周易禪解序
Preface to the Chan Interpretation of the Zhouyi
蕅益子結冬於月臺，禪誦之餘，手持韋編而箋釋之。或問曰：「子所解者是《易》耶？」余應之曰：「然。」復有視而問曰：「子所解者非《易》耶？」余亦應之曰：「然。」又有視而問曰：「子所解者亦《易》亦非《易》耶？」余亦應之曰：「然。」更有視而問曰：「子所解者非《易》非非《易》耶？」余亦應之曰：「然。」
During a winter retreat at Moon Terrace, Ouyi Master spent his time after meditation and scripture recitation studying the Book of Changes, composing annotations. Someone asked, "Are you interpreting the Yijing?" I replied, "Yes." Another looked at me and asked, "Are you not interpreting the Yijing?" I replied, "Yes." Another looked at me and asked, "Are you interpreting both the Yijing and not the Yijing?" I replied, "Yes." Yet another looked at me and asked, "Are you interpreting neither the Yijing nor not the Yijing?" I replied, "Yes."
侍者聞而笑曰：「若是乎，墮在四句中也。」余曰：「汝不聞：四句皆不可說，有因緣故四句皆可說乎？因緣者，四悉檀也。人謂我釋子也，而亦通儒，能解《易》，則生歡喜焉，故謂是《易》者，吾然之，『世界悉檀』也。或謂我釋子也，奈何解《易》以同俗儒，知所解之非《易》，則善心生焉，故謂非《易》者，吾然之，『為人悉檀』也。或謂儒、釋殆無分也。若知《易》與非《易》必有差別，雖異而同，雖同而異，則儱侗之病不得作焉，故謂亦《易》亦非《易》者，吾然之，『對治悉檀』也。或謂儒、釋必有實法也。若知非《易》，則儒非定儒；知非非《易》，則釋非定釋。但有名字，而無實性，頓見不思議理焉，故謂非《易》非非《易》者，吾然之，『第一義悉檀』也。」
An attendant heard this and laughed, saying, "In that case, you've fallen into the trap of the four propositions." I replied, "Haven't you heard that the four propositions cannot be expressed, yet due to specific conditions, they all can be expressed? The conditions refer to the four types of skillful means (四悉檀). Some people see me as a Buddhist monk who also understands Confucianism and can interpret the *Yijing* (I Ching), which makes them happy. Therefore, when they say it is the *Yijing*, I agree—this is the 'Worldly Skillful Means' (世界悉檀). Others think that as a Buddhist monk, I shouldn't interpret the *Yijing* like a common Confucian scholar, and if they realize that what I explain is not the *Yijing*, a sense of goodness arises in them. Therefore, when they say it is not the *Yijing*, I agree—this is the 'Individual Skillful Means' (為人悉檀). Some believe that Confucianism and Buddhism are essentially indistinguishable. If they understand that the *Yijing* and not-the-*Yijing* must have differences, yet are different yet the same, and the same yet different, then the fault of being vague and undiscriminating cannot arise. Therefore, when they say it is both the *Yijing* and not the *Yijing*, I agree—this is the 'Remedial Skillful Means' (對治悉檀). Others believe that Confucianism and Buddhism must have fixed, concrete realities. If they understand that it is not the *Yijing*, then Confucianism is not fixed Confucianism; if they understand that it is not *not* the *Yijing*, then Buddhism is not fixed Buddhism. They exist only as names, without inherent nature, and one suddenly perceives the inconceivable principle. Therefore, when they say it is neither the *Yijing* nor not the *Yijing*, I agree—this is the 'Ultimate Truth Skillful Means' (第一義悉檀)."
侍者曰：「不然。若所解是《易》，則人將謂《易》可助出世法，成『增益謗』。若所解非《易》，則人將謂師自說禪，何嘗知《易》？成『減損謗』。若所解亦《易》亦非《易》，則人將謂儒原非禪，禪亦非儒，成『相違謗』。若所解非《易》非非《易》，則人將謂儒不成儒，禪不成禪，成『戲論謗』，烏見其為四悉檀也？」
The attendant said, "Not so. If your interpretation follows the *Yijing*, people will say the *Yijing* can aid the path to liberation, creating the slander of 'addition.' If your interpretation does not follow the *Yijing*, people will say you are just speaking your own Chan and never truly understood the *Yijing*, creating the slander of 'subtraction.' If your interpretation both follows and does not follow the *Yijing*, people will say Confucianism is fundamentally not Chan, and Chan is fundamentally not Confucianism, creating the slander of 'contradiction.' If your interpretation neither follows nor does not follow the *Yijing*, people will say Confucianism is not Confucianism, and Chan is not Chan, creating the slander of 'frivolous debate.' How can this be seen as the Four Siddhantas?"
余曰：「是固然。汝獨不聞：人參善補人，而氣喘者服之立斃乎？抑不聞：大黃最損人，而中滿者服之立瘥乎？春之生育萬物也，物固有遇春而爛壞者；夏之長養庶品也，草亦有夏枯者；秋之肅殺也，而菊有黃花；冬之閉藏也，而松柏青青、梅英馥馥。如必擇其有利無害者而後為之，天地恐亦不能無憾矣！且佛以慈眼視大千，知群機已熟，然後示生，猶有魔波旬擾亂之、九十五種嫉妒之、提婆達多思中害之，豈惟堯舜稱猶病哉？吾所由解《易》者無他，以禪入儒，務誘儒以知禪耳！縱令不得四益而起四謗，如從地倒，還從地起，置毒乳中，轉至醍醐，厥毒仍在。遍行為外道師、薩遮為尼犍主，意在斯也。」侍者再拜而謝曰：「此非弟子所及也，請得筆而存之。」
I replied: "That is true. But have you not heard that ginseng is excellent for nourishing people, yet those with asthma die immediately upon taking it? And have you not heard that rhubarb is most harmful to the body, yet those with abdominal fullness recover at once upon consuming it? In spring, when all things are born, there are plants that wither upon meeting spring; in summer, when all things grow and thrive, there are grasses that die in summer; in autumn, the season of killing and decay, chrysanthemums bloom yellow flowers; in winter, the season of storing and concealing, pine and cypress stay green and plum blossoms give forth fragrance. If we must choose only what is beneficial and without harm before we act, even Heaven and Earth would be unable to avoid regret. Moreover, the Buddha, with his compassionate eyes, observes the great universe. Knowing that the capacities of sentient beings are ripe, he appears in the world—yet still Māra Pāpīyas disturbs him, ninety-five kinds of heretics envy him, and Devadatta plots to harm him. How can even Yao and Shun be called free from suffering? My reason for interpreting the *Yijing* is nothing else: to infuse Zen into Confucianism, and to guide Confucians toward understanding Zen. Even if one fails to gain the four benefits and instead produces the four slanders—like falling to the ground, only to rise again from the ground, or placing poison in milk that turns into ghee, with the poison still present—it is like wandering everywhere as a teacher of outside paths, or Samjaya as a leader of the naked ascetics. My intention lies in this."
The attendant bowed twice and replied, "This is beyond my understanding. Please let me write it down and keep it."
崇禎辛巳仲冬，旭道人書于溫陵之毫餘樓。
Written by the Daoist Xu in the winter of the year 1641, at the Haoyu Tower in Wenling.