脩於六度萬行。但直究自心。是不。

> The guest asked: "If that's the case, then there's no need to cultivate the Six Perfections and countless good deeds—just directly investigate your own mind. Is that correct?"

答曰。非謂離于六度萬行而別有究心也。六度萬行即是究心之旨。何則。若以分別心而取彼非此是。只此是名有為。但行於六度萬行不起著心。取捨兩忘。直入無為。此真脩六度萬行者也。所以經云。菩薩所作福德不應貪著。若也起心作念。我當脩于六度。我當莊嚴佛土。是不名菩薩。若也作念不必脩於六度萬行。直究自心便得成佛。是人大失善利。非佛種也。何則。聲聞不脩六度萬行。故不能證于無上菩提。所以迦葉云。見是菩薩不可思議法門。我等聲聞祇應號泣。聲振三千大千世界。古人云。若起精進心。是妄非精進。若能心不妄。精進無有涯。豈許恁麼道也。

> The answer: This does not mean that there is a separate "investigation of the mind" apart from the Six Perfections and the myriad practices. The Six Perfections and the myriad practices are themselves the very essence of investigating the mind. Why? Because if you use a discriminating mind to choose one thing over another, this is precisely what is called "conditioned action." But if you practice the Six Perfections and the myriad practices without attaching to them, letting go of both grasping and rejecting, and directly enter into the unconditioned—this is true cultivation of the Six Perfections and the myriad practices. That is why the sutra says: "A bodhisattva should not be attached to the merit they perform." If you give rise to thoughts of intention, thinking, "I will cultivate the Six Perfections" or "I will adorn the Buddha-land," then you are not a bodhisattva. On the other hand, if you think, "There is no need to cultivate the Six Perfections and the myriad practices—just directly investigate your own mind, and you will attain Buddhahood," such a person greatly misses the true benefit and is not a seed of Buddhahood. Why? Because the Śrāvakas do not cultivate the Six Perfections and the myriad practices, and therefore they cannot realize unexcelled, complete enlightenment. This is why Kāśyapa said: "Seeing this inconceivable Dharma gate of the bodhisattvas, we Śrāvakas can only weep—our cries shaking the great trichiliocosm." The ancients said: "If you raise a thought of diligent effort, that is delusion, not true diligence. If your mind is not deluded, diligence is boundless." How could it be permissible to speak in such a careless manner?

客曰。如師所云。參禪為究心之要。某無疑矣。然參禪是後人所目。經教無聞。為諸佛子還宜以論明妙道。豈可如宗門把無義味話頭令人提究。如栢樹子．乾屎橛．麻三斤之類。恐非佛意耳。

> A guest asked, "As you explained, Master, meditation is essential for investigating the mind—I have no doubt about that. But the term 'meditation' was coined by later generations; it’s not found in the scriptures. Shouldn’t practitioners of Buddhism rely on the teachings to clarify the wondrous path? How can they use senseless phrases like 'the cypress tree,' 'the dried piece of shit,' or 'three pounds of flax,' as they do in the Zen tradition? This seems to go against the Buddha’s intent."

答曰。此實佛意也。何則。豈不聞梵語禪那此云聞思脩。謂思彼所聞。脩彼所思。證彼所脩。名之三慧。諸佛諸祖莫有不從此三者而證者也。今祖宗門下以一參字易彼思字。豈有異哉。且上古之世機熟根利。聞思便證。降此以還。加以深參方悟。是知參比於思更進一步耳。故經有四馬之喻。前後可知也。子所問無味話頭。亦原于佛意。非祖師私創也。何則。如來一代時教。大小偏圓莫不盡善。其上根者見義忘詮。中下之流迷心執教。多陷牛跡。佛雖掃拂。有指月等喻。猶涉名言。故或拈花示眾。昇座默然。意皆一貫。故六祖已前亦皆論明佛性。後來諸家各立戶庭。密設玄機。掃除意見。削彼是非。用力之久一旦豁然。則乾屎橛下彼旃檀香。栢樹子渾是金剛劍。何則。佛所謂實相。所謂真心。須在悟明。豈名言之可幾哉。顧此二者。亦非名言之可幾也。

> This truly is the essential meaning of the Buddha. Why? Have you not heard that the Sanskrit word "Dhyana" is translated as "hearing, reflecting, and cultivating"? It means reflecting on what one has heard, cultivating what one has reflected on, and realizing what one has cultivated. This is known as the three kinds of wisdom. No Buddha or ancestor has ever attained enlightenment without these three. Now, in the school of our patriarchs, we use the word "investigate" in place of "reflect." Is there any difference? In ancient times, people had sharp faculties and ripe conditions. Through hearing and reflecting, they immediately realized. In later generations, however, deep investigation was necessary before awakening. Therefore, "investigating" goes one step further than "reflecting." Hence, the sutra uses the simile of four horses, and the meaning becomes clear when understood in this context. The "tasteless topic" you ask about also originates from the Buddha's intention; it is not something the patriarchs created on their own. Why is that? The entire teachings of the Tathagata—whether great or small, partial or perfect—are all entirely good. Those with sharp faculties grasped the meaning and let go of the words. Those of middling and lower abilities, confused by mind and attached to doctrine, often fell into the trap of clinging to traces, like following hoofprints without seeing the ox. Although the Buddha swept away such attachments, using similes like the finger pointing at the moon, these still relied on words and concepts. Thus, he sometimes held up a flower to the assembly or sat in silence on his seat—all pointing to the same truth. Before the Sixth Patriarch, teachings still discussed and clarified Buddha-nature. Later, various schools each established their own approaches, secretly setting up profound devices to sweep away opinions and eliminate distinctions of right and wrong. After prolonged effort, sudden awakening would occur. Then, even "a dry piece of shit" becomes sandalwood incense, and "the cypress tree" becomes a vajra sword. Why? Because what the Buddha called "ultimate reality" and "true mind" must be realized through awakening—how could mere words and concepts ever reach it? Yet, both these words and concepts themselves are also beyond the reach of words and concepts.

客曰。解師所言。則知看教參禪曾無二理。而遲速有異滯脫各途。務從其要。然經有嘆持呪功能。故經云。若不持我頂光神呪。得離魔惱坐於道場。無有是處。何以明之。

> The guest said: "From what you, Master, have explained, I now understand that studying the scriptures and practicing Chan meditation are not two different principles. However, there are differences in speed—some progress slowly, others quickly—and in whether one remains stuck or becomes liberated. Each path has its own essential focus. Yet the sutras praise the power and benefits of reciting mantras. For instance, the sutra says: 'If one does not recite my Supreme Light Divine Mantra, and still hopes to escape demonic disturbances while sitting in the meditation hall, that is utterly impossible.' How do you explain this?"

答曰。此易明也。惟則老人將楞嚴經科為五分。初見道分。二脩道分。三助道分。四證果分。五結經分。明科持呪為修道分。何須說也。故云。見道方脩道。不見復何脩。今未得悟心則脩道不知其方。既未能脩道。不若先究自心而後為可也。佛恐後世脩道者陷於魔業。故凡說經必說呪以護之。亦有不同。如法華者所護說法。故標曰法師。楞嚴所護道心。標曰行人。乃至治鬼治病差別不同。大抵不出助脩也。苟能悟心。所謂真言者皆出于吾𮌎中矣。何以故。觀音大士悟圓通後。便能于一首現八萬四千首。一眼現八萬四千眼。結一一印。誦一一呪。狀如涌泉不可竭也。故僧問古德云。如何是真言。德云。作麼。作麼。且道這箇是真言不是真言。參。

> This is easy to understand. However, the elder Weize categorized the \*Shurangama Sutra\* into five sections: first, the division on seeing the Path; second, the division on cultivating the Path; third, the division on cultivating as an aid; fourth, the division on realizing the fruit; and fifth, the division on concluding the sutra. It is clear that he arranged the mantras as part of the division on cultivating the Path. Why must this be explained? Hence, it is said: "One must see the Path before cultivating it; without seeing, what is there to cultivate?" Now, if one has not yet awakened to the mind, then cultivating the Path lacks the proper method. Since one cannot yet cultivate the Path, it is better first to investigate one’s own mind and then proceed. The Buddha, fearing that those who cultivate the Path in later ages might fall into demonic practices, always included mantras when teaching sutras to protect them. However, there are also differences. For example, the \*Lotus Sutra\* protects those who teach the Dharma, so it refers to them as "Dharma teachers." The \*Shurangama Sutra\* protects those cultivating the Path, so it refers to them as "practitioners." There are also distinctions, such as subduing ghosts or curing illnesses, but these generally fall within the scope of assisting cultivation. If one can awaken to the mind, then all so-called true words come from within one’s own being. Why? After the Bodhisattva Guanyin attained perfect penetration, they could manifest eighty-four thousand heads from a single head, and eighty-four thousand eyes from a single eye. With each mudra they formed and each mantra they recited, it flowed forth like a spring that never runs dry. Thus, a monk once asked an ancient worthy, "What is the true mantra?" The ancient worthy replied, "What is this? What is that?" Now tell me: is this the true mantra or not? Investigate!

客曰。師謂參禪勝于餘門。某無疑矣。然佛說十六觀經。念佛往生淨土。似有易於參禪。未知孰為優劣。

> A visitor asked: "Master, you say that Chan meditation surpasses other methods, and I have no doubt about that. However, the Buddha taught the Sutra of Sixteen Visualizations and the practice of reciting the Buddha's name to be reborn in the Pure Land. This seems easier than Chan meditation. I wonder which is superior or inferior."

答曰。念佛惟憑彼佛提携。全叨願力。參禪克究真心。祇是自因。求人求己優劣可見。且十六觀經。佛因韋提希夫人難遭逆子身禁獄中速求解脫。為說此經作勝方便。且佛出世四十九年。其間所說法要不可勝舉。其指于淨土者萬中之一耳。子胡不疑諸餘而疑此一節乎。子不見法華曰。諸佛世尊。種種方便。種種譬喻。種種因緣。是法皆為一佛乘故。為諸眾生演說諸法。如是則當知觀經之設豈非為一佛乘之助耶。然則經指方便者。義可知矣。

> Answer: Those who recite the Buddha’s name rely solely on that Buddha’s guidance—it is entirely dependent on the power of his vows. Those who practice Chan meditation seek to realize their own true nature—this relies only on their own effort. The distinction between seeking help from another and relying on oneself is clear. Now, as for the \*Sutra of the Sixteen Visualizations\*: the Buddha taught it for Queen Vaidehi, who was trapped in prison by her harmful son and desperately sought liberation. In response, the Buddha spoke this sutra, providing an excellent expedient method. Consider that throughout his forty-nine years of teaching, the Buddha expounded countless essential teachings—those specifically pointing to the Pure Land accounted for only one in ten thousand. Why do you not question those other teachings, but instead question this one passage? Have you not seen the \*Lotus Sutra\*, which says: “All Buddhas and World-Honored Ones, using various skillful means, various parables, and various causal explanations, teach all these dharmas for the sake of the One Buddha Vehicle alone. Thus they expound all dharmas for living beings.” When you understand this, you should realize that the \*Visualization Sutra\* is surely an aid to the One Buddha Vehicle. So when the Sutra speaks of “expedient means,” its meaning is clear.

客曰。若惟觀經果比餘經。不止萬中之一。何以餘經皆指淨土。如華嚴普賢菩薩語善財曰。面見彼佛阿彌陀。即得往生安樂剎。楞嚴大勢至云。都攝六根靜念相繫等云云。又如之何。

> The visitor asked: "If we say that the Sutra of Contemplation surpasses other scriptures by more than ten thousand times, then why do other scriptures also point to the Pure Land? For example, in the Avatamsaka Sutra, Samantabhadra Bodhisattva tells Sudhana: 'Face to face, you will see Amitabha Buddha and thus attain rebirth in the Land of Peace and Bliss.' Also, in the Shurangama Sutra, Mahasthamaprapta says: 'Focus all six senses, unite them in one pure thought' and so on. How do you explain this?"

答曰。諸經皆指淨土者。大意不過讚持經之勝報。感生淨土而已。亦非指此一途必云得某功德。生某淨土。得某法門。乃至見彌勒等。此皆流通經法。豈曰專指往生。華嚴為善財遍歷百城圓收萬行。十願包羅。土歷剎塵。佛供恒沙。非止淨土一國彌陀一佛者也。楞嚴揀選圓通。勢至正陳方便。如是者凡二十四人。明非此方教體。若以勢至為楞嚴正意。則觀音無處容身矣。故文殊曰。聖性無不通。逆順皆方便。此方真教體。清淨在音聞。夫在音聞者。非聞思脩三慧禪那而孰加乎。如是當知。楞嚴意指非前二十四法門。亦明甚矣。行願品云。所有十方世界中。三世一切人師子。我以清淨身語意。一切徧禮盡無餘。普賢行願威神力。普現一切如來前。一身復現剎塵身。一一徧禮剎塵佛。乃至恒忍一切諸眾生。當知善財非專于淨土也。明矣。

> The answer is: When various sutras refer to the Pure Land, the general intent is simply to praise the sublime rewards of upholding the sutras as a means to be reborn in the Pure Land. This does not mean that this is the only path, requiring one to obtain certain merits, be reborn in a certain Pure Land, attain a certain Dharma gate, or even meet Maitreya. These are all ways to propagate the Dharma, and are not exclusively about rebirth in the Pure Land. In the Avatamsaka Sutra, Sudhana embarks on a journey through a hundred cities, fully encompassing all practices. The Ten Vows are all-encompassing, lands are as numerous as dust motes, and offerings are made to Buddhas as countless as grains of sand. This is not limited to the single Pure Land of a single Buddha, Amitabha. In the Shurangama Sutra, the selection of perfect penetrations is discussed. Mahasthamaprapta presents the expedient means of mindfulness, and in total, twenty-four people present their methods. This does not mean that this tradition focuses on the teaching of this world. If we take Mahasthamaprapta's method as the core meaning of the Shurangama Sutra, then there would be no place for Avalokiteshvara. Thus, Manjushri says: "The nature of the holy is unobstructed; both the direct and the reverse are expedient means. The true teaching substance of this world is purity through the hearing of sounds." When "hearing of sounds" is mentioned, what could surpass the three kinds of wisdom—hearing, reflection, and cultivation—and Chan meditation? Knowing this, it is clear that the Shurangama Sutra's intent is not focused on the previous twenty-four Dharma gates. The \*Samantabhadra's Practices and Vows\* states: "In all worlds throughout the ten directions, and for all lion-like beings of the three time periods, with pure body, speech, and mind, I bow to them all without exception. Through the awesome power of Samantabhadra's practices and vows, I appear before all Thus Come Ones. This body manifests countless other bodies, and each of those bodies bows to Buddhas as numerous as atoms in all worlds." It even speaks of enduring all sentient beings with patience. From this, we should clearly understand that Sudhana's practice is not exclusively focused on the Pure Land.

客曰。如師所言。法華是一實之談。何以亦指淨土也。經曰。若如來滅度之後後五百歲中。若有女人聞是經典如說脩行。于此命終。即往安樂世界。阿彌陀佛大菩薩眾圍繞住處。此又何云。

> The visitor asked: "Master, as you say, the Lotus Sutra speaks solely of the single ultimate truth. Why, then, does it also point to the Pure Land? The sutra states: 'After the Tathagata's passing, in the final five hundred years, if a woman hears this scripture and practices accordingly, at the end of her life she will be reborn in the Land of Peace and Bliss, where Amitabha Buddha dwells, surrounded by a host of great bodhisattvas.' What does this mean?"

答曰。此有二義。一者明法華功勝餘經。後五百歲鬪諍堅固之世。女人聞經脩行尚得生於淨土。豈況聲聞菩薩受持不獲勝妙功德者乎。以劣倣勝。其勝可知矣。似指他佛。二者會合前文還是釋迦。何也。方便品云。除佛滅度後。現前無佛。所以者何。佛滅度後。如是等經受持讀誦者。是人難得。若遇餘佛。於此法中便得決了。天台釋餘國為方便有餘土也。良由法身常住。非生非滅。機應既盡。方便唱滅。分應餘國。故名方便餘土。醫師喻中甚明。又云。我于餘國作佛。更有異名等。盖為佛在世時。諸大聲聞聞法得記。各稱本懷。佛滅度後。倘聞經生解。欲發信心。當何決了。佛意云。當生餘國。還見于我。而得決了。若據壽量品中狂子病愈長者還來。智者悟心。靈山如故。當知餘國見佛。明為方便。始知寂場不異古今。

> This has two meanings. First, it shows that the Lotus Sutra’s merit surpasses other scriptures. In the final five hundred years—an age of conflict and stubborn views—women who hear and practice this scripture may still attain rebirth in a pure land. How much more so, then, will voice-hearers and bodhisattvas who uphold it gain supreme and wondrous merit? Comparing the lesser to the greater, the greater becomes evident. This appears to refer to other Buddhas. Second, when reconciled with earlier passages, it still points to Shakyamuni. Why? The “Skillful Means” chapter says: “Except after the Buddha’s parinirvana, when no Buddha is present in the world. Why? After the Buddha’s parinirvana, those who uphold, read, and recite sutras like this are rare. If they encounter other Buddhas, they will then gain clear understanding of this Dharma.” Tiantai interprets “other lands” as the “land of expedient reward.” This is because the Dharma body is eternal, neither born nor extinguished. When conditions for response are exhausted, the skillful means of the “cry of cessation” emerges, and the Buddha manifests partially in other lands—hence the name “land of expedient reward.” This is clarified in the parable of the physician. Furthermore, the sutra says, “In other lands I become a Buddha, with a different name,” and so on. This is because, during the Buddha’s lifetime, the great voice-hearers heard the Dharma and received predictions, each fulfilling their own aspiration. After the Buddha’s parinirvana, if someone hears the sutra, gains understanding, and wishes to arouse faith, how can they resolve their doubts? The Buddha’s intent is: they should be reborn in another land, where they will still see me and thus gain clarity. According to the “Life Span” chapter, when the mad son recovers from his illness, the elder returns. The wise person awakens to the mind, and Vulture Peak remains as before. One should know that seeing the Buddha in another land clearly reveals the skillful means. Then one realizes that the Enlightenment Ground is no different from the past or present.

