法華經義記 1.3

1.3

或謂：「古之消釋此經，南二而北七，各以長相當，莫之適從矣。惟我天台，奏師子絃、投師子乳，其說超絕，宜廢古今。猶若龍燭之於螢爝，照曜雖多隱而弗見。嘗謂的傾光宅，餘則自潰。以此觀之，區區亡編之傳，足以彌縫，何闕耶？」予曰：「子之言也，噫！知天台之非不高，而不知光宅之非不深，莫認荊山之璞，奚覩赤水之珠，雖諭斤運之巧妙，而不喻堊質之尤難也。況聖慈純化，或貶或褒、或搥或砧，總在成於器、不在乎迹。不師其迹，善學下慧者也。若徒有優於迹而弱於實，錮諸古而牖於今，猶迂轍以即塗、膠舟而求濟。此非特疏乎光宅，寔亦不肖于天台者也。且又近代叨襲翏翏苟簡之弊，援以屑屑臆鑿之見，而日趨非、日趨虛，言如近而彌遠，理似邃而愈淺。嗚呼！際之末運，盡力其間而不相逮者，其能莫愧于斯哉。此予所以僣升篇首，數思砭今而復古也。」不以人廢言，則予可無慮矣夫！予可無慮矣夫！

Someone remarked: 'In ancient times, when this sūtra was interpreted, there were two southern and seven northern traditions, each presenting its own strengths, with no consensus on what to follow. Only our Tiantai plays the lion-string and pours forth the lion-milk; his exposition is transcendent and should supersede all past and present. It is like the dragon’s torch compared to the spark of a firefly: though there be much illumination, it becomes hidden and unseen. It was once said that if one decisively overturns Guangzhai, the rest will collapse of themselves. Looking at it this way, what deficiency is there that the transmission of this paltry lost text should be needed to mend?' I replied: 'Sir, your words—alas! You know that Tiantai is by no means un-lofty, but do not know that Guangzhai is by no means un-deep. You fail to recognize the jade of Mount Jing, and how could you ever behold the pearl of the Red River? Though you understand the skill of swinging the axe, you do not appreciate how difficult it is to find the base of white clay! Moreover, the pure transformation wrought by the sage's compassion may disparage or praise, strike or serve as anvil—all aim at fashioning the vessel, and do not lie in the outward traces. Not dogmatically adhering to outward traces is the mark of one who skilfully learns from lesser wisdom. If one merely excels in traces but is feeble in reality, shackled to the past while blinkered by the present, it is like turning back one's carriage to make headway or gluing down the rudders of a boat in seeking to cross. This is not only being alienated from Guangzhai; it is truly being unworthy of Tiantai as well. Furthermore, in recent generations people have blindly inherited the flaws of shallow slovenliness, resorting to petty, conjectural notions, so that day by day they diverge into error and drift into emptiness; their words seem close at hand yet are ever more remote, their reasoning appears profound yet grows increasingly shallow. Alas! Meeting with this degenerate age, if those who exert their utmost strength within it still cannot measure up, how could one not feel ashamed at this? This is the reason why I have prescriptively climbed to the head of this work, repeatedly thinking to remedy the present and restore antiquity.' If one does not reject the words on account of the man, then I may be free from anxiety! I may indeed be free from anxiety!