肇論新疏 2.425

2.425

Here there are two meanings: first, Liu Yimin relies on words to seek principle; second, the treatise master relies on words to answer difficulties. Now both are dispelled: first, to cause one to forget words and tally with the purport; second, to reveal that words are identical to non-words. The first two clauses mutually clarify that where the flaw arises is from words and images. "Divergent paths" refers to the doctrinal paths of differing attachments. The two clauses from "yet words" downward have two meanings: first, because words and images are fundamentally empty; second, because the sage mind is fundamentally severed. From "therefore" downward, it directly points out following the preceding. The text is very profound and abstruse; fully stated, it is: "Those who are skilled at speaking of words should speak the words that words cannot speak," meaning that principle is not reached by words, hence it is said "what words cannot speak." Words are borrowed to reveal principle, hence it says "should speak." As the sūtra says: "Without exposition and without indication"—could it be that there is no exposition? And it also says: "The nature of letters is detached"—could it be that words are grasped? Using words that dispel words to discourse on the principle that transcends words is precisely the words that words cannot speak. Traces can be explained by analogy.