客曰。師之所論無不了了。近來諸方何以一槩示人念佛。更無他語。何也。

> The visitor asked, "Master, what you have discussed is entirely clear. But lately, why do all practitioners uniformly teach others to recite the Buddha's name, without offering any other guidance? Why is that?"

答曰。巴歌易和。雪曲難酬。此常途之事也。近來法門浸敝。多出聽嚮之流。入耳出口祇欲人前裝大模樣。衒惑于人。不知自己全然缺於師法。今日出家。明日收徒。經教有所未聞。知識未能親近。外假威儀。內心如墨。凡弟子有問則答曰念佛千了百了。不知是何道理。只恐彼此󳬿朧。唐喪光陰。伊誰之過。古云。師不明兮弟不明。兩人相伴落火坑。可不鑒諸。苟或有問云。如何是念佛。即心離心。圓脩別脩法門。彼師則便生嗔。不知自缺師承。反責前人無理。或以胡指亂答。取笑達者。苟圖名利掩彼善根。其害匪細。金剛經云。無有定法名阿㝹多羅三藐三菩提。既無定法。豈止念佛一途。雖則無定開示皆為阿㝹菩提者。苟不以剋的究心為佛本懷。吾弗知矣。

> A reply: Simple songs are easy to sing along to, but refined melodies are hard to match. This has always been the case. Lately, the Dharma gate has been growing shallow, producing many who only follow what they hear. Words go in one ear and out the mouth, used just to put on a grand show in front of others and dazzle them. Such people don’t realize they completely lack any legitimate teacher or method. They leave home to become monastics today, and the very next day, they take on disciples. They haven’t even heard of the scriptures and teachings, nor have they ever drawn near to true teachers. Outwardly, they put on a dignified manner, but inwardly, their minds are black as ink. Whenever a disciple asks a question, they just answer, “Reciting the Buddha’s name brings it all to completion — a thousand recitations, ten thousand recitations, that’s all there is.” They don’t even know what principle this rests on. I’m afraid both master and disciple end up muddled, wasting their time in vain. Whose fault is that? An ancient saying goes, “If the teacher is unclear, the disciple will be unclear too. The two walk together, and both fall into the pit of fire.” Can we not take this as a warning? If someone should ask, “What exactly is reciting the Buddha’s name — is it a practice of the mind or apart from the mind? Is it a complete practice or a separate method?” Such a teacher flies into a rage. Not knowing that he himself lacks a proper lineage, he instead blames the questioner for being unreasonable. Or else he gives random, nonsensical answers, making a fool of himself before the wise. All he aims for is fame and profit, burying whatever good roots he might have. The harm this causes is no small matter. The Diamond Sutra says, “There is no fixed Dharma to be called supreme, perfect enlightenment.” Since there is no fixed method, how could reciting the Buddha’s name be the only path? Even though there is no fixed teaching, all such teachings point to the supreme enlightenment that is our mind. But if someone does not use sincere, pointed inquiry into the mind as the very essence of the Buddha’s intention, then truly, I don’t know what to say.

客曰。諸方師德倘有濫為。過已知矣。雲棲和尚何以一皆念佛勸人。

> A visitor asked: "If some teachers in various places act wrongly, their faults are already known. Why does the Venerable Yunqi repeatedly encourage everyone to recite the Buddha's name?"

答曰。子莫謗雲棲。雲棲必不如是。何也。他如開雜貨舖。人買珍珠與之珍珠。人買鼠糞則與鼠糞。曾無定計。予昔年曾近座下。凡見和尚示眾。皆圓示真心曾無異道。一日和尚詰予曰。古人云。海底泥牛㗸月走。岩前石虎抱兒眠。鉄蛇鑽入金剛眼。崑崙騎象鷺鷥牽。此四句內有一句能縱能奪能殺能活。若人檢點得出。一生參學事畢。你作麼生。予將旁僧推出云。大眾證明。和尚復詰曰。南泉斬貓。不得學趙州頂草鞋。你作麼生。予便抽身出堂。大眾報云已出去矣。和尚即休。又一日有西堂湛源出問云。德山托鉢因緣意旨如何。和尚展卷示之。如此對客開示日無少乏。山房襍錄中別舊溪先主號云。溪水本無新與舊。久居方表舊溪名。自從認得溪邊主。不趂桃花入武陵。又雲遊詩云。問渠行脚事如何。面面相看口如木。又雪師子詩云。掃聚成形染便雄。通身皎潔玉光濃。幻裝也解驚群獸。不是尋常一色功。又自贊真云。依肉像。出紙像。紙像固不真。肉像還成妄。那箇是雲棲和尚。又題云。十𦘕九不像。惱殺丹青匠。庶幾此近之。權留作供養。若道這便是。依然成兩樣。不兩樣。三十棒。是皆譚禪也。又拈世尊默然良久。外道謂開我迷雲。空生宴坐不言。帝釋云善說般若。拈云。良久處欲望開迷。陰霾萬里。宴坐邊擬聞般若。說竟多時。既然如是。鞭頭得旨空裏飛花者畢竟是箇什麼。參。又拈自性西方惟心淨土。拈云。若直指西方。不但過此娑婆十萬億剎者為非也。設箇自性已涉程途。若實譚淨土。不但寶池金地種種莊嚴者為非也。纔道自心翻成垢穢。離此二邊作麼生是西方淨土。參。既云十萬億剎非直指。寶地莊嚴非實談。當知惟權惟假。意可推矣。如是等語俻載彼錄。豈雲棲不欲參禪而惟脩淨土乎。雖然。雲棲曲盡萬途豈止二門。何者。和尚直抵燕京訪詢辨容月心諸大尊宿。親領圓融法門。故說無定方。且姑舉數端以什子疑。其發隱戒䟽朔望布薩。是主戒也。歷講法華．維摩。妙宗圓覺等經。是主教也。作證訛集．崇行錄。是主論也。教受瑜伽。是宗呪也。放生呪食濟貧扶乏。是脩福也。其餘萬德萬行難以具述。且三時課誦是百丈已來諸方各剎住持大體。今指雲棲惟脩淨土。其猶見門墻未見堂奧而妄度人家財。不亦誣乎。矧彼之門墻亦非易窺者。今凡住雲棲者。或往隨喜者。皆不能深叩微妙。但見僧眾濟濟佛聲浩浩。退謂人曰。雲棲惟求生淨土。若有如古人撥草瞻風。便見雲棲有通天作用。辭海波騰。未易言也。

> The reply said: "Do not slander Yunqi. He would never be like that. Why? He is like someone running a general store—if a customer comes for pearls, he gives them pearls; if they come for rat droppings, he gives them rat droppings. He has no fixed formula. In the past, I sat near his seat and saw him teach the assembly, always revealing the true mind without any deviation. One day, he questioned me, saying: 'The ancients said, "A mud ox on the ocean floor carries the moon in its mouth; a stone tiger before the cliff sleeps cradling a baby; an iron snake drills into the diamond eye; a Kunlun rides an elephant while an egret leads it." Among these four lines, one has the power to let go and seize, to kill and bring to life. If someone can discern this, their lifelong study of Zen is complete. What do you make of it?' I pushed a monk beside me forward and said, 'Everyone here bears witness.' The master then questioned further: 'When Nanquan killed the cat, one must not learn from Zhaozhou to wear sandals on his head. What do you say to that?' I then withdrew from the hall. The assembly reported, 'He has already left,' and the master let it go. Another day, Xitang Zhanyuan came forth and asked, 'What is the meaning of Deshan carrying his bowl?' The master unrolled a scroll to show him. In this way, he taught visitors tirelessly, never missing a day. In his \*Mountain Hermitage Miscellaneous Records\*, he wrote a farewell to Old Creek's former master: 'The creek water is inherently neither new nor old; living long there reveals the name "Old Creek." Since recognizing the master by the creek, I no longer chase peach blossoms into Wuling.' Again, in a poem on traveling, he wrote: 'Asked about his wandering life, they stared face to face, mouths silent as wood.' In another verse on the Snow Lion: 'Swept into form, tough when gathered; its whole body pure white with icy luster. It can frighten beasts even in illusion—not the usual skill of a single color.' In a self-portrait inscription: 'Clinging to a fleshly form to produce a paper likeness—the paper form is indeed untrue, yet the fleshly form is also false. Which one is the Venerable Yunqi?' Another inscription: 'Ten paintings, nine unalike, frustrating the painter. Perhaps this comes close. Leave it for offerings. If you say it is so, there are still two forms. Not two? Thirty blows!' These all speak of Zen. Furthermore, he quoted the Buddha remaining silent for a long time, with the non-Buddhist saying, 'He clears my clouds of confusion.' When Subhuti sat in silent meditation, the god Shakra said, 'He speaks well of Prajna.' Yunqi commented: 'If you seek to clear confusion through that long silence, it is like a vast icy fog; if you try to hear Prajna through seated stillness, much time has passed while it is spoken. Since this is so, what is it that meets the essence on the whip’s tip and flies like flowers in the air? Investigate!' Again, he quoted the idea of a "self-nature Western Land" and a "mind-only Pure Land." He commented: 'If you directly point to the West, you deny that this Sahā world is ten billion lands away. To set up a "self-nature" already involves a pathway. If you truly talk about the Pure Land, you deny that the jeweled pools and golden grounds with all their ornaments are real. As soon as you say "self-mind," you turn it into defilement. Apart from these two extremes, what is the Western Pure Land? Investigate!' If it is said that the ten billion lands are not a direct pointing, and the jeweled land's splendor is not the real teaching, then you must know it is only provisional, only conventional—the meaning can be inferred. Such sayings fill his records. How could it be that Yunqi did not want people to practice Zen, but only to cultivate the Pure Land? Nevertheless, Yunqi encompassed myriad paths, not only these two doors. Why? When the master traveled directly to Yanjing to visit great elders such as Bianrong and Yuexin, he personally received the perfect unobstructed Dharma. Therefore, his teachings had no fixed direction. I have merely cited a few examples to set aside your doubts. His \*Exposition of the Precepts with Commentary\*, the recitation of precepts on the first and fifteenth of the month—these emphasize precepts. His lectures on the \*Lotus Sutra\*, the \*Vimalakīrti Sutra\*, the \*Wonderful Aims of the Great Perfection\*, and the \*Perfect Enlightenment Sutra\*—these emphasize the teachings. His compilation \*Correcting Errors\* and \*Records of Noble Conduct\*—these emphasize the treatises. His teaching of the Yoga practice—this emphasizes mantras. His releasing animals, offering food to the hungry, relieving the poor, and aiding the destitute—these are acts of merit. The myriad virtues and practices are too many to list. Furthermore, the three sessions of daily recitation have been the general practice of abbots in various monasteries since Baizhang’s time. To now claim that Yunqi only cultivated the Pure Land is like seeing a wall or a gate but not the inner halls and shrines, and then estimating a family’s wealth—is that not a slander? Moreover, his walls and gates are not easy to penetrate. Now, those who dwell at Yunqi or go there for appreciation cannot deeply fathom its subtlety. They only see the assembly solemn and the Buddha recitations resonant, and then tell others, "Yunqi only seeks rebirth in the Pure Land." If there were someone like the ancients, who pushed aside the grass to observe the wind, they would see that Yunqi has a function that reaches heaven itself—whose words surge like ocean waves, not easily spoken."

客曰。某惑于人言。失却雲棲和尚。因師所舉。自為恨也。然經云。念佛一聲能免八十億劫生死重罪。參禪之益豈能勝于此乎。

> A visitor said, "I was misled by others' words and lost faith in Master Yunqi. Because of what you've pointed out, Master, I now feel deep regret. However, the sutras say that reciting the Buddha's name once can eliminate the heavy sins of eighty billion kalpas of birth and death. How could the benefit of Chan meditation possibly surpass this?"

答曰。子莫錯解佛語。盖謂凡夫背佛。不念佛語。廣作業因。故於生死之際無有邊涯。譬如蕩子不念父母。流浪他鄉。受諸苦惱。無有返期。苟能一念思憶家山。漸覺迴途。承順慈親。受無量樂。眾生亦爾。其或發心念佛恩德。便隔凡流歸於聖域。豈曰一聲佛號便得如是。若然。則五逆強徒但心心造惡。口口持名。應無罪矣。何以善星比丘身親面佛。生陷泥犁。是知念佛一聲據其發心為語也。又佛者心也。昧心造業。果報無涯。其猶處夢。深成不覺。苟得悟心。大夢俄醒。黑業頓消。所謂八十億劫猶屬分限。不爾則虗唱無益。慢道佛語難信也。

> Question: But doesn't a single recitation of the Buddha's name bring one to the holy realm? You speak of "karmic forces," yet this contradicts the Buddha's teaching. Answer: Do not misinterpret the Buddha's words. The point is that ordinary beings turn their backs on the Buddha. They ignore the Buddha's teachings and create vast oceans of karmic actions, leading to an endless cycle of birth and death without any boundary. This is like a prodigal son who forgets his parents, wanders in foreign lands, suffers countless hardships, and has no thought of returning. If he can suddenly remember his hometown, he will gradually find his way back. He will honor his loving parents and receive boundless joy. Sentient beings are the same. If they can awaken their minds to recollect the Buddha's grace, they will immediately cross over from the ordinary realm and enter the holy realm. Does this mean a single recitation of the Buddha's name alone achieves this? If so, then violent criminals who create evil with every thought while mouthing the Buddha's name should be free from guilt. Why then did the monk Shanjian, who was a personal disciple of the Buddha, fall alive into the Avici Hell? Know that the single recitation of the Buddha's name is understood in relation to the mind that initiates it. Moreover, the Buddha is the mind. To darken the mind and create karma leads to endless retribution, like being trapped in a dream, deeply unconscious. If one can realize the mind, the great dream will immediately end, and dark karma will vanish instantly. What we call "eighty billion kalpas" is still a limited measure. Otherwise, mere empty chanting is useless. Do not arrogantly claim that the Buddha's words are hard to believe.

客曰。都云念佛雖未極於成功。將來善種亦不虗廢。苟參禪得悟果超勝餘門。若不得悟心則光陰唐喪。空無所獲。為此人多念佛不欲參禪也。師以何旨定之。

> A visitor asked: "People say that while reciting the Buddha's name may not lead to complete success in this life, it still plants virtuous seeds that won't be wasted. But if one practices Chan meditation and attains enlightenment, that truly surpasses other methods. However, if enlightenment isn't achieved, then time is simply wasted and nothing is gained. Because of this, many people prefer chanting over Chan meditation. What is your teaching on this matter?"

答曰。梵語阿棃耶。此云含藏識。即第八識也。能含藏善惡種子。故云。假使百千劫。所作業不忘。因緣會遇時。果報還自受。既云善惡之業悉皆不忘。況般若之緣而可忘耶。宗鏡云。般若有經耳之緣。法華有隨喜之德。蠎聞懺以生天。龍聽法而悟道。物尚如此。況人而不如乎。永嘉云。吾早曾經多劫脩。不是等閒相誑惑。又高峯云。一生不就。三生必克。是豈欺人哉。若此般若因緣如空用其力。則一切諸法皆無其因。經教無文。不知何因有此語也。經載人食金剛少火燃薪等喻。明如皎日。不必辨也。子胡不信此而疑彼謬說耶。

> Answer: In Sanskrit, the term is "Ālaya." In Chinese, it is called the "Storehouse Consciousness," which refers to the Eighth Consciousness. It can store all seeds of good and evil, hence the saying: "Even after a hundred thousand eons, past actions never fade; when conditions come together, the results return to oneself." Since it is said that the karmic seeds of good and evil are never forgotten, how could the conditions of \*Prajñā\* (wisdom) be forgotten? The \*Record of the Mirror of the Tradition\* says: "The \*Prajñā\* sutras offer the opportunity to hear with the ear, the \*Lotus Sutra\* gives the merit of joyful appreciation. A snake, hearing repentance, was reborn in heaven; a dragon, listening to the Dharma, attained enlightenment. Even beings like these can do so—how much more so humans? How could humans fail to match them?" Master Yongjia said, "I have already cultivated through many eons; this is not a casual deception or empty talk." Master Gaofeng also said, "If you do not succeed in one lifetime, you will certainly achieve it in three." How could this be a lie? If the conditions for \*Prajñā\* were as futile as using one’s strength in vain, then all phenomena would lack causes, and the scriptures and teachings would have no basis—how could such statements exist? The scriptures contain metaphors such as "a person eating a diamond" or "a small spark setting fire to kindling," which are as clear as the sun. There is no need to debate them. So why do you distrust this and believe in such mistaken explanations?

客曰。師所發明無不了了。然教載成佛必具三十二相八十種好廼得成佛。如舍利弗云。若得作佛時。具三十二相。乃名得真滅。今禪門但云見性便得成佛。都不言相好。何也。

> The visitor asked: "Master, your explanations have made everything perfectly clear. However, the scriptures state that to become a Buddha, one must possess the thirty-two marks and eighty excellent characteristics. As Shariputra said, 'If one becomes a Buddha, they must have the thirty-two marks, only then can they be said to have attained true nirvana.' Yet now the Chan school only says that seeing one's true nature brings Buddhahood, without ever mentioning these physical marks. Why is that?"

