法智遺編觀心二百問 1.139

1.139

問：《義例》本為邪解之師錯謂《止觀．釋名》已下皆是漸圓，乃將十二部經觀心之文立頓，頓觀修道即得，既謂九章帶漸，終不取彼方便正修，十境十乘度入事法觀中修習。此師又云頻將二頓問人人無答者，終不肯咨稟良師口訣。只據見文一句為頓，頓觀修道即得，遂斥之為壞驢車也。若稟師氏取彼《止觀》方便十境十乘細釋成乎妙觀，豈是驢車餘文？或有此斥皆潛防此計，乃言《止觀》一部為妙行者，皆為防於不取大部銷通，便以一句為足者也。那例破事法觀心不得修習？儻得知識決通，豈亦成壞驢車耶？

Question: Yili was originally written because false-understanding teachers mistakenly claimed that from 'Explaining the Name' in Zhiguan onward, everything is the gradual-perfect, and thereupon based sudden contemplation on the contemplation-of-mind passages of the twelve divisions of scriptures, claiming that cultivation of the path is achieved immediately; and since they claimed the nine chapters contain the gradual, they ultimately refused to adopt those skillful means and the primary cultivation, or to transfer the ten objects and ten vehicles into the contemplation of phenomenal dharmas for cultivation and practice. This master also said that he frequently asked people about the two sudden teachings and no one could answer, never willing to consult and receive the oral instructions of a good teacher. Relying solely on seeing a single line of text, he took it as sudden contemplation and claimed that cultivation of the path is achieved immediately, whereupon he was condemned as [riding in] a broken donkey cart. If one receives instruction from a teacher and adopts those skillful means, ten objects, and ten vehicles from the Zhiguan to explain them in detail so as to complete wonderful contemplation, how could it be a donkey cart? Where there are such criticisms in other texts, they all secretly guard against this calculation, and the assertion that the entire Zhiguan is wonderful practice is wholly to guard against those who do not adopt the great treatise to digest and comprehend it, but take a single phrase to be sufficient. Why do you generally refute the contemplation of phenomenal dharmas as something that cannot be cultivated? If one obtains a good spiritual friend to decide and comprehend it, could it also become a broken donkey cart?