答曰。經云。三十二相得見如來否。須菩提言。如是如是。可以三十二相得見如來。佛告須菩提。若以三十二相見如來者。轉輪聖王即是如來。須菩提白佛言。世尊。如我解佛所說義。不應以三十二相得見如來。何以故。三十二相即是非相。是名三十二相。若然。則法華所言三十二相豈有相之相耶。何以故。身子智慧第一。不在空生之下。未必以相見之也。參禪悟心之士。無相尚不取。況有乎。

> The sutra says: "Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the thirty-two marks?" Subhuti replied, "Yes, indeed, the Tathagata can be seen by means of the thirty-two marks." The Buddha then told Subhuti, "If the Tathagata could be seen by means of the thirty-two marks, then the Wheel-Turning Sage King would also be the Tathagata." Subhuti said to the Buddha, "World-Honored One, as I understand the meaning of the Buddha's teaching, the Tathagata should not be seen by means of the thirty-two marks. Why? The thirty-two marks are not marks in themselves; they are merely called the thirty-two marks." If this is so, then do the thirty-two marks mentioned in the Lotus Sutra refer to marks that possess substance? Why? Because Shariputra, foremost in wisdom, was not inferior to Subhuti—he surely did not see the Tathagata through physical marks. Those who practice Chan meditation and awaken to the mind do not cling even to formlessness, let alone form.

客曰。三十二相是非相者。可少無疑。然佛有無量神通三昧。乃至種種功德。俻如華嚴。今禪門既稱成佛。何以不具如此法門也。

> The visitor said, "Regarding the thirty-two marks, understanding that they are not ultimate is now clear. However, the Buddha possesses infinite spiritual powers, meditative absorptions, and countless meritorious qualities, fully described in the Avatamsaka Sutra. Since the Chan school now claims that one can attain Buddhahood, why does it not include all these teachings and practices?"

答曰。若論稱性門中。一切皆具。禽獸昆虫皆能辨事。況人而不具神通乎。但迷昧不知。非謂無也。所以云。河沙妙德總在心源。且六根門頭放光動地。子能知乎。且如眼之放光也。森羅萬象洞鑑分明。混而不襍。分而不離。重重涉入。彼此互容。此不碍彼。彼不碍此。相入則一為無量。相即則無量為一。如月印千江。海吞萬象。曾無間然。此即華嚴普光明殿無障碍大總持神通三昧之門也。耳鼻舌身亦復如是。彼時法身大士領覽法身境界。各各充足無疑。二乘凡夫執認根塵。未能證得。故楞嚴會上揀選圓通。令人自悟。將六根優劣推求。如悟圓通。則知根根塵塵週遍法界。所謂眾生與佛本不相差也。嘗論之。如鳥之處巢也。人負而置之別林。彼林不窄。此巢不壞。鳥即驚云。不知何等大人將我世界取之置於何方。我未之知也。如淨名住不思議神力。斷妙喜世界置于娑婆世界。彼界不壞。此界不窄。本性如故。彼諸菩薩除補處者。其餘皆作是言。不知何人取我世界。如來願見救護。所謂不思議神力者。比夫負鳥巢者。何以異矣。又如蟻之負微物也。勢如泰山。合于眾力。極其志思。竟日不能數步。有人運土者。連蟻担之餘處。易如反掌。蟻即驚云。彼大人者具不思議神力也。能負世界過于不可思議世界。我等不知。誰能救之。夫彼起未曾有之驚。此即以為尋常之事。豈許蟻之思議可知。是豈不類不思議菩薩之神力乎。故永嘉云。六般神用空不空。一顆圓光色非色。又龐居士云。日用事無別。惟吾自偶偕。頭頭非取捨。處處勿張乖。朱紫誰為號。丘山絕點埃。神通并妙用。運水及搬柴。子所謂三昧者。一念不生。前後際斷。此即一行三昧。此是三昧王三昧。出生一切三昧也。苟能從此一念無為體上圓鑑萬機。即是海印三昧。隨機應變。事理無碍。即是獅子遊戲三昧。證此一心得決定解。一切不疑。即是師子無畏三昧。運決定法。稱機適教。巧盡三乘。即是現一切色身三昧。故法華云。妙音菩薩現一切色身三昧者。以妙音聲為能應之機也。觀音菩薩現三十二相者。以妙觀心為所應之機也。揀能非所而曰妙音者。以其不二之音稱適無虧。豈非妙乎。揀所非能而曰觀音者。本不自觀以觀觀機。豈非觀乎。群機雖異。能現之心常一。故曰現一切色身三昧。真心雖一。其所赴之機不同。故曰三十二相。群機雖多不出三十二者。三十二是總。一切是別。總別相攝。還是現一切色身三昧也。其餘三昧皆可例推。不盡舉也。

> \*\*Answer\*\*: If we speak from the perspective of the nature of True Suchness, then everything is inherently complete. Even animals and insects can manifest spiritual powers—how much more so humans? It’s not that they lack these abilities; it’s that they are unaware and confused. It is said: “The infinite virtues of the Ganges are all contained within the mind-source.” Within our six sense faculties, there is light shining and energy moving—can you recognize this? For example, take the light of the eyes: it clearly illuminates all phenomena, myriad and distinct. They mingle without confusion, differentiate without separation. Layer upon layer, they interpenetrate each other, mutually containing one another. This does not obstruct that; that does not obstruct this. When they interpenetrate, one becomes infinite; when they identify, the infinite becomes one. It is like the moon reflected in a thousand rivers, or the ocean swallowing all phenomena—without any gap or hindrance. This is precisely the realm of the Great Total-Retention, Unobstructed Spiritual-Power Samadhi of the Avatamsaka’s Universal Light Hall. The ears, nose, tongue, and body are also like this. At that time, the Dharma-body Bodhisattvas directly experience and comprehend the realm of the Dharma-body, each fully complete and free from doubt. But ordinary people and those of the Two Vehicles, fixated on the six sense faculties and their objects, cannot realize this. That is why, in the Śūraṅgama Assembly, Guanyin’s method of perfect penetration was selected, guiding people to awaken on their own. Comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the six faculties, if one awakens to perfect penetration, one realizes that every sense faculty and sense object pervades the entire Dharma-realm. This means that sentient beings and Buddhas are fundamentally no different. Consider an analogy: a bird in its nest. Someone carries the nest and places it in another forest. That forest is not too small; this nest is not damaged. The bird, startled, wonders: “What great being has taken my world and put it somewhere else? I have no idea.” This is like Vimalakīrti’s inconceivable spiritual power, where he cut off the entire world of Wonderful Joy and placed it in the Sahā world—that world was not damaged, and this world was not cramped. Their original natures remained unchanged. All the Bodhisattvas of that world, except for the ones destined to succeed the Buddha, exclaimed: “Who has taken our world? May the Tathāgata protect us!” What is this inconceivable spiritual power? How is it different from the one who carried the bird’s nest? Another analogy: an ant carrying a tiny object feels it as heavy as Mount Tai. Working together with all its strength, driven by determination, it can’t move even a few steps in a whole day. But someone moving earth picks up the ant along with its load and carries it elsewhere as easily as turning over a hand. The ant, terrified, thinks: “That great being possesses inconceivable spiritual power! He can carry a world over an inconceivable number of worlds. We have no idea—who can save us?” What is astonishing to the ant is just ordinary to the person. How can the ant’s limited thinking comprehend it? Isn’t this similar to the spiritual power of an inconceivable Bodhisattva? Thus, Yongjia said: “The six miraculous functions are both empty and not empty; a single perfect light is both form and not form.” And Layman Pang said: “In everyday affairs, nothing special—only I go along with myself. No picking and choosing anywhere; no clinging or rejecting anywhere. Who named red and purple? Hills and valleys are utterly dust-free. Spiritual powers and miraculous functions—carrying water and chopping firewood.” What is called “Samadhi” in your question? The state where a single thought does not arise and the past and future are cut off—this is the One-Practice Samadhi. This is the King of Samadhis, the source from which all samadhis arise. If one can, based on this non-action essence of a single thought, perfectly and clearly respond to all situations, this is the Ocean Seal Samadhi. Adapting freely to conditions, perfectly merging principle and phenomena, this is the Lion’s Play Samadhi. Realizing this one mind with decisive understanding, leaving no room for doubt, this is the Lion’s Fearless Samadhi. Using decisive methods, fitting the teaching to the capacity, skillfully covering all Three Vehicles, this is the Samadhi of Manifesting All Forms. Therefore, the Lotus Sutra says: “The Bodhisattva Wonderful Sound manifests all forms through his samadhi”—this refers to subtle sound as the responsive faculty. Guanyin Bodhisattva manifests thirty-two forms—this refers to the subtle contemplative mind as the receptive faculty. When emphasizing the responsive faculty over the receptive, it is called “Wonderful Sound”—a non-dual sound that perfectly fits all situations—isn’t that marvelous? When emphasizing the receptive faculty over the responsive, it is called “Guanyin”—He does not contemplate himself but contemplates beings’ capacities—isn’t that contemplation? Though beings’ capacities vary, the mind that manifests is always one—thus the “Samadhi of Manifesting All Forms.” Although the true mind is one, the capacities it responds to differ—thus the “thirty-two forms.” The many capacities are not beyond these thirty-two—the thirty-two are the general, and “all forms” are the specific. The general and specific mutually encompass each other, and this is still the Samadhi of Manifesting All Forms. All other samadhis can be inferred by analogy and are not listed here in full.

客曰。師所話及處多舉法華。謂一乘之譚無有過也。又云世尊拈花百萬人天唯迦葉一人得旨。似有過於法華。若然。法華會上諸大聲聞悟心得記不可信矣。何者。一悟之後不復再悟。一記之後豈有再記也。苟如是。何以於拈花之際皆不之知也。請師明示。

> The visitor asked: "Master, in your teachings you often cite the Lotus Sutra, saying that as a discourse on the One Vehicle, nothing surpasses it. Yet you also say that when the World-Honored One held up a flower, among the million humans and celestial beings, only Mahakashyapa understood his meaning. This seems to suggest something superior to the Lotus Sutra. If so, then the great listeners in the Lotus assembly who awakened to the mind and received prophecies of enlightenment cannot be trusted. Why? Because after one awakening, there is no further awakening; after one prophecy, how could there be another? If that is the case, why then did all those other disciples not understand at the moment of the flower? Please, Master, clarify this."

答曰。此有二義。一者為傳法故。是以百萬眾中咸推迦葉一人。知宗有所據。不相混濫。非無知也。如波離持律。目連神力。旃延論義。樓那說法等。豈餘則不能乎。如淨名以神通力示諸大眾。上方過四十二恒河沙佛土有國名眾香。佛號香積。今現在。乃至時彼佛與諸菩薩方共坐食。有諸天子皆號香嚴。悉發阿㝹多羅三藐三菩提心。供養彼佛及諸菩薩。此諸大眾莫不自見。時維摩詰問眾菩薩。諸仁者。誰能致彼佛飯。以文殊師利威神力故。咸皆默然。既云文殊神力使之默然。非諸菩薩無神力不能往也。意顯淨名之德耳。二者顯頓法故。是華嚴以降。中間阿含．方等．般若多說往劫積功。如法華亦云。大通下種未設本地風光。或有說之猶涉言詮。未能言外知歸。雖則身子等乃如來許以信得入。因聞生信。因信發解。解同佛心。即得受記。豈曰即證佛乘。故曰過若干劫。供若干佛。乃得作佛。明知以信得入也。如拈花之際。言語不足以載。思惟不能以至。非功行可及。非意識可知。苟不以親證其心。他孰能擬哉。所以云。如將梵位直授凡庸。實非細事。豈易知也。且如來於無量劫中艱辛難得之法。到此方稱本懷。譬如良醫力窮藥性。撮此良方。狂子無知。視為毒藥不肯服之。深可嗟也。

> The answer: This has two meanings. First, it is for the sake of transmitting the Dharma. Thus, among a million people, only Mahakashyapa was universally acclaimed—this shows that the source of the teaching had a foundation, avoiding confusion and mixing. This is not due to ignorance. For instance, in the case of Upali upholding the precepts, Maudgalyayana possessing supernatural powers, Katyayana excelling in debate, and Purna preaching the Dharma, were the others incapable of doing so? Consider how Vimalakirti, using his supernatural powers, revealed to the great assembly: far above, beyond forty-two Ganges-river sands of Buddha lands, there is a land called "Universally Fragrant," with a Buddha named "Fragrance Accumulation," who is still present today. At that time, that Buddha and the Bodhisattvas were just sitting down to eat together, accompanied by many heavenly beings, all called "Fragrance Adornment," who had all awakened the \*Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi\* mind, making offerings to that Buddha and those Bodhisattvas. Everyone in the great assembly saw this with their own eyes. Then Vimalakirti asked the Bodhisattvas, "Venerable ones, who can go and fetch that Buddha's meal?" Because of the awesome power of Manjushri, they all remained silent. Since they were silenced by Manjushri's power, this does not mean the other Bodhisattvas lacked the power to go. It was meant to highlight Vimalakirti’s virtue. Second, it reveals the sudden teaching. From the \*Avatamsaka Sutra\* onward, the \*Agamas\*, \*Vaipulya\*, and \*Prajnaparamita\* sutras mostly speak of accumulating merit over many eons. Even the \*Lotus Sutra\* says that from the time of the "Great Penetrating Wisdom Thus Come One," seeds were planted, yet the essential enlightenment of the original ground was never disclosed. Sometimes it was spoken of using words, but still relied on verbal expression, not allowing one to realize it beyond words. Although Shariputra and others were permitted by the Tathagata to enter through faith—hearing, generating faith, and dissolving understanding—their understanding became identical to the Buddha's mind, so they received the prediction of Buddhahood. But can this be called direct realization of the Buddha vehicle? Therefore, it is said: "After passing through many eons and making offerings to many Buddhas, one becomes a Buddha." This clearly shows that they entered through faith. As in the case of the "twisted flower" incident, words cannot contain it, and thinking cannot reach it. It cannot be attained by effort nor known by consciousness. If one does not personally realize this mind, who else can conceive of it? Therefore, it is said, "To directly bestow the position of a Brahma king upon an ordinary person is truly no trivial matter—how could it be easily understood?" Moreover, the Dharma that the Tathagata attained through immense hardship over countless eons, at this moment, fully meets his fundamental intention. It is like a skilled, brilliant doctor who, having thoroughly investigated the nature of medicine, formulates this excellent prescription—only to have an ignorant child see it as poison, refuse to take it, and thus suffer deeply. This is truly lamentable.

客曰。蒙師委曲發明。則如來出世本懷以究心為本。固無疑也。未知教門諸師亦有棄教參禪者否。彼教家皆云。依經了義。觀教明心。離此別求異端。皆名外道。師偏主禪宗。未知孰是。請為辨之。

> A student asked, "After your compassionate and thorough explanation, it's now clear that the Buddha's fundamental intent in appearing in the world is to investigate the mind as the core practice. There's no doubt about that now. But I wonder: among teachers of the doctrinal schools, are there any who abandoned scriptural study to engage in Chan meditation? The doctrinal teachers all say, 'Rely on the scriptures' ultimate meaning, contemplate the teachings to clarify the mind. To seek anything else outside of this is called a heretical path.' You, Master, seem to favor the Chan school. Which is correct? Please clarify this for me."

答曰。吁是何言歟。彼所謂識教者。未必其然。虎皮羊質豈真虎耶。昔者百丈．南泉．藥山．大溈諸大老。是真識教者。何也。初則愽學三乘。終則歸心的旨。所以云。依經解義三世佛冤。離經一字即同魔說等語。俻載群書。法華亦云。是法於久後。要當說真實。豈有尚言詮不求真實者哉。苟許其言。何以亮座主見馬祖潛隱西山。孚上座即入雪峯之室。長水．良遂彼何人哉。今之所謂識教者能如彼乎。

> "You're right, they reply. What you said is quite off the mark. Those who claim to understand the teachings of the scriptures may not truly do so—like a wolf in sheep's clothing, they are not real tigers. In the past, great masters like Baizhang, Nanquan, Yaoshan, and Dawei truly understood the teachings. Why? Because they began by broadly studying the Three Vehicles, but ultimately turned their focus to the direct, essential meaning. Thus it is said: 'To interpret the scriptures by relying on words is to wrong the Buddhas of the three times. To depart from the scriptures by even one word is like speaking devilish language.' These sayings are recorded in many texts. The Lotus Sutra also says: 'After a long time, the truth must be spoken directly.' How could anyone who clings to words and explanations and does not seek the real truth be considered wise? If you allow such claims, then why did Elder Liang, upon meeting Mazu, hide himself on West Mountain? Why did Elder Fu enter Xuefeng's chamber? Who were Changshui and Liangsu? Can those today who claim to understand the scriptures compare to them?"

客曰。若如是。悟心之後還許看教否。

> A visitor asked: "If that's the case, after attaining enlightenment, is one still allowed to study the scriptures?"

答曰。悟心之後正須看教。何以故。未悟以前涉獵文字障自悟門。所謂所知障障正知見。故教亦遮而不許也。悟心之後執掌藏鑰。廣會權實。利生接物巧應群機。苟執認不圓。是名法執不忘。非真大乘也。雖然。學與不學。當自知時節。不在問人。思之。

> The reply says: Once you awaken to the mind, then you truly need to study the teachings. Why is that? Before awakening, casually browsing scriptures can become an obstacle to enlightenment. This is the so-called "intellectual obstruction" that blocks true insight. Therefore, the teachings rightfully discourage such practice. But after awakening, you hold the key to the treasury. You can then fully understand both provisional and ultimate truths, skillfully guiding living beings and responding to their various capacities. If you cling rigidly to incomplete understanding, this is called failing to let go of attachment to the Dharma—this is not the true Great Vehicle. Nevertheless, whether to study or not should be known through your own timing; do not ask others. Reflect on this.

客曰。悟心明宗我知之矣。未知悟心之士還念佛否。

> The visitor asked: "Now I understand the principle of awakening the mind and realizing the essence. But I would like to know—do those who have awakened the mind still practice recitation of the Buddha's name?"

答曰。悟心之士。念與無念皆無定計。何也。古人終日無念。不乖於念。終日念。不乖無念。無念不乖念者。如趙州．大溈等皆云。念佛一聲噪口三日。又云。佛之一字吾不喜聞。此是高提向上機關。向空劫以前與諸眾生把手共行。遊於千佛頂𩕳。密示本源。非故意貶佛。如雲門呵佛之類是也。後人既不悟心。効他嚬蹙。為過非細。可不戒諸。念不乖無念者。如永明壽．芙蓉偕．天衣懷．圓照本。不廢宗門而以念佛為事者。正如洞宗挾帶通途正中。妙挾空刼今時。二皆無碍。所以云行至水窮山盡處。也須作伴做工夫。此其事也。何以故。良由末法澆漓。人多乾慧。雖得悟心。苟不假念持心。恐有微細現流習氣難以速淨。故云。理雖頓悟。事假漸脩。彼人苟執一隅。皆非圓意慎之。

> A question was asked: One who has awakened to the mind—thoughts and no-thoughts are both without fixed definitions. Why is this? Because the ancient masters spent all day without thoughts, yet were not violating the principle of thought. They spent all day in thought, yet were not violating the principle of no-thought. For no-thought not violating thought: Masters like Zhaozhou and Dawei all said, "Reciting the Buddha's name once will make your mouth stink for three days." And further said, "The word 'Buddha' is something I dislike hearing." These were means to uplift the crucial mechanism, to walk hand-in-hand with sentient beings before the empty kalpa, roaming above the crowns of a thousand Buddhas, secretly revealing the original source—not intentionally disparaging the Buddha. Cases like Yunmen's ridicule of the Buddha are similar. Later people, without having awakened the mind, imitated their frowns—their faults were not trivial; should they not be cautioned? Thought not violating no-thought: Masters like Yongming Yanshou, Furong Daoqian, Tiangyi Huai, and Yuanzhao Ben did not abandon their school yet practiced mindfulness of the Buddha. It is just as the Caodong school's "combined path"—smoothly operating between ordinary and sublime. Both direction and emptiness, the present moment and the ancient—none obstruct each other. Thus it is said, "When you walk to where the water ends and the mountains vanish, you still need companions to continue your practice." This is the matter at hand. Why? Because the Dharma-ending age is degenerate; many possess only dry wisdom. Even if one has awakened the mind, without relying on mindfulness to sustain it, one fears that subtle, flowing habitual tendencies may not be quickly purified. Hence it is said, "Though awakening is sudden in principle, practice requires gradual cultivation." Those who stubbornly cling to one side miss the comprehensive meaning—be cautious.

客曰。悟心之後正須念佛。吾已知矣。未審還假作福否。

> The visitor asked: "I now understand that after awakening the mind, one should indeed practice Buddha-recitation. But I am not sure — is it still necessary to cultivate merit through good deeds?"

答曰。悟心之後正好作福。何以故。凡夫所作福田。趣果惟在人天。二乘所作福德。發心僅求小果。菩薩所作福德。事事皆名佛德。故云一色一香無非中道。所以然者。參禪悟心之士。佛慧開發。法法妙圓。如眾色歸空同為空色。百川入海咸名海水。故法華云。供佛造像乃至禮拜低頭無非佛行。且凡夫作福如蟻步。二乘作福如人行。大乘作福如雲飛。圓心作福如契虗。雲行猶有往來之狀。心契虗理則何所不該。是以圓心行人出入無相。非彼所知。豈曰悟心不必脩福也。又三乘之于六度必先布施。漸歷至于智慧。同異失准。圓心之于六度必先智慧。而攝前五度。一念圓該難易。皎然非常境界。極宜深究不可忽也。

> After awakening the mind, it is precisely the right time to cultivate merit. Why is that? The fields of merit created by ordinary people bear fruit only in the realms of humans and gods. The merit cultivated by the Two Vehicles arises from a mind that merely seeks lesser attainments. The merit created by Bodhisattvas is entirely the virtue of Buddhahood in every action. Hence it is said: "Every form and every fragrance is nothing other than the Middle Way." The reason is that those who awaken their minds through Zen meditation have their Buddha-wisdom unfold, and every dharma becomes wonderfully all-encompassing. Just as all colors return to emptiness and become one with emptiness, and all rivers flow into the sea and are called seawater, so too does the Lotus Sutra say: "Making offerings to the Buddha, creating statues, even bowing or lowering one's head—all are Buddha-actions." Ordinary people creating merit is like an ant crawling; the Two Vehicles creating merit is like a person walking; the Great Vehicle creating merit is like clouds flying; those with the Perfect Mind creating merit is like merging with emptiness itself. Even cloud movement has the appearance of coming and going, but a mind that merges with emptiness—what does it not encompass? Therefore, practitioners of the Perfect Mind come and go without any fixed characteristics—this is beyond the understanding of others. How can it be said that after awakening the mind, one need not cultivate merit? Furthermore, among the Three Vehicles, the Six Perfections always begin with generosity, gradually proceeding to wisdom—these paths differ and lose their alignment. For those with the Perfect Mind, the Six Perfections always begin with wisdom, which encompasses the first five perfections in a single moment—the difference between difficulty and ease is obvious. This is a realm beyond the ordinary, and must be deeply investigated; it cannot be overlooked.

客曰。如師所云。若悟自心無碍圓修。未知亦可生淨土否。

> The visitor asked, "If, as you have explained, one realizes that the mind itself is unobstructed and practices perfectly, could they still be reborn in the Pure Land?"

答曰。真正悟明。必生淨土。何以故。悟者悟自心外無土。土外無心。此界他方同歸方寸淨土。天宮總是家山。形直影端。聲和響順。大德大位理必如然。豈有悟心而不生淨土者哉。且念佛如不分證淨心。豈有決獲往生。何以故。隨聲唱和未必皆歸淨土。教有明文。所以雲棲勸人念佛以千繼計萬。今載往生者止有二三。馬祖會中眾惟五百八十餘人悟道。故知淨土之易不異參禪之易。參禪之難即是淨土之難。難易之事在人不在法。頓漸之宗在志不在得。所以云。小聖不及大凡。聖僧讚嘆仰嶠之宗。黃檗豈如羅漢破結。如世讀書。一人壯年而已職小宦。一人弱冠而頓發大心。未必定至三公。其志實為可尚。是二人較之。不啻霄壤矣。

> Answer: One who truly attains enlightenment will surely be reborn in the Pure Land. Why? Because the enlightened person realizes that the mind is not separate from the Pure Land, and the Pure Land is not separate from the mind. This world and other realms all return to the Pure Land within the mind; the heavenly palace is always our own home. If a form is straight, its shadow will be straight; if a sound is harmonious, its echo will follow. It is natural that great virtue leads to a great position. How could an enlightened mind fail to be reborn in the Pure Land? However, reciting the Buddha's name without realizing the pure mind does not guarantee rebirth. Why? Chanting aloud and going through the motions does not necessarily lead to the Pure Land. The scriptures clearly teach this. For this reason, Master Yunqi urged people to practice Buddha-recitation by the thousands and tens of thousands, yet only two or three out of the recorded cases were actually reborn. In the assembly of Master Mazu, over five hundred and eighty people awakened to the truth. Therefore, it is clear that the ease of attaining the Pure Land is no different from the ease of Chan meditation; the difficulty of Chan meditation is exactly the same as the difficulty of attaining the Pure Land. Matters of difficulty and ease depend on the person, not the method. The teachings of sudden and gradual awakening depend on one's resolve, not on attainment. Thus it is said, "A lesser saint is no match for a great ordinary person." The holy monks praised the teachings of Mount Yangqi, and Huangbo was not merely someone who broke through delusions like an Arhat. It is like studying in the world: one person reaches middle age and attains only a minor official post, while another, at a young age, suddenly awakens a great aspiration. The latter may not necessarily become a high minister, but his resolve is certainly commendable. Comparing these two people is like comparing heaven and earth.

客曰。若然。何以真如󳭷青草堂還轉輪迴即置而不論。且如五祖戒深獲悟明。叢林標榜。轉世還耽富貴。貪酒戀花。不得佛印提携。幾乎沈迷不返。

> The guest asked: "If that is the case, why is it that when it comes to such matters as Zhenru Qingcaotang being reborn in the cycle of rebirth, we set them aside without discussion? Moreover, consider the case of the Fifth Patriarch Jie, who had achieved profound enlightenment and was held up as a model in the monastic community. Yet in his next life, he became attached to wealth and luxury, indulged in alcohol and flowers, and was almost lost forever in confusion—only barely saved by the guidance of the Dharma Seal \[Foyin\]."

答曰。悟心之士得失是非曾無二致。生死涅槃豈有兩人。了達無生無死。生即無生。遊戲法海。廣作慈航。曾無有倦也。且如傅大士為彌勒化身。念法華仰山山應記。乃至豐干彌陀。般若勢至。達磨觀音。普賢拾得。諸大聖賢遞代出興。子胡不之疑而偏疑數者。子所謂不得佛印提携幾乎沉迷不返。假如彌勒元在天宮。大士曾為捕魚之叟。頭陀極陳方悟。勢至不離佛側。瓔珞還為丐食之童。遇師指授發明。世尊成佛塵點劫中。豈煩天人頻警。覩星方悟。盖表悟假因緣道有時節。豈曰沉迷不返。如是則東坡輩現宰官身而為說法。未可知也。苟不然者。則圓覺銷金出鑛之喻必也徒然。佛語猶成戲論。

> Answer: A person who understands the mind sees that gain and loss, right and wrong are ultimately the same. Life and death, nirvana—these are not two separate realms. Such a person fully comprehends that there is no birth and no death; even birth itself is no-birth. They wander freely in the vast ocean of Dharma, serving as a great ferry boat of compassion, without any weariness. For example, Great Master Fu was an incarnation of Maitreya; he recited the Lotus Sutra while Yangshan responded to his prediction. Even Fenggan was Amitabha, and Hanshan (Bodhisattva of Wisdom) was Manjushri, Shide was Samantabhadra. All these great saints and sages have appeared in succession throughout the ages. Why do you have doubts about only a few of them? You mentioned that without the seal of Buddha-awakening, one might sink deep and never return. But consider this: Maitreya originally dwells in the Tushita Heaven, yet Great Master Fu was once a humble fisherman. A certain monk only awakened after persistent ascetic practice. Manjushri never leaves the Buddha’s side, yet once appeared as a beggar child holding a string of jewels. Only after encountering a teacher's instruction did he realize his true nature. The World-Honored One became a Buddha countless eons ago—did he really need heavenly beings to keep reminding him? The moment he saw the morning star and awoke was merely a symbol that realization depends on causes and conditions, and that the time is ripe. So how can you speak of "sinking deep and never returning"? Thus, even figures like Su Dongpo take on the form of high officials to teach the Dharma—how could we ever fully know their true nature? If you deny this, then the metaphor in the \*Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment\* about refining gold from ore would be meaningless, and the Buddha's own words would become mere empty talk.

客曰。若然。何以永明云。有禪無淨土。十人九差路。彼為國師真子。法眼親孫。豈有不知禪外無土乎。而曰十人九差路者。何也。

> The guest asked: If that's the case, then why did Master Yongming say, "With Chan but without Pure Land, nine out of ten will miss the path"? He was a true successor of the national teachers and a spiritual grandson of the Fayan lineage. How could he not know that Chan is not separate from the Pure Land? Yet he said nine out of ten miss the path—what does this mean?

答曰。彼偈目曰料揀。正揀四禪入定之徒。樂獨善寂淨佛國土教化眾生。心不喜樂者說也。豈指如來最上乘禪達磨心印亦如之耶。何者。身心一如。心外無餘。曾無心外之土。土外之心。即身即心。即禪即土。所以云。有禪有淨土。猶如戴角虎。現世作人師。來生為佛祖。所謂來生者。亦即一念也。故佛云。汝今一念亦生亦老亦死。所以永明未生淨土感閻羅王禮拜。不出娑婆為韶國師的子。故天衣云。生則決定生。去則實不去。猶如眾器含空。千江印月。是以器成非生。器存非住。器壞非去。何以故。空非有為。故佛性亦然。寧分來去。不生不滅不來不去。經有明文。今有濫語之徒。謬引鴈過長空之語配之。違旨甚矣。且水如真心不動。鴈如六塵起滅。鴈有來去之形。水無去留之跡。元有二物。此古人喻心境交加之際。見理如是。豈可以決生不去之語配之也。彼所謂決生者。如器壞空消。似有所去。去即生也。空無方所。實無可歸。歸即去也。故如來於普光明殿入剎那際三昧。一念普觀無量劫非去非來非住。於是了知三世事。超諸方便。成十力。非心境對待之語可知也。

> The answer said: That verse is titled “Selection and Refinement.” It is precisely meant to select those who practice the four stages of meditative absorption—those who delight in solitude, take joy only in stillness, and who purify the Buddha-land to teach and transform beings, yet whose minds do not take pleasure in such activity. How could it refer to the Tathagata’s supreme vehicle of Chan, or to Bodhidharma’s mind seal, in the same way? Why is that? Because body and mind are one; there is nothing apart from mind. There is never a land outside the mind, nor a mind outside the land. Just this body is just this mind; just this Chan is just this land. Therefore it is said: “One who has Chan and has the Pure Land is like a tiger with horns—in the present life, a teacher of people; in the next life, a Buddha.” What is called “the next life” is also simply this one thought-moment. Thus the Buddha said: “In this very thought-moment, you are both born, both age, and both die.” That is why Yongming, before he was born in the Pure Land, felt King Yama bow to him. Without leaving the Saha world, he became the true heir of National Teacher Shao. Thus Tiantai said: “Birth is definitely birth; going is truly not going.” It is like various vessels containing empty space, or a thousand rivers reflecting the moon. Therefore, when a vessel is formed, space is not born; when a vessel exists, space does not dwell; when a vessel breaks, space does not depart. Why? Because empty space is not conditioned. The Buddha-nature is likewise—how could it be divided into coming and going? It is unborn, unceasing, neither coming nor going. The scriptures have clear passages on this. Now there are reckless speakers who mistakenly cite the line “a wild goose passes across the vast sky” to match it, greatly contravening the intent. For instance, water is like the true mind, unmoving; the wild goose is like the six dusts, arising and ceasing. The wild goose has a form of coming and going; water has no trace of departing or staying. Originally these are two things. This was a simile used by the ancients to illustrate the point where mind and objects interact, showing their understanding of principle. How could it be matched with the phrase about “definite birth without going”? What they call “definite birth” is like when a vessel breaks and space disappears—it seems as if there is something that goes. Going is itself birth. Space has no location; there is truly nothing to return to. Returning is itself going. Therefore, the Tathagata, in the Hall of Universal Light, entered the samadhi of the moment of an instant, and in one thought comprehensively observed that limitless eons are neither coming nor going nor dwelling. Then he completely understood the affairs of the three times, transcended all provisional means, and realized the ten powers. This cannot be understood through the language of mind and objects as opposites.

客曰。師之所論皆原經說。甚可知也。但如師等出家之輩。無鄉山可戀。無名利可拘。獨脫無為。參禪了達故可也。恐某在家之徒未能耳。

> The guest said: "Master, what you have discussed all comes from the scriptures. I understand it clearly. But for those like you who have left home and entered monastic life, you have no homeland or mountains to long for, and you are not bound by fame or profit. Free and unattached, you have nothing to do—you can practice meditation and realize the truth. That is all well and good for you. But I'm afraid that for laypeople like myself, this is simply not possible."

答曰。朝為田舍郎。暮登天子堂。將相本無種。男兒當自強。彼有為法且當自強不應自屈。況乎無為本性人人本具。各各不無。但因迷悟有殊。聖凡似別。故世尊不得已權開僧俗之門。隨人力量。如龐居士．甘贄．陸釘校等未必出家而後悟道也。譬如越城四兵圍遶。危如累卵。急若噬嚌。頃刻之間命成灰燼。若也逃生。誰分僧俗男女富貴貧賤。除有甘為賊黨自棄其命者。不在此論也。人身亦然。生老病死四魔圍遶。危急過是。若論逃苦就樂。誰能不能。除有甘為魔子永輪三界者。亦不在此論也。子云不能者。但不能深厭生死之苦。樂著嬉戲。不肯出於三界。甘為火宅所燒。苟能厭之。別無方便。但於時中以何方便得出生死。如是思惟。如是究竟。如是檢點。如是訪問。日久年深忽然得悟。頓見本心。此時子來吾與汝語。僧俗跡也。男女亦跡也。生死迷也。涅槃亦迷也。誰知本地風光。祖翁田地。其來久矣。

> The answer says: “In the morning, a farm boy; by evening, a minister in the imperial court. Generals and chancellors are not born into their roles—a true man should strive to better himself.” Even conditioned phenomena require self-effort and not self-surrender. How much more so for the unconditioned original nature, which is inherently present in everyone, lacking in none? It is only due to differing degrees of confusion and awakening that saints and ordinary beings appear distinct. Thus, the World-Honored One, out of necessity, provisionally opened the gates of monastic and lay life, according to each person’s capacity. For example, Layman Pang, Gan Zhi, and Lu Dingxiao did not necessarily become monks before awakening. Consider a city surrounded on all four sides by troops, as precarious as a stack of eggs, as urgent as something burning in the throat—at any moment, life could turn to ash. If one seeks to escape, who would distinguish between monk and lay, male and female, rich and poor, noble and humble? Only those who willingly join the enemy forces and abandon their lives are excluded from this discussion. The same applies to the human body: surrounded by the four demons of birth, aging, sickness, and death, the danger is even greater than that. As for escaping suffering and seeking happiness, who can and cannot do it? Only those who willingly remain as demon-children, forever cycling through the three realms, are excluded. You say you cannot—this merely means you have not deeply hated the suffering of birth and death, that you delight in play and games, unwilling to leave the three realms, content to be burned in the house of fire. If you could truly grow weary of it, no other methods are needed. Simply ask yourself: at all times, what means can lead me to escape birth and death? Think this way; investigate thoroughly; examine carefully; ask persistently. Over many days and years, suddenly you may awaken and see your original mind directly. At that point, come to me, and I will speak with you. Monastic or lay—these are just traces. Man or woman—also traces. Birth and death are confusion; even nirvana is confusion (from this perspective). Who truly knows the local scenery and ancestral ground? It has been here all along.

客曰。男女乃權分之跡。生死乃迷背所成。據師所喻。某頗信矣。何云涅槃亦名迷者。寔所不預。重增迷悶。乞與決之。

> A visitor asked: "You explained that male and female are merely temporary distinctions, and that birth and death arise from delusion and misguided attachment. Based on your analogy, I'm now quite convinced of this. But why do you say that nirvana is also called a deluded state? I truly cannot understand this. It only adds to my confusion and distress. Please help resolve this for me."

答曰。佛為眾生違背自性。枉受生死尠不知止。為說涅槃。梵語涅槃。此云滅度。度生死故。苟能悟心。則知生死性空。苟知生死性空。則涅槃性亦空。何也。生死病也。涅槃藥也。若所迷之病既除。則能治之藥何有。病愈而服藥不休。返增病本。惑破而執心有得。即是迷源。故予言生死涅槃惟有其名。男女僧俗兩皆是跡。背寔迷名。豈識肇公無當之論。忘真執跡。相辜自己平等之心。所以二乘自謂身心疲懈。不能于五道利生。為厭生死。權趣涅槃。於寶所則不敢正眼相窺。于化城則自謂滿心受樂。世尊於法華會上斥彼不寔。元我化為。疲息既除。當求前進。及乎化城之執既破。乃告寶所在近而已。不言有處。若執為寔。豈不名迷。

> The Buddha said that because sentient beings go against their inherent nature, they endure birth and death in vain, never knowing when to stop. For them, the Buddha taught Nirvana. In the original language, Nirvana means "extinction and transcendence"—transcending the cycle of birth and death. If you awaken to your mind, you will realize that the nature of birth and death is empty. And if you understand that the nature of birth and death is empty, then the nature of Nirvana is also empty. Why is this? Birth and death is an illness; Nirvana is the medicine. If the illness of confusion has been cured, what use is the medicine that cured it? If you continue taking the medicine after the illness has healed, you only create a new cause for illness. Once delusion is broken, clinging to any attainment is itself the source of confusion. Therefore, I say that both birth and death and Nirvana are merely names—male and female, monk and layperson are all just appearances. To turn your back on reality and cling to names—how could you understand Master Sengzhao's teaching of "no real foundation"? To forget the true and hold to appearances is to betray your own equal mind. That's why the followers of the Lesser Vehicle say they are weary in body and mind and cannot benefit beings in the five realms. Out of disgust with birth and death, they temporarily seek Nirvana. But when it comes to the true treasure, they dare not look directly; when it comes to the phantom city, they settle for joy. At the Lotus Assembly, the World-Honored One rebuked them, saying these are not real—they are merely my expedient manifestations. Once your weariness is gone, you should press forward. And when the attachment to the phantom city is shattered, he tells you that the treasure is near. He does not say there is a fixed place. If you cling to it as real, how is that not confusion?

客曰。我知之矣。經不云乎。窮子捨父逃走。久住他國五十餘年。及乎住立門側。猶生驚怖。乃至長者得病。大付家財。曾無二人。當時但謂我是聲聞。菩薩之法我等無分。誰知五道眾生同為佛子。亦猶聲聞聞般若之法。謂是菩薩之事。不敢希取。我亦然也。未知從上國王大臣在富貴之中。亦有參禪者否。

> My guest said, "I understand now. Doesn't the scripture say: 'The poor son abandoned his father and fled, living long in another land for over fifty years. When he finally stood by the gate, he was still filled with fear. Then the father grew ill and entrusted the entire family fortune to him, without a second thought.' At the time, I only thought I was a Hearer. The Bodhisattva path, I believed, was beyond my reach. Who would have thought that beings in the Five Realms are all children of the same Buddha? It's just like when Hearers hear the Perfection of Wisdom teachings—they think it's only for Bodhisattvas and dare not aspire to it. I was the same. But tell me—among the kings and ministers of old, dwelling in wealth and status, were there any who also practiced meditation?"

答曰。西天悟道未可定語。如此土唐太宗洞明至道。同光帝心契真乘。肅宗憲穆師學南陽。宣宗為鹽官侍者。以至宋之太祖太宗皆參禪學。餘皆置而弗論。且如同光帝問興化曰。朕獲中原一寶。只是無人酧價。化曰借陛下寶看。帝以手托樸頭示之。化曰君王之寶誰敢酧價。帝大喜。子所謂大臣者。如崔趙公學於徑山。陸大夫師于南泉。王大傅．白樂天．張無盡．楊次公．李都尉．楊大年等。當時衲子莫如慈明。已謂不過楊李之門不名作者。給事馮公易衣告寂合眼而逝。同僚曰大夫既來去自由。何不留取一偈接引後人。公復開目索筆書偈曰。初三十一。中九下七。老人言盡。龜哥眼赤。如是等類備載祖席。不能盡舉。子當自考。

> He replied: "In the Western Heavens, enlightenment cannot be spoken in fixed terms. In this land, Tang Taizong understood the ultimate Way deeply, Emperor Tongguang realized the true vehicle in his heart, Emperors Suzong, Daizong, Xianzong, and Muzong studied with Teacher Nanyang, and Emperor Xuanzong served as the attendant of the Salt Official. Then, Emperors Taizu and Taizong of the Song all engaged in Chan study. The rest can be set aside. For instance, Emperor Tongguang asked Master Xinghua: 'I have obtained a treasure within this realm, yet there is none who can appraise it.' Xinghua said: 'May I borrow the emperor's treasure to have a look?' The emperor raised his official cap to show him. Xinghua said: 'This is the sovereign's treasure—who dares to appraise it?' The emperor was overjoyed. "As for the ministers you mention, Minister Cui Zhao studied under Master Jingshan, Minister Lu studied under Master Nanquan, and others such as Grand Marshall Wang, Bai Juyi, Zhang Wujin, Yang Cigong, Li Duwei, and Yang Danian were all deeply engaged. Among the Chan monks of their time, none surpassed Ciming, who said that those who had not passed through the gates of Yang and Li could not be called true practitioners. Secretary Feng Yi changed his lay clothes, took leave of Sakyamuni, and passed away with eyes closed. A colleague said: 'Sir, since you come and go freely, why not leave behind a verse to guide later generations?' He then opened his eyes again, asked for a brush, and wrote this verse: 'Third day, tenth night; middle ninth, lower seventh. The old man's words are exhausted; the turtle's eyes are red.' There are many such examples recorded in the ancestral lineage—too many to list fully. You should examine this for yourself."

客曰。僧俗都不相妨。悟後可尋文字愽問先知。故可也。只如女人柔弱。又不能遍訪賢良。文字全然不識。未知亦有方便令彼脩否。

> A visitor asked: "Both monastics and laypeople can practice without hindrance. After enlightenment, one may seek out texts and inquire of those who already know. That is fine. But what about women, who are delicate and unable to travel widely to visit sages, and who cannot read at all—is there also an expedient means that would allow them to cultivate?"

答曰。女人若辨肯心。正好參禪。何也。教明二障者。所謂煩惱障．所知障也。女人惟一。學人具二。煩惱障輕。所知障重。女人無之。只是無明重覆。不得發心。若也發心。曾無二念。一直頓超也。如靈照女．淨居尼．妙總尼等皆處女也。龐行婆．俞道婆．秦國夫人等。彼皆優婆夷也。且如妙總禪師者。一日馮濟川語大慧曰。和尚所示者。某會也。慧曰汝作麼生會。川曰什麼也不得。蘇魯娑婆呵。不什麼也不得。悉哩娑婆呵。什麼不什麼總不得。蘇魯悉哩娑婆呵。慧顧師曰汝作麼生。師曰曾聞郭象註莊子。識者云却是莊子註郭象。觀他問答綿密。特語超常。豈女人則不能耶。又俞道婆本以賣餅為業。一日遇一禪師問曰。師為我說法。某當施餅。師曰。臨濟一日上堂。汝等諸人有一無位真人。在汝面門出入。未證者看看。只什麼參。自有悟處。婆參三年。一日忽然大悟。凡見師僧但云兒兒。法燈珣往勘之。婆纔見乃曰兒兒。珣曰爺在什麼處。婆即轉身取巾帽頂之。珣與一踏云。賺我來。賺我來。婆曰兒來我還惜汝。珣徑往不顧。他得一把金剛劍相似。便解作活計。逢佛殺佛逢魔殺魔。初不有文字語錄評唱頌古。但向自己𦚾中流出。可謂一門深入矣。

> The answer: If a woman has a determined mind, she is perfectly suited for Chan meditation. Why is this? The teachings speak of two kinds of hindrances: the hindrance of afflictions and the hindrance of knowledge. Women have only one of these, while students generally have both. The hindrance of afflictions is light, while the hindrance of knowledge is heavy. Women lack this second hindrance. Their only issue is a thick layer of ignorance that prevents them from rousing their aspiration. But if they do rouse it, they have no second thoughts—they leap straight to enlightenment. Consider Lingzhao, the nun Jingju, and the nun Miaozong—all were laywomen. Pang the Laywoman, Yu the Laywoman, and Lady Qin of the state—all were upasikas. Take the Chan master Miaozong, for instance. One day, Feng Jichuan said to Dahui: "What you, Master, have shown me—I understand it." Dahui asked: "How do you understand it?" Feng replied: "If it's something—no. Su lu suo po he. If it's nothing—no. Xi li suo po he. If it's both something and nothing—no. Su lu xi li suo po he." Dahui then turned to Miaozong and asked: "What about you?" She replied: "I've heard that Guo Xiang commented on Zhuangzi, but those in the know say it was actually Zhuangzi commenting on Guo Xiang." Observe how subtle and interconnected their dialogue was—so extraordinary. Are we to say women are incapable of this? Then there was Yu the Laywoman, who originally made her living selling cakes. One day, she met a Chan master and said: "Master, if you teach me the Dharma, I will give you some cakes." The master said: "One day, Linji went up to the hall and said: 'You all have a true person of no rank who enters and exits through your face. Those who have not yet realized it—look closely.' Just meditate on this—you will have your awakening." Yu practiced Chan for three years, and one day, she suddenly awakened. After that, whenever she encountered a monk, she would only say: "Son, son." The master Fadeng Xun went to test her. As soon as Yu saw him, she said: "Son, son." Xun said: "Where is the father?" Yu immediately turned around, took a turban, and put it on her head. Xun stomped his foot and said: "You tricked me! You tricked me!" Yu said: "Son, if you come, I still care for you." Xun left and didn't look back. She had obtained a vajra sword and knew how to use it: meet a buddha, kill a buddha; meet a demon, kill a demon. From the very beginning, she didn't rely on scriptures, commentaries, or poetry. Everything flowed directly from her own heart-mind. This can truly be called a single-minded penetration.

客曰。若也一門深入。不拘文字。何以諸方一槩提舉評唱考覈古今。謂之通宗。豈復參禪一門又成是非也。

> The guest asked: "If one can penetrate deeply through a single method without relying on words and letters, why do teachers everywhere consistently raise cases, add comments and chants, and examine ancient and modern texts? This is called 'thoroughly understanding the tradition.' But would this make the practice of Chan meditation yet another source of right and wrong?"

答曰。此皆敝也。古之所謂說禪者。實無一法與人。但向方便門中委曲發明。學人于領不到處起疑參究。久久自悟。既悟之後通身具眼。另立門庭。或棒喝交馳。或機鋒峻捷。乃至竪拳竪指瞬目揚眉。不言而會也。後人樂之。聾瞽未聞。取笑達者。天童．雪竇．投子．丹霞取以頌之。圓悟老師深嗟末法。復以評之。作法門寶鏡。塞杜撰之師。為後世之良規。掩効顰之臉。豈意法久敝生。萬端穿鑿。將十六本評唱熟讀爛記謂之參宗。禪書外學採摭奇言註頭隱尾謂之秘要。以之謂師師密付。以之謂以心印心。大可悲傷。學人無知。不覺遭此毒氣。將破瓦盆認作琉璃寶。孜孜護持。復誑後人。我於某師親聽評唱。密授秘要。汝能恭敬。吾當授汝。其人忘身給侍。惟恐不獲。及乎得之。依舊黑漫漫地。便擬廣學內外教典。恰似讀書文士。以此󳯝代相承。祖師心印不復現矣。東漢時張豐為𣵠州太守。力好方術。遇一方士授以特石。指曰。此五色玉璽也。得者當為天子。繫于肘後。尋謀叛。自稱無上將軍。連兵四年。被祭遵擒之。遵曰何故反。豐曰肘內有璽。使人破之。乃頑石耳。豐愕然就死。將此較今之研窮評唱以謂自得真寶特石耳。苟逢作者剖而析之。則愕然不知所之。亦猶是也。

> The answer says: These are all blind spots. In ancient times, what was called "expounding Chan" actually had no single teaching to give to others. It only pointed the way through skillful means, skillfully revealing the truth from different angles. If a student couldn't grasp the point, they would raise doubts and investigate deeply. Over time, they would awaken on their own. Once awakened, they would see clearly in all directions. Then, such a person might establish their own school, using shouts and blows, sharp and swift exchanges, raising a fist, pointing a finger, blinking an eye, raising an eyebrow—communicating without words. Later generations found this appealing. But those who are blind and deaf to the truth have never truly heard it, and only become a laughingstock to the realized ones. Tiantong, Xuedou, Touzi, and Danxia used these methods to compose verses of praise. The great teacher Yuanwu, deeply lamenting the decline of the Dharma, added his own commentaries. He made these texts a precious mirror for the Dharma, to block the mouths of impostors and establish a true model for future generations, covering the face of those who merely mimic without understanding. Who could have imagined that as the Dharma aged, corruption would arise? Countless distortions crept in. People would memorize and recite the sixteen volumes of commentaries, thinking this was "studying Chan." They would pluck strange phrases from Chan texts and other teachings, hiding their meanings between lines, calling this "secret essentials." They would speak of "the master’s secret transmission" and "mind-to-mind sealing." How deeply saddening! Ignorant students, unaware, fall into this poison. They mistake a broken pot for a precious crystal, guarding it zealously, and then deceive others, saying, "I heard the commentaries from my teacher and received the secret essentials in person. If you can show due respect, I will teach you." The listener, serving with total devotion, fears only that they might not receive it. But when they finally get it, all remains pitch black. Then they plan to study extensively both inner and outer scriptures, like a scholar reading books. Passing down this corruption generation after generation, the mind-seal of the patriarchs is no longer visible. During the Eastern Han Dynasty, Zhang Feng was governor of Zhuozhou. He was deeply fond of magical arts. A master of techniques once gave him a special stone, saying, "This is a five-colored jade seal. Whoever possesses it will become the Son of Heaven." Zhang Feng tied it to his arm. Soon, he plotted rebellion, calling himself the "Supreme General." After four years of warfare, he was captured by Ji Zun. Ji Zun asked, "Why did you rebel?" Zhang Feng replied, "There’s a seal on my arm." Ji Zun had it broken open—it was just an ordinary stone. Zhang Feng stared in shock and went to his death. Compare this to those today who study commentaries and believe they have found the true treasure—it’s just a special stone. If one day they meet a true master who cuts through their delusion, they too will stare in shock, not knowing where to turn.

客曰。若然。古之所謂用棒用喝竪目揚眉。乃至綿密語句。苟不以評唱通之。焉得契古人之意乎。

> The guest asked, "If so, then how can we understand the ancients who used sticks, shouts, raised eyebrows, winking eyes, and even subtle words—if we don’t use commentaries and explanations to interpret them, how can we possibly grasp what they truly meant?"

答曰。子謂拈鎚竪拂等必須評唱通之。何以自迦葉而下未有評唱。悟道者不可勝計。萬松而後影響之徒。多見的傳之嗣絕聞。所以古人云。總是今日。老胡絕望。盖此非文字可示也。故云。與人實法土難消。道火何曾把口燒。又云。句中無句獅子吼。句中有句野犴鳴。既云不與實法。句中無句。而可以實法解之也。所以碧岩集出。大慧碎其板。紙衣錄語。雲門斥其痴。當知此事非語錄可盡也。且如世間有人于共聚之處。以千計萬其中僅二人共事。一人動目。一人領解。二人皆去。眾人疑之。倘有効彼動目者。眾人未必能知。二人未必不笑。何者。在二人元非無事。在眾人元非有事。其効者徒增其醜耳。如或有人詢問。智者深窮力究忽爾發明。則知其事不在動目處也。餘人詰之但曰唯唯。必不以動目示之。豈文字語言能通耶。今有不悟自心而徒為効顰者。不知重增其醜耳。

> I say: You claim that all those who raise the mallet or hold up the fly whisk must have their words and actions deciphered through explanatory critiques. But why is it that since the time of Mahakashyapa, when even more countless people have awakened to the Way, no such critiques were needed? After Wansong, those who merely imitated the form became numerous, while the true transmission of the lineage was rarely seen or heard. This is why the ancients said: "It is always right now—the old barbarian has given up all hope." This matter cannot be revealed through words and letters. Thus it is said: "Giving people concrete dharma is like soil impossible to digest; if you speak of fire, does your mouth ever get burned?" It is also said: "When words contain no words, that is the lion's roar. When words contain words, that is the yapping of a jackal." Since we say there is no concrete dharma and words without words—how can it be explained by concrete dharma? This is why, when the Blue Cliff Record appeared, Dahui burned its printing blocks. When Ziyi recorded his sayings, Yunmen called him foolish. You should know that this matter cannot be exhausted by recorded sayings. Consider this: In a gathering of a thousand or ten thousand people, only two among them share a special connection. One moves his eyes, and the other understands. Then both leave. The crowd is puzzled. If someone else tries to imitate that eye movement, the people watching will not understand, and the two will surely laugh. Why? Because for those two, there was originally something happening; for the crowd, there was originally nothing. The imitator only adds to his own foolishness. If someone inquires, the wise person delves deeply and investigates with all his strength until suddenly he becomes enlightened. Then he knows the matter does not lie in the eye movement. If others press him, he only says, "Yes, yes," and will certainly not show them the eye movement. Can such a matter be communicated through words and language? Today, those who do not awaken to their own minds yet merely imitate others—they increase only their own ugliness.

客曰。若然。彼評唱語錄則無益于人矣。

> The visitor said: "If that's the case, then all those commentaries and recorded sayings are of no benefit to people."

答曰。非謂無益。良由後世倘有悟道者。少遇師法。或可藉以印心。實非新學之事。猶如刑政等務。乃已仕者之事。豈書生也而即可以侵之耶。近來浸敝。新戒比丘未辨出家之心。先有為人之意。瞞眛自己。輕薄上流。自謂我參公案。我達禪宗。莫之能救。故曹山立正命食。揀非命者即非時之食也。但能于自己不明之處著實參究。豁爾通玄。然後考諸方冊。誰謂無益。古云。未有學養子而後嫁者也。盖言悟明自然通達。若先愽後脩。多障所知。良由易辨金鍮。難分煤墨。所以泣岐尋羊者非羊之難。實岐之難也。依希似量。人多有之。可不獨究其心乎。

> Answer: This is not to say it is completely useless. The reason is that if later generations happen to have someone who awakens to the path, but has few teachers or teachings to guide them, they might use these texts to verify their enlightenment. However, this is truly not something for beginners. It's like administrative or legal affairs—these are matters for those already in office; how could a mere student presume to meddle in them? In recent times, the situation has deteriorated. Newly ordained monks have not yet understood the mind of renunciation, yet they already have the intention to teach others. They deceive themselves, look down on those of higher spiritual attainment, and claim, "I study gong'ans," "I understand Chan Buddhism," until there is no remedy for them. That is why Master Caoshan established the "Right Life-Sustenance," rejecting "Non-Right Livelihood" as food consumed at improper times. If you can genuinely investigate what you have not yet understood, and suddenly penetrate its profound mystery, then you can consult all kinds of writings and scriptures—who would say that is useless? The ancients said, "No one first learns to raise a child and then gets married." This means that once you awaken, understanding comes naturally. If you study broadly first and cultivate later, you may be obstructed by accumulated knowledge. It's easy to distinguish gold from copper, but hard to tell coal from ink. That is why there's the story of weeping at the crossroads because the difficulty in finding a lost sheep lies not in the sheep, but in the many divergent paths. Many people rely on vague, approximate understanding. Given this, how can you not investigate your own mind thoroughly?

客曰。悟心自達。理誠為然。柰何諸家建立名相不同。所謂三玄三要。五位四句等。各各有原。苟不究彼文字。何以得明差別。師有辨否。

> The guest said: "Understanding the mind and reaching enlightenment—this principle is indeed true. But why do the various schools establish different terms and concepts? For example, the Three Mysteries and Three Essentials, the Five Ranks and Four Phrases—each has its own origins. If we do not study their specific expressions, how can we understand the distinctions? Teacher, do you have a way to clarify this?"

答曰。子之所難者。難彼門庭施設也。豈知入理深譚曾無二致。況差別名相是後人所目。彼時稱機稱理曾無一法與人。豈有所謂五位四句七事三玄。乃至其餘乎。彼所立雖多。不出六句可以槩收。吾以近事與子釋之。則知實在悟心不在施設也。所謂縱奪句。問答句。探拔句。遮顯句。賞罰句。回互句是也。縱奪者。如有二童。一童呼曰某郎。彼叱曰汝敢喚我某郎。此曰若然呼你作麼始得。彼曰老相公。此曰呌我作什麼。古之所謂賓主縱奪者。未必不若此也。問答者。如有一人市中買物而回。路途逢人問曰。手中是什麼矣人舉手中物示之。此以無答而答。彼亦不言而信矣。古之所謂問答者未必不若此也。探拔者。有人明識彼家無刀。故意問之曰。人傳爾家持刀殺人。彼報曰我家以蚌󳺶切菜。那得有刀殺人乎。一詰便招。無容擬議。古之所謂探拔者未必不若此也。遮顯者。古有秀才專能關說。縣宰怒之。乃曰。我有一對。如能對得。吾即聽汝。曰願聞。宰曰。月明月明月月明。何故中秋更月明。才不能對。旁吏私語曰。年過年過年年過。只有今年最難過。宰喝之。且縣宰自謂愜意。秀才依然不覺。吏亦不知所以。古之所謂遮顯者未必不若此也。賞罰者。如有一人。婢能多語。對客飲酒次。禁之曰。不許添語。違則重責。一客起令曰。凡說葉之大者勝。勸飲一盃。一曰梧桐葉大。一曰芋葉大。一曰荷葉大。婢曰。不足為大。豈不是芭蕉葉大。其主遂與一掌。只此一掌便具賞罰。何者。賞者賞其當。罰者罰其禁。一機兩應。得失同具。古之所謂賞罰者未必不如此也。回互者。如有人屬牛者。人往借其牛。不敢觸諱。但告之曰。大力一借。主人曰我家並無大力。曰。如無。犂田者何。答曰。乃牛。非大力也。時人咸咲其不知回互耳。雖然不若曰牛。彼此無隱。可謂真言也。古之所謂回互者未必不如此也。此乃人于交接之際尋常所用之事。豈知所謂賓王縱奪乃至賞罰回互也。如虫禦木巧出一時。寧能存心意於其間哉。古人悟達自心。於應機接物之際。非應而應。不合而合。豈有名目存於其間也。後人強而目之。擬而學之。則自己大光明藏不復現矣。何也。良由此事非心識文字之可及也。所以云。教外別傳。不立文字。直指人心。見性成佛。雖然不得打在無事甲裡。須知古人云。出言須會旨。弗自立規矩。斯言可信也。

> The student asked: "The difficulty you raise is about the outer forms and labels people set up. How could you not understand that the profound discourse on principle has never been divided into two? Furthermore, distinctions and terms were added by later people. At that time, teachings were given according to the capacity of the listener and the truth itself, without offering a single Dharma to anyone. So how could there be things like the Five Ranks, Four Phrases, Seven Matters, or Three Mysteries, let alone others? Though the systems they established are numerous, they can all be summarized within six types of interactions. Let me explain with everyday examples, so you will understand that true realization lies in the mind, not in these labels. These six are: the Favorable-Depriving Exchange, the Question-Answer Exchange, the Probing-Revealing Exchange, the Concealing-Revealing Exchange, the Punishment-Reward Exchange, and the Interdependent Exchange. • Favorable-Depriving Exchange: Two boys are together. One calls out, 'Hey, so-and-so!' The other scolds, 'How dare you call me that?' The first replies, 'Then what should I call you?' The second says, 'Master.' The first counters, 'What are you calling me for?' This is how the ancient masters engaged in host-guest and favorable-depriving exchanges—it was likely no different from this. • Question-Answer Exchange: Someone returns from buying goods at the market and meets a friend on the road. The friend asks, 'What's in your hand?' The man simply raises the object in hand to show him. This is answering without answering, and the other trusts without needing words. The ancient masters' question-answer exchanges were likely similar. • Probing-Revealing Exchange: Someone knows clearly that a household has no knife, yet deliberately asks, 'I heard your family used a knife to kill someone.' The householder replies, 'We slice vegetables with a clam shell—how could we have a knife to kill?' A single probe reveals the truth without hesitation. The ancient masters' probing-revealing exchanges were likely no different. • Concealing-Revealing Exchange: An old scholar excelled at arguing legal cases, which angered the magistrate. The magistrate said, 'I have a couplet for you. If you can match it, I'll listen to you.' The scholar said, 'Let me hear it.' The magistrate recited, 'Moon bright, moon bright, moon after moon is bright—why is the mid-autumn moon even brighter?' The scholar could not answer. A clerk whispered to him, 'Year passes, year passes, year after year passes—only this year is hardest to get through.' The magistrate shouted him down. Though the magistrate thought he had won, the scholar remained oblivious, and the clerk himself did not understand the deeper point. The ancient masters' concealing-revealing exchanges were likely similar. • Punishment-Reward Exchange: A man had a talkative maidservant. While entertaining a guest over drinks, he warned her, 'Don't add a single word, or you'll be severely punished.' A guest initiated a game: 'Whoever names the largest leaf wins a drink.' One said, 'Palm leaf.' Another said, 'Taro leaf.' Another said, 'Lotus leaf.' The maidservant blurted out, 'None of those are big—what about banana leaf?' Her master slapped her immediately. That single slap contained both punishment and reward. Why? Because the reward was for being correct, and the punishment was for breaking the prohibition. One action served both functions, with gain and loss embodied together. The ancient masters' punishment-reward exchanges were likely no different. • Interdependent Exchange: A man who was born in the year of the ox owned a cow. Someone came to borrow the cow but avoided direct mention from respect. He said, 'Lend me your Great Strength.' The owner replied, 'We have no Great Strength here.' The man asked, 'If not, then what do you plow your fields with?' The owner answered, 'An ox—it's not called Great Strength.' Everyone laughed, saying the owner did not understand subtle avoidance. But actually, had he simply said 'the ox,' there would have been no hiding between them—that would have been true speech. The ancient masters' interdependent exchanges were likely no different. These are all ordinary interactions people have in daily life. How would they realize these are actually the host-guest, favorable-depriving, concealing-revealing, punishment-reward, and interdependent exchanges? It is like an insect carving wood—skill arises spontaneously in the moment. How could there be premeditated intention involved? When the ancients awakened to their own mind, responding to situations and interacting with others, they responded without responding, and they matched without matching. How could any labels remain in their minds? Later people forcibly named these interactions, tried to imitate them, and thus their own great treasury of radiant light no longer appeared. Why? Because this matter cannot be reached by mind, consciousness, or words. Thus it is said: 'A separate transmission outside the teachings, not established on words, directly pointing to the human mind, seeing one's nature and becoming Buddha.' But do not fall into the trap of thinking nothing needs to be done. Remember the ancient saying: 'When you speak, you must grasp the meaning; do not set up your own rules.' This saying can be trusted."

客曰。師云直究一心。與道門一氣同別何如。彼云一氣流行發生萬物。又云。天地之根乃玄牝之門。師云萬法從心。似同一途。何以異也。

> A visitor asked: "You say to directly investigate the One Mind. How is this similar or different from the Taoist concept of the 'One Energy'? They say the One Energy flows and gives rise to all things. They also say the root of heaven and earth is the gate of the mysterious female. You say all things arise from the mind—this seems like the same path. How are they different?"

答曰。此盖言萬法生于虗妄。虗妄依乎一心。彼云一氣者。乃陰陽流行之氣也。在陰非陽。在陽非陰。一何為定。又云。大道無形。運行日月。大道無名。長養萬物。既無形名而有一氣。真是邪因。彼謂玄牝為天地之根。玄者有而不可見也。牝者無而能生物也。盖言萬物生于有無者也。彼謂黃庭之下。丹田之上。為玄牝之門者。或直指丹田者。或言泥洹者。或言色身內者。或言色身外者。曾無定指。豈得類一心元鑑決定之真說哉。

> The answer: This is to say that all phenomena arise from illusion, and illusion depends on a single mind. When they speak of "one energy," it refers to the energy that flows through yin and yang. It is not yin when in yang, nor yang when in yin—how can the "one" be fixed? They also say, "The Great Way has no form, yet it moves the sun and moon. The Great Way has no name, yet it nurtures all beings." If it has no form or name, yet has "one energy," that is a mistaken cause. They claim that the "Mysterious Feminine" is the root of heaven and earth. "Mysterious" means something that exists but cannot be seen. "Feminine" means something that is nothing yet gives birth to beings. This is to say that all things arise from existence and non-existence. As for the "gate of the Mysterious Feminine," some say it is below the Yellow Court and above the Elixir Field; some point directly to the Elixir Field; some speak of Nirvana; some say it is within the physical body; some say it is outside the physical body. There has never been a fixed interpretation. How could this compare to the true teaching of the single mind, which is the clear mirror of certainty?

客曰。彼謂禪者脩性不脩命。但出陰神。玄門性命雙脩。形神俱妙。能出陽神陰神。能見人而人不能見。又不能取物。陽神能見人而人亦能見。又能取物。似有不如。師何明之。

> The visitor asked: "They say that Zen practitioners only cultivate the nature, not the vitality, and can only produce the yin spirit. In contrast, Daoist teachings cultivate both nature and vitality, achieving perfection in both form and spirit, enabling the production of the yang spirit. It is said that one with the yin spirit can see others but cannot be seen by them, nor can they take objects. One with the yang spirit, however, can see others and be seen by them, and can also take objects. This seems to suggest that Zen practice is inferior. Master, how would you clarify this?"

答曰。妙性如空。曾無出入。若認往來。還如見鬼。彼將識神認作自心。起滅無因。故云。杳杳冥冥其中有精。恍恍惚惚其中有物。依希執認。以此識心還脩于識。故所謂嬰兒姹女。內搆陰陽。相逢離坎。十月胎成。昇于黃庭。透于泥洹。成此神我。便誇形神俱妙。不知真生死根也。何以故。且如老子曰。吾有大患為吾有身。有身有患。理必如然。南山文豹之喻。正如之矣。前云。能見而復能取于物者。不是無形有形而能免生死者。吾不之知也。可謂自語相違。過非小小。思之擇之。彼清淨經亦云。內觀其心。心無其心。外觀其形。形無其形。遠觀其物。物無其物。三者既悟。惟見于空。空無所空。所空既無。無無亦無。無無既無。湛然常寂。既云無無而有形神。常寂而有往來。無物而能取物。無形而人能見我。無心而我能見人。所謂自相違者殆甚也。彼謂陽神取物。難逃五百年雷火之灾。吾宗門。成佛尚且不貴。況陰神乎。

> The answer says: The wondrous nature is like empty space—it has never come or gone. If you insist on recognizing coming and going, it’s still like seeing ghosts. Those people mistake consciousness for the true mind, seeing it arise and cease without cause. Therefore it’s said, “In the deep and dark there is an essence; in the dim and vague there is a substance.” They grasp and cling to this, cultivating their discriminating mind with that very mind. So they speak of “infant” and “maiden,” constructing yin and yang within, joining water and fire. After ten months, a perfected fetus rises to the Yellow Court, passes through the Mud Pill, and becomes this “spiritual self.” Then they boast of unity between form and spirit, not knowing this is the true root of birth and death. Why is that? For example, Laozi said, “My great trouble is that I have a body.” Having a body means having trouble—this principle is inevitable. The metaphor of the Southern Mountain’s spotted leopard applies exactly here. It was also said earlier: “One who can see and then take hold of things—if there is no form or having form that can escape birth and death, I do not know it.” This can only be described as self-contradiction; the fault is no small matter. Consider it and choose wisely. That same \*Pure and Quiet Sutra\* also says: “Look within at the mind—the mind has no mind. Look without at form—form has no form. Look afar at objects—objects have no object. Once these three are realized, you see only emptiness. Emptiness empties out; what is emptied is then gone; the absence of absence is absent; when the absence of absence is gone, there remains only serene stillness. Since it says there is absence and absence—yet claims form and spirit—serene stillness yet speaks of coming and going—no objects yet ability to grasp objects—no form yet others can see me—no mind yet I can see others—this self-contradiction is truly extreme.” They claim that the yang spirit can grasp objects but cannot escape the calamity of thunder and fire every five hundred years. In our tradition, even attaining Buddhahood is not cherished—so what use is a yin spirit?

客曰。一氣一心皎然無惑。儒教一理比之何如。

> The guest asked: "It is now completely clear without doubt that energy and mind are one. How does the single principle of Confucianism compare to this?"

答曰。聖賢創言一理。未敢議其同異。但後儒以己之未知。推及聖賢之已知。似為濫也。何者。如大學之道在明明德。盖言自心本明之德。非從外得。當自明之。如日性之熱。月性之凉。火性之燥。水性之濕。廣及萬物。以至吾身。眼如是見。耳如是聞。乃至意如是思惟。識如是了別。莫不皆然。曾非外物。說者謂。人之所得乎天。而必曰天之所付于人。天能付于人者有也。人所受于天者無也。天有人無。一理孰當。天之賦于我者。未知我是何物。何則。天付之然後有我。則未付之前應無我也。無我誰當受于天也。若有我而後付之。已有我之能受。受彼天之所付。未知所付之理何物也。有能有所。似同二物。未知何者是我。何者非我也。聖人曰。未知生焉知死。未知生則無生。無生而云得于天者。吾不之知也。焉知死則無死。無死而曰斷滅者。吾不之知也。彼云人死之後魂昇于天。魄降于地。形骸朽壞。精神漂散。縱有剉燒之作。曾無所施。乃至善惡之報。輪迴之理。鬼神之跡。雷霆之事。悉皆撥置無因。大同𥧌語。不懼悟者。何者。苟許其言。則盜跖得其宜。聖人失其所。強者任其志。弱者就其戮。富者奪之。好者取之。如是則天下不待一人。家國豈容一主。忠臣良將孝子節󳴜彼皆愚痴不足取也。何也。苦身節欲所圖何事也。盖據彼謂一死之後得失皆空。善惡無報。則却惡行善者皆愚矣。然何以聖人云。朝聞道夕死可也。假若夕死既空。則聞道亦奚為。彼聖人豈誣人也。故吾謂。一理一心曾無二致。後儒失旨。惑亂天下。大可哀哉。

> Answer: When sages and worthy men originally set forth a single principle, no one ventured to debate its similarities or differences. But later Confucians, using their own ignorance, presumed to judge what the sages already knew—this seems excessive. Why? For instance, the path of the Great Learning lies in illuminating luminous virtue. This means that the mind’s innate luminous virtue is not attained from outside; one must illuminate it oneself. Just as the sun’s nature is heat, the moon’s nature is cool, fire’s nature is dryness, water’s nature is wetness—extending to all things, even to our own body: the eyes see thus, the ears hear thus, the mind thinks thus, consciousness discerns thus. All are like this, none come from external objects. Some explain it as "what humans receive from Heaven," insisting that Heaven bestows something upon people. They say Heaven has the ability to bestow, while what humans receive from Heaven is nothing—Heaven has it, humans don’t. But where does this single principle reside? If Heaven bestows it on me, then before bestowal, I should have no self. Without a self, who is there to receive from Heaven? If a self exists first and then receives bestowal, then there is already a self capable of receiving; but what is this "principle" that is bestowed? There is a bestower and a receiver, as if they were two separate things. Who then is the "self," and who is the "not-self"? The Sage said, "If you do not know life, how can you know death?" If you don’t know life, then there is no life. Saying "I receive it from Heaven" without understanding life—I don’t know about that. "How can you know death" implies no death. To speak of annihilation without understanding death—I don’t know about that either. Some claim that after death, the soul ascends to Heaven, the body descends to Earth, the physical form decays, and the spirit scatters. Even if you were to grind or burn it, nothing remains. They then completely dismiss the principles of karmic retribution, the cycle of rebirth, the existence of spirits, and the workings of thunder—all as baseless, like sleep-talking, without fear of awakening others. Why? If we accept their words, then the robber Zhi would get what he deserves, and the sage would lose his place; the strong could follow their will, the weak would be slaughtered; the rich could be plundered, and the beautiful taken by force. In such a world, there would be no need for a single ruler, no room for a single master in family or state. Loyal ministers, good generals, filial children, and chaste wives—all would be fools unworthy of esteem. Why? For what purpose would they endure hardship and curb desire? Because, according to them, after death all gains and losses vanish, good and evil go unrequited. Then everyone who avoids evil and practices good would be foolish. Yet why did the Sage say, "If in the morning you hear the Way, you may die in the evening"? If dying in the evening brings nothingness, then what is the point of hearing the Way? Would the Sage deceive us? Therefore, I say: One principle, one mind—they are not two. Later Confucians lost the true meaning, confused and misled the world—this is truly lamentable.

客曰。師所謂後儒失旨。何以中庸亦云。天命之謂性。豈非命猶令也。

> The visitor asked, "Master, you say that later Confucians lost the true meaning. But the \*Doctrine of the Mean\* also states, 'What Heaven decrees is called nature.' Isn't 'decree' the same as 'command'?"

答曰。此亦見于傳註。聖賢之意非然也。何則。傳註濫引商書天之明命之意以註此書。失旨殊甚。彼盖言天明命商家為天子也。豈天能將性命于人乎。苟性必天命于人者。何以堯舜之仁。桀紂之暴。盜跖之強。乃至上智下愚善善惡惡以及萬品。天胡不等皆命之。而各私于人也。天苟私之。則堯舜當仁。桀紂當暴。盜跖當強。如是則聖人設教。欲惡者遷善。強者脩仁。暴者行慈。得不悖于天乎。烏得云聖人參于天也。是性必天所命者。則應先有天地。而後有太極之理命于人矣。何以宋儒註太極圖云。太極以陰陽五行乾男坤女化生萬物。又云天地一太極。男女一太極。萬物各一太極。既云各一太極。則人與天地義同昆仲。共出太極。何云天能命人也。易云。太極生兩儀。兩儀生四象。四象生八卦。皆云太極而後天地。未知何據而云理從天所命也。依中庸。則先天後理。依太極易經。先理後天。二說混淆。自語相反。以此之故。難類吾門一心之妙理。決定之真說也。今儒門皆宗舊說。一槩無疑。予幼不從。學出自胷臆。皆原至理未知可否。子自思之。

> The reply: This also appears in commentaries and annotations, but the intention of the sages is not as such. Why? Because the commentaries mistakenly quote the phrase "bright mandate of Heaven" from the Book of Shang to annotate this text, which greatly misses the mark. That passage speaks of Heaven's bright mandate making the Shang dynasty its Son of Heaven—how could it mean that Heaven bestows human nature upon individuals? If nature were indeed bestowed by Heaven, then why are there the benevolence of Yao and Shun, the cruelty of Jie and Zhou, the violence of Robber Zhi, and the full spectrum from the wisest to the most ignorant, the good and the evil? Why does Heaven not bestow the same nature equally on all, but instead give each person something different? If Heaven were partial, then Yao and Shun would be destined to be benevolent, Jie and Zhou to be cruel, and Robber Zhi to be violent. In that case, if sages establish teachings to urge the wicked to reform, the strong to cultivate benevolence, and the cruel to practice compassion, would that not contradict Heaven? How then could it be said that sages participate in Heaven's work? If nature were necessarily bestowed by Heaven, then Heaven and Earth would have existed first, followed by the principle of the Supreme Ultimate being bestowed on humans. But why do Song Confucians, in their commentary on the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate, say: "The Supreme Ultimate, through yin and yang, the Five Elements, the Qian (heavenly) principle and Kun (earthly) principle, gives birth to the myriad things"? And also: "Heaven and Earth form one Supreme Ultimate; male and female form one Supreme Ultimate; each of the myriad things has its own Supreme Ultimate." If each thing has its own Supreme Ultimate, then humans and Heaven and Earth are like brothers, all originating from the Supreme Ultimate. How then can it be said that Heaven bestows nature? The Book of Changes says: "The Supreme Ultimate generates the Two Modes; the Two Modes generate the Four Symbols; the Four Symbols generate the Eight Trigrams." All these say that the Supreme Ultimate comes before Heaven and Earth. On what basis then is it claimed that principle is bestowed by Heaven? According to the Doctrine of the Mean, Heaven comes before principle; according to the Supreme Ultimate and the Book of Changes, principle comes before Heaven. These two theories are contradictory and self-contradictory. For this reason, they are difficult to compare with our school's profound principle of the One Mind and its definitive true teaching. Today, Confucian scholars all adhere to the old interpretations without question. Since childhood, I have not followed them; my learning comes from my own understanding, all grounded in ultimate truth—whether it is correct or not, I do not know. You should consider this for yourself.

客曰。玅性本然非從外得。先儒失旨於理甚當。但儒教治世法法可儀。事事可則。人所易為。釋教寂滅空理。渺無可著。人所難為。故不之學也。師力主心宗。何能勝于常道乎。

> The guest said: "The wondrous nature is inherently present, not something to be attained from outside. The earlier Confucian's failure to grasp this point is quite reasonable in principle. However, Confucianism is a method for governing the world—every teaching offers a model, every matter provides a rule. It is easy for people to follow. As for Buddhism, it focuses on transcendent, empty principles of extinction and stillness, offering nothing concrete to hold onto. It is difficult for people to practice. That is why they do not study it. Master, you strongly advocate the mind school—how can it surpass the ordinary path?"

答曰。子不知難易耳。且人之初生。必先無為無難無易無是無非。而人莫不皆具也。莫不皆然也。及其長也。習乎有為。難易分焉。子謂難于無為。而易于有為者。人莫不求利也。莫不好爭也。且利之與爭皆出有為。有為有事而曰易。為吾不之知也。且人之欲行仁義也。與人貿易當直一金與一金。當直百金與百金。彼不仁者強欲加之。此仁者必責其不仁。彼不仁者亦責於仁者曰。汝何不仁。欲取我便宜。是二者斯須不相離矣。故曰仁義之生。是非之本。若吾謂難于有為而易于無為者。人莫不求安也。人莫不求樂也。且安之與樂莫過無為。無為無事而有易難者。吾不之知也。所謂空者有二焉。有有無對待之空者。儒教所設也。有有無俱泯之空者。釋典所載也。俱泯空者。廓週沙界。圓裹十虗。彌綸八極。妙括二儀。為事理之真源。作聖賢之宗祖。我佛證之。眾生迷之。諸經載之。諸祖傳之。予所謂自心妙悟之境。釋教之所載也。對待空者。對有說空。對非說是。對病說藥。乃至對不仁義而說仁義者是也。盖上古之世淳風真朴。所謂仁義有無是非。猶如眼中之楔。故不之聞。世態漸遠而人心巧偽一異兢生。故聖人不得已說法治之。是以仁義治其不仁義也。是治其非也。正治其邪也。空治其有也。所謂儒教之所說也。以此而推。仁義道德是非有無得失邪正皆表顯對待之語。同是一空可以極之矣。則豈非妙極一心勝于五常之道乎。

> He replied: "You do not understand what is difficult and what is easy. When a person is first born, they are necessarily without action, without difficulty, without ease, without right, without wrong—and yet every person inherently possesses all these things, and they are all the same. As they grow up, they become accustomed to action, and difficulty and ease become separated. You say that non-action is difficult and action is easy. But people all seek profit, and all love contention. Profit and contention both arise from action. If action and effort are what you call 'easy,' then I do not understand that. When someone wants to practice benevolence and righteousness, in a transaction they should give one gold coin when it is worth one gold coin, and a hundred gold coins when it is worth a hundred gold coins. If an unkind person tries to force them to give more, this benevolent person will surely accuse that person of being unkind. Likewise, the unkind person will accuse the benevolent person, saying, 'Why are you so unkind? You want to take advantage of me.' These two will never be separated for even a moment. That is why it is said that the emergence of benevolence and righteousness is the root of right and wrong. As for my view that action is difficult and non-action is easy: people all seek peace, and they all seek happiness. Peace and happiness are nothing greater than non-action. Non-action and non-effort—if there is difficulty and ease in that, I do not understand it. What is called 'emptiness' has two kinds. First, there is the emptiness of having and not-having as opposites—this is what Confucian teachings establish. Second, there is the emptiness where both existence and non-existence vanish together—this is what the Buddhist scriptures record. The emptiness where both vanish extends throughout the cosmos, encompasses the ten directions fully, penetrates the eight limits, and mysteriously embraces the two principles. It is the true source of all phenomena and principles, and the ancestral foundation of sages and saints. The Buddha realized it; sentient beings are deluded about it. All scriptures record it, and all patriarchs transmit it. This is what I call the state of one's own mind's wondrous awakening—what the Buddhist teachings contain. As for the emptiness of opposites—it speaks of emptiness in contrast to existence, of right in contrast to wrong, of medicine in contrast to illness, and even of benevolence and righteousness in contrast to unkindness and unrighteousness. In ancient times, the world was simple and pure. What we call benevolence, righteousness, existence, non-existence, right, and wrong were like a wedge in the eye—people never even heard of them. As worldly conditions grew more distant, people's hearts became cunning and deceptive, and disputes arose endlessly. Thus, the sages had no choice but to set forth laws to govern them. Therefore, benevolence and righteousness are used to govern unkindness and unrighteousness. Right is used to govern wrong. Correctness is used to govern deviance. Emptiness is used to govern existence. This is what the Confucian teachings describe. From this we can see that benevolence, righteousness, virtue, morality, right and wrong, existence and non-existence, gain and loss, correct and deviant—all are words expressing opposites. They are all just emptiness, which can be taken to its ultimate. So then, is not the wondrous ultimate of One Mind superior to the path of the Five Constant Virtues?"

客曰。五常之語開于堯舜不原上古。古無今有則知空義可憑。何以孟子云。何必曰利。亦有仁義而已矣。彼賢人也。不知仁義為空。而曰有仁義乎。

> The visitor said: "The concept of the Five Constant Virtues was established in the time of Yao and Shun, not originating from ancient antiquity. If it did not exist in ancient times but exists now, then we can see that the meaning of emptiness has grounds. Why then did Mencius say, 'Why must you speak of profit? There is only benevolence and righteousness'? He was a wise man. Did he not know that benevolence and righteousness are empty, and yet he said they exist?"

答曰。彼云有仁義者。空貨利之利劍也。何者。此義如不空。則貪取無厭。此義如空。則約取有道。貪取無厭者以其不空。不空則有己。有己則有家。有家則有國。有國則有天下。既皆有焉。則天子責於諸侯。諸侯責于大夫。大夫責於庶民。既皆責焉。而不至乎貧富相爭。強弱相吞。善惡相欺。彼此相鬪。而能治天下者。吾不之知也。約取于道者以其空。空故無己。無己則無家。無家則無國。無國則無天下。既皆無焉。則天子不責諸侯。諸侯不責大夫。大夫不責庶民。既皆無責焉。而不至乎貧富一分。強弱一身。善惡一觀。彼此一家。而不能治天下者。吾不之知也。是以空則堯授於舜。舜授于禹。不空則商伐乎桀。而周伐乎紂也。故曰聖人無家。可以治國。聖人無己。可以同眾。是皆空義也。則知孟子之言仁義者。亦即空義也。若然。何以宋儒云儒教不空而釋教空也。良由不知仁義治不仁義之空藥也。而曾不知本來之身初非病患。執藥為身者痴也。若無不仁義之病。仁義何有哉。執仁義以為道本者。是執藥為身也。何則。妙明元心初無名相。安得有所謂仁義不仁義乎。

> Answer: The concept of “benevolence and righteousness” is the sharp sword that cuts through the greed for material gain. Why? If this righteousness is not empty, then one becomes insatiably greedy. If it is empty, then one practices restrained acquisition. Insatiable greed arises from non-emptiness. Non-emptiness means having a self. Having a self leads to having a family. Having a family leads to having a state. Having a state leads to having the world. Since all these exist, the emperor holds the feudal lords accountable, the feudal lords hold the ministers accountable, and the ministers hold the common people accountable. With all this accountability, can the world be governed without conflicts between rich and poor, the strong devouring the weak, good and evil deceiving each other, and people fighting one another? I cannot imagine it. Restrained acquisition through the Way arises from emptiness. Emptiness means no self. No self means no family. No family means no state. No state means no world. Since all these are absent, the emperor does not hold the feudal lords accountable, the feudal lords do not hold the ministers accountable, and the ministers do not hold the common people accountable. With no accountability at all, can the world not be governed when the rich and poor are as one, the strong and weak are as one body, good and evil are seen as equal, and others and self are one family? I cannot imagine it. Thus, through emptiness, Yao passed the throne to Shun, and Shun passed it to Yu. Through non-emptiness, the Shang dynasty overthrew Jie, and the Zhou dynasty overthrew Zhou. Therefore, it is said: The sage has no family, yet can govern the state. The sage has no self, yet can unite all people. This is the meaning of emptiness. From this, we see that Mencius’s teaching on benevolence and righteousness is also the teaching of emptiness. If so, why did the Song Confucians claim that Confucianism is not empty while Buddhism is? This is simply because they didn’t understand that benevolence and righteousness are the “medicine of emptiness” for curing the disease of non-benevolence and non-righteousness. They were unaware that the original self has never been sick. Holding onto medicine as if it were the self is foolishness. If there were no disease of non-benevolence and non-righteousness, how could “benevolence and righteousness” exist at all? To cling to benevolence and righteousness as the foundation of the Way is to mistake the medicine for the self. Why? The wondrous, luminous original mind has no names or forms to begin with. How could there be such things as “benevolence and righteousness” or “non-benevolence and non-righteousness”?

客曰。師謂仁義為治病之良藥。莊子謂仁義為病性之禍本。猶駢拇之枝于體者也。故指曾史之仁。楊墨之辨。師曠之聦。離朱之明。皆傷于性也。盖欲一其性情。如鶴之不待絕。𠒎之不待接。苟欲接絕皆不免于傷生。是二者何以異。

> A guest asked, "You say that benevolence and righteousness are like good medicine for curing social illness, while Zhuangzi says they are the root cause that sickens our true nature—like an extra sixth finger on a hand. Therefore, he considered the kindness of Zeng Shen and Shi Qiu, the debates of Yang Zhu and Mo Di, the musical genius of Master Kuang, and the keen eyesight of Li Zhu all to be harmful to one's original nature. He wanted people to return to their authentic nature, just as a crane's long legs should not be cut short, and a wild duck's short legs should not be stretched out—any such alteration would inevitably damage life itself. How do these two views differ?"

答曰。莊子擬乎上古之世。淳朴之風。依乎無為。指乎自然。難于曾史楊墨離朱師曠者。不知有無邊之性德也。彼四者於性中之德。比于毫毛不知其少也。易于𠒎鶴鴟梟者。不知有無邊之妄能也。此四者比于性中之妄。猶若微塵不知其多也。性德本有。而離朱等各專其一。謂之傷性可乎。妄能本無。而𠒎鶴等昧之不覺。謂之適性可乎。譬如世間有一大宅。眾人居之。不見日月。不見虗空。不識出路。間或有人于窻牗間窺見虗空日月。異乎眾也。謂之傷眾可乎。或有智者尋門而出。異乎眾也。謂之悖眾可乎。聖人出宅者也。曾楊等窺空者也。𠒎鶴等居昧者也。若然。彼所謂自然者。邪因也。何則。非然不然。無然非自。彼謂楊朱之辨。其辨亦多矣。苟許其言。則果聖人讓之。吾又謂不然。譬如有人病患沉疴。幸遇良醫與之湯藥。加之針灸。彼旁者據自己無病之身而責之曰。身本無病。用此針灸得不殘其身也。則人皆咲其痴矣。何則。無病之身加之針灸得名殘身。此人現患沉疴。加此針灸。得非全其身耶。故吾謂五常為治病之藥。非彼違時之語可比也。子毋辨也。道非辨得。辨則失其道矣。所以云。多方辨論。不若悟心。苟能洞徹。則古今一道也。聖凡一心也。事理一揆也。物我一如也。既皆一之。何有此是彼非彼是此非乎。脫體大用無可不可。指天為地。喚南作北。指泰山為培塿。喚掬水作大海。人不之疑矣。所以云。是無可是。非無真非。是非無住。萬法無主。我無三寸。鼈可喚龜。迦葉不肯。一甚攢眉。大須妙悟。不在輕言。保之惜之。

> Master Zhuangzi looked back to the world of antiquity, where the wind of simplicity and purity blew. He relied on non-action and pointed toward the natural way. But where he criticized Zengzi, Shih Ch'iu, Yang Zhu, the master debater, Li Zhu the sharp-eyed, and Shih Kuang the keen-eared, he did not recognize the boundless nature of our intrinsic virtue. The excellence of these four figures, compared to the full scope of our intrinsic virtue, is like a single hair, yet he did not realize how tiny it is. And where he preferred the short-legged duck and the crane's long legs, the owl and the jackdaw, he did not recognize the boundless scope of delusive abilities. These four, when compared to the delusion within our intrinsic nature, are like a speck of dust, yet he did not realize how numerous they are. Our intrinsic virtue is something we inherently possess; but when Li Zhu and his kind each mastered only one aspect of it, can we truly say they harmed their nature? Delusive abilities are fundamentally unreal; but when the short-legged duck, the crane, and the others were oblivious to them and never woke up, can we truly say they were true to their nature? For example, imagine a great mansion in the world, where many people live. They never see the sun or the moon, never see the open sky, and don't know the way out. Occasionally, someone peeks through a window or door and glimpses the sky, the sun, and the moon — they are different from the others. Can we call this "harming the others"? Or suppose there is a wise person who finds the door and leaves — different from the others. Can we call this "betraying the others"? Sages are those who have left the mansion. Zengzi and Yang Zhu are those who have glimpsed the sky through a window. The short-legged duck and the crane are those who remain in darkness. If this is the case, then what Zhuangzi calls "the natural way" is actually a distorted cause. Why is that? Because it is not that things are naturally right or wrong; rather, the idea of "natural" has no fixed object — what is "natural" is not separate from that which makes it so. He praised Yang Zhu's arguments, saying his disputations were many. If we allowed such talk, then even the sages would have to defer to it. But I say this is not so. Consider someone suffering from a severe illness. Fortunately, they meet a good doctor who gives them herbal medicine and applies acupuncture. A bystander, being healthy themselves, scolds the doctor: "The body was originally free of illness — aren't you harming it with this acupuncture?" Everyone would laugh at such a fool. Why? Because applying acupuncture to a healthy body would indeed be called "harming the body." But this person is currently suffering from a serious illness — doesn't the application of acupuncture actually preserve their body? Thus, I say that the Five Constant Virtues are like medicine for curing illness; they cannot be compared to those out-of-touch sayings of others. You should not argue about this. The Way cannot be attained through argument — argue and you lose the Way. That is why it is said: "A hundred arguments are not as good as awakening the mind." If one can penetrate through to the truth, then ancient and present are one single path; sages and ordinary people are one single mind; principle and phenomena are one single standard; self and other are one single suchness. Since everything is One, how can there be "this is right, that is wrong," or "that is right, this is wrong"? Once we are free from the body, the great function is unbounded — nothing is improper, nothing is forbidden. You can point to the sky and call it earth, call south "north," point to Mount Tai and call it a pebble, call a handful of water the great ocean — and people would not doubt it. Therefore, it is said: "Yes has nothing truly yes; no has no truly no. Yes and no have no fixed abode; all dharmas have no master." I myself have no three inches — now call a turtle a tortoise. Kashyapa would not accept it; with one raised brow, he frowned deeply. You must profoundly awaken — this is not a matter for light talk. Cherish it; protect it.

客曰。一日所言多方。所論必曰參叩自心。前來雖云切念生死。未知參叩之方。請師示之。

> A guest said: "You speak of so many things in a single day, yet your discussions always come back to investigating and awakening to your own mind. Earlier, you mentioned being earnestly mindful of life and death, but I still don't understand the method of investigating this mind. Please, Master, show me the way."

答曰。善哉問也。前來所辨者皆原經論。故知是法可尊而力讚之。然我非悟者。既未悟。焉能以參叩之方示子乎。雖然。不得辜子之問。權借古人發揚處舉一兩段以副子心。古人云。欲參禪者。須發三種大心。必獲妙悟。成就不疑。三種者何。一者發大信心。二者發大勇猛不退心。三者發大疑情。信者信自心與十方諸佛無二無別。生死涅槃無二無別。菩提煩惱無二無別。無明佛性無二無別。既皆無二。諸佛已証。我等當証。直下信得及。把得住。行得穩。如未能証得。盡此一生曾無二念。決此一信到頭。天曉分明方知成佛久矣。所以云。信為道元功德母。長養一切諸善根。當知諸佛道圓無上。德等恒沙。証此一信字也。善財遍歷百城。廣參知識。決此一信字也。諸經載此一信字。諸祖傳此一信字。靈雲見桃悟此一信字。香巖擊竹了此一信字。故知若聖若賢。自始自終。說法轉輪成道利生。皆不出一信字耳。子能發此信心。必須起大勇猛。如一人與萬人敵相似。直下莫教眼差手慢。這裡方是利害時節。所以云。護生須是殺。殺盡始安居。當知將從前惡知惡覺恩愛是非無明煩惱利名物欲頓然放下。如利劍斬一握絲相似。一斬一切斷。更無不斷者。令胷中虗豁豁地去。冷氷氷地去。如喪考妣去。如忘至寶去。然後起大疑情去。何謂疑情。但于古人悟道因緣。或對機示眾。或經論差別。或意識不及義解不行。如是等種種因緣著實參叩。不管得與不得。奮勇直進。莫生退屈。挨拶不行若銀山鐵壁。此時可名到家消息也。不較多也。只少㘞地一聲。通身汗出耳。若向這裡開得一隻眼。須知心佛及眾生是三無差別。非欺我也。此時無邊三昧門。無邊辨才門。無邊差別門。無邊神通門。無邊福德門。如是等種種法門一齊開發。說也說得。辨也辨得。用也用得。默也默得。坐也坐得。臥也臥得。豈不為慶快平生大事了辨也。

> Excellent question! What we have discussed so far all derives from the scriptures and commentaries, which show that this practice is worthy of respect and praise. However, I am not an enlightened person myself. Since I have not awakened, how can I show you the way to realization? Nevertheless, I cannot let your question go unanswered. I will borrow a few passages from the ancient masters to satisfy your inquiry. The ancients said, "Those who wish to practice Zen must generate three kinds of great resolve, and they will surely attain wondrous awakening and achieve unshakable certainty." What are these three? First, generate great faith. Second, generate great courageous perseverance that never retreats. Third, generate great questioning doubt. Faith means believing that your own mind is no different from the minds of all Buddhas throughout the ten directions. Samsara and nirvana are no different. Bodhi and afflictions are no different. Ignorance and Buddha-nature are no different. Since all are non-dual, and the Buddhas have already realized this, we too should realize it. Have faith directly—grasp it firmly, practice it steadily. If you have not yet realized it, spend your entire life without a single other thought. Resolve this one faith to the end. When the sky clears at dawn, you will know that you have been a Buddha for a long time. Thus it is said, "Faith is the source of the path and the mother of merit, nurturing all good roots." Know that the Buddhas complete the supreme path, equal to the Ganges' sands in virtue—this is realized through this one word: faith. Sudhana traveled through a hundred cities, consulting many teachers—he resolved this one word: faith. All sutras record this one word: faith. All patriarchs transmit this one word: faith. Lingyun saw a peach blossom and awakened to this one word: faith. Xiangyan heard a bamboo strike and understood this one word: faith. Therefore, we know that sages and saints, from beginning to end, turning the wheel of Dharma, accomplishing the path, and benefiting beings—all come down to this one word: faith. If you can generate this faith, you must then arouse great courageous perseverance, like one person fighting ten thousand enemies. Immediately do not let your eyes stray or your hands slow. This is the crucial moment. Thus it is said, "To protect life, one must kill; when the killing is done, one may dwell in peace." Know that you must suddenly let go of all previous evil knowledge and evil perceptions, love and hate, right and wrong, ignorance, afflictions, fame, profit, and desires—cut them off like a sharp sword slicing through a bundle of silk. Cut once and sever all; there is nothing not cut. Let your mind become vast and empty, cold and icy, as if grieving for your parents, as if you have lost a priceless treasure. Then, generate great questioning. What is "questioning"? Simply take a story of an ancient master's awakening, or a teaching given to a student, or a difference in the scriptures, or a point beyond reasoning and intellectual understanding, and wholeheartedly investigate it. Do not worry about getting it or not getting it. Advance with courage, never giving up or shrinking back. When you press forward and cannot break through, and it feels like a silver mountain or an iron wall, then you have arrived at the threshold of realization. Not far from it now—you only lack the sound of "huo!" and your whole body drenched in sweat. If you can open one eye here, you will know that "mind, Buddha, and beings are without distinction"—this is no lie. At that moment, countless gates of samadhi, countless gates of eloquence, countless gates of distinction, countless gates of spiritual powers, countless gates of blessings—all these numerous Dharma doors will unfold at once. You can speak, you can debate, you can act, you can be silent, you can sit, you can lie down. Would this not be cause for great joy and celebration, the great matter of life truly completed?

客曰。師謂古人因緣思解不行處。著實參叩。久之自然妙悟。信無疑也。然話頭無味。究不多時便乃打入名利愛欲昏沉散亂之鄉。何能制之。

> The visitor asked: "You say that in the gongan (koans) of the ancients, when thinking and understanding cannot proceed, one should genuinely investigate and press directly into the matter. Over time, marvelous awakening will naturally occur. I have no doubt this is true. However, the meditation topic itself feels dull and flavorless. Before long, I find myself slipping back into the realm of fame, profit, love, desire, drowsiness, and distraction. How can I possibly control this?"

答曰。良由信道之心未篤。脫苦之心未切也。何以故。子或看經論。或聞師家種種開示。則知生死五欲皆苦也。未能真見其苦耳。苟能真見。寧無切乎。且如有人身患沉疴。或躭欲樂。倘或兵火四至。是人或復但躭欲樂不思逃難之心耶。為復但惜沉疴不起求生之念耶。當是時。不見欲樂。不見沉疴。不覺昏沉。不知散亂。但見苦相。急欲逃生。無一物可愛。無一物可取。徑身獨脫。更不之顧。是人逃之十里未名免難。乃至百里千里亦未名免難。直至清平無難之地。方名免難也。今人不能悟心而欲免生死之難。無有是處。子所謂打入昏迷之鄉者。脫苦之心未切耳。求道之心如篤則。萬境不當其前。身如朽木。心若死灰。見色聞聲渾忘所以。故云視而不見。聽而不聞。食而不知其味。苟如是。烏得有所謂昏沉散亂也。

> The reply said: This is simply because your faith in the Way is not yet sincere, and your wish to escape suffering is not yet urgent. Why is that? You may read scriptures or hear various teachings from masters, and thus know that the cycle of birth and death and the five desires are all suffering. But you have not truly seen this suffering for yourself. If you could truly see it, how could you lack urgency? Consider someone with a serious illness, or someone caught up in sensual pleasures. If fires of war break out on all sides, would that person only indulge in pleasure and not think of fleeing? Or would they cling to their illness and not strive to survive? In that moment, they see neither pleasure nor illness. They are neither drowsy nor distracted. They see only the danger and are desperate to escape. Nothing is lovable, nothing is worth taking. They flee alone, caring for nothing else. Even if that person runs ten miles, they are not yet safe. Even if they run a hundred or a thousand miles, they are still not safe. Only when they reach a completely peaceful, danger-free place can they be considered safe. Today's people want to escape the suffering of birth and death without awakening their true nature—this is impossible. What you call "falling into the realm of drowsiness" is simply because your wish to escape suffering is not yet urgent. If your desire for the Way were truly sincere, then no external circumstance could stand before you. Your body would be like a withered tree, your mind like cold ashes. When seeing forms and hearing sounds, you would completely forget what you saw and heard. Thus it is said: "Looked at but not seen; listened to but not heard; eaten but not tasted." If you were like this, how could there be any such thing as drowsiness or distraction?

客曰。古人根利機熟。信心堅固。故能趣入無疑。今人根鈍信淺。焉能如此。

> The guest said, "In ancient times, people had sharp spiritual faculties and mature conditions, with steadfast faith. That's why they could enter without doubt. But people today have dull faculties and shallow faith—how could they possibly do the same?"

答曰。子謂古人根利機熟者。何以趙州八十年行脚。長慶七破蒲團。香林四十年不雜用心。靈雲三十年方能了悟。從上尊宿皆是艱難而得。子今用功幾年而云根鈍機淺。盖不之學耳。且卞璧雖貴。不知兩刖其足。而後價重連城。鏌鎁能寶。尚乃九載功成。方能刃利吹毛。凡物尚然。豈無上妙道顧思其易乎。世尊塵刼修行置而勿論。子能如雪山大士半偈全身乎。能如常啼菩薩慶法賣心乎。能如二祖大師求心斷臂乎。能如脇尊者一生不臥乎。能如雲岩不恥下問乎。能如汾陽遍參知識乎。能如雪峯三登投子而九上洞山乎。能如踈山萬里賣布單三十年當受記乎。子徒知六祖天然。岩頭．仰山等輩之易。而不知難於無量刼中也。所以永嘉云。我早曾經多刼脩。不是等閑相誑惑。可以証矣。

> The Master replied: "You say that people of ancient times had sharp faculties and ripe conditions. But consider this: Zhaozhou spent eighty years traveling on pilgrimage, Changqing shattered seven meditation cushions, Xianglin practiced with undivided mind for forty years, and Lingyun only awakened after thirty years. All the venerable masters of the past attained enlightenment through great difficulty. How many years have you been practicing, that you call yourself dull and shallow? In truth, you have not yet truly studied. "Even the priceless jade of Bian He—do you know that his feet were cut off twice before its value surpassed an entire city? The sword Moye was a treasure, yet it took nine years of effort before it became sharp enough to split a hair blown against it. Ordinary things are like this—how much more so the supreme and wonderful Way? Do you think it can be attained easily? "Setting aside the World-Honored One's countless eons of cultivation, can you, like the Snow Mountain Bodhisattva, offer your whole body for half a verse? Can you, like Constant Cry Bodhisattva, sell your heart for the Dharma? Can you, like the Second Patriarch, cut off your arm while seeking the mind? Can you, like the Venerable Parshva, never lie down for your entire life? Can you, like Yunyan, not be ashamed to ask those beneath you? Can you, like Fenyang, visit teachers far and wide? Can you, like Xuefeng, climb Mount Touzi three times and Mount Dongshan nine times? Can you, like Shushan, sell a single cloth robe across ten thousand miles and receive a prophecy of enlightenment only after thirty years? "You only know the ease of the Sixth Patriarch's natural awakening, and of Yantou and Yanshan's attainments, but you do not know the immense difficulty they endured throughout countless eons. This is why Yongjia said: 'I have already cultivated through many eons; this is not an idle deception.' This verse can serve as proof."

客曰。如師坐關守靜。一心一意。更無異緣。故可用心。所以云。外絕攀緣。內心無喘。可以入道。今時流輩雖獲出家。身雜異俗。或名利所牽者。或住持所拘者。或執事所勞者。或世情有關者。或衣食所苦者。如是等輩尚雜于日用。何心于道乎。

> The visitor said: "Master, you sit in retreat, guarding stillness with single-minded focus, free from all distractions—this is why you can apply your mind. As it is said, 'Cut off external attachments externally, calm the inner mind without panting, and you can enter the Path.' But people of today, even if they become monastics, are mixed up with worldly affairs. Some are caught by fame and profit, some are bound by temple responsibilities, some are exhausted by duties, some are hindered by social ties, or some are plagued by the hardships of food and clothing. People like this are still entangled in daily life—how can they have a mind for the Path?"

答曰。子難易于動靜之塵。而不知本性初非動靜也。且水之本靜也。風擊則波興。而水性無動。如是則動而未曾動也。風息則波澄。而濕性依然。如是則靜而未曾靜也。虗空洞豁。不礙萬象發揮。日明夜暗。草生木長。雲行鳥飛。豈有虗空同其生滅者哉。是以楊岐總十載院事。起臨濟正宗。百丈不作不食。為萬年龜鑑。溈山典座賭淨瓶于眾中。雪峯飯頭悟妙道於鰲山。雲峯化主桶𣐝脫于後架。石鞏獵戶弓箭折于庵前。丹霞天然頴悟而三年曹廠。六祖肉身菩薩而八月碓坊。古人皆以事理兼脩。豈一向避喧求靜者耶。如子之意。只消前來馮濟川一偈可以釋疑矣。子謂塵事所拘能。過彼居官者乎。休休。日暮矣。子如不信。直饒予辨似懸河。亦破子疑不得。子如肯信。不必他餘。但向一機一語思解不行處著實參叩。行也如是。坐也如是。著衣吃飯亦如是。阿屎放尿亦如是。迎賓待客亦如是。語默動靜亦如是。乃至日如是。夜如是。月如是。年如是。參來參去。驀忽地脚根線斷。八字打開。則知從前奇言妙句。檢點將來。是什麼干屎橛。破草鞋。古人云。絕後再甦。方始欺君不得。其言可信也。予愧無德。未曾敢與人舉語。鑒子之誠。不覺潦倒。予則言之。而子果不以人廢言。密以行之。勿語諸人乃可耳。倘諸方聞之加以呵責。我罪何逃。雖然古云己未度而欲度人者。菩薩之用心也。吾雖非菩薩。安得人人於此議其是非乎。更有一偈與子舉之。偈曰。

諸方議論宗殊說。欲取真金多認鐵。名相紛紛未足憑。野人耿耿思分別。也知螢火莫然山。志效螳螂擬拒轍。知我罪我兩由人。付諸水火從君折。

> Various schools debate and argue over different doctrines— Like seeking real gold but mistaking much iron for it. The clamor of names and forms cannot be taken as proof; One simple-hearted person earnestly seeks to discern the truth. I know a firefly cannot set a mountain ablaze, And my resolve is like a mantis trying to block a chariot. Whether you understand me or condemn me—it is up to you. I cast this offering into fire or water, leaving the judgment in your hands.

時

> At that time,

明萬曆念參年歲次乙未肆月　日曹洞正宗第參拾壹代比丘沒用頭陀圓澄撰

> Written by the Bhikshu Wuyong Toutuo Yuan Cheng, the 31st Patriarch of the Caodong Orthodox Lineage, on the 4th month of the year Yiwei in the 33rd year of the Wanli era of the Ming Dynasty (1615 CE).

參禪釋難或問終

> Meditation in Zen Resolves All Doubts<note>End</note>