撫州曹山元證禪師語錄 1.87

1.87

或有相兼帶來者，這裡不說有語無語，語裡直須正面而去，這裡不得不圓轉，事須圓轉，然在途之語總是病，夫當人先須辨得語句正面而去，有語是恁麼來，無語是恁麼去，作家中不無言語，不涉有語無語，這箇喚作兼帶語，全無的的也。他智上座臨遷化時向人道：「雲巖不知有，我悔當時不向伊說。雖然如是，且不違於藥山蔡子。」看他智上座合作麼生老婆也。南泉喚作異類中行，且密闍黎不知。　逐位揀曰：「相兼帶來者，為語勢不偏不正、不有不無，如全不全、似虧不虧，唯得正面而去也，則的不立，的不立則至妙之言，境不圓常情之事也。如先師對文殊喫茶語云：『借取這箇看得麼？』亦如翠微云：『每日噇甚麼？』亦有功勳中兼帶，似向上事，臨時辨取，如落淨妙之處，則須知有事在，要去則去，要止則止，千萬圓轉不得莽鹵，如大無明底人為全體，不同闡提，闡提則知有，事却鞔，雖鞔却成孝養，鞔者不存祖佛及自己本分父母也。紅爛底人為不歸全擔荷，不立至尊，大保任底人為刺脚入泥裡，非小小護持。」　別揀曰：「相兼帶來者，不落有語無語，如藥山帶刀語，此是兼帶語，臨時看語來勢，或當頭正面而去，或異中虛（句），此（句）若不妙會，則千里萬里也，又引相兼帶來語例，如文殊喫茶語兼這箇人甚麼處去也，雲巖云：『作麼作麼？』又云：『即今作麼生？』此例甚多。」　別時揀曰：「相兼帶不涉偏正二途，此一位等絕，妙旨難辨，呼為兼帶，皆為明這箇一段事，況復正位不同。」　學士揀曰：「問：『祖師意？』答：『待特牛生兒則向汝說。』揀云：『此是正位中來。』此一例語切不得呼為正位中來，可云玄學路中問答，俱然也，別是一路。又不得呼為相兼帶，為顯明故，縱賓主回互，亦秖得呼為有病兼帶。又問玄旨，答如死人舌。又如問：『十二時中將何奉獻？』云：『無物。』此二例語不得呼為偏位中來，須各揀，若是玄旨一例語，可同於祖師意也。又如十二時中將何奉獻，答無物，此一例語可同於功勳也。此二例語竝不得呼為偏位及兼帶也，前已明破了，是借功明位，借位明功，同於此也。又獨脫物外，起眾聖前，云是正位却圓，其實屈正位也。此例是古人道過跡尚在，猶未得語中無語，此復呼為非正位也，為語中有語故。此可呼為有病兼帶，為語中有語故，不得呼為相兼帶來。夫相帶兼來者，直須似文殊喫茶語，及先師答雲巖鉏薑語，竝安和尚法堂語，及藥山布衲洗佛語。於中最妙兼帶，無過藥山答雲巖帶刀語，及百丈下堂，大眾欲散未散時，索云：『是甚麼？』藥山遙聞此語云：『在此。』便道暗頭兼帶，借功明物、借物明功，借過明功、借功明過等來，若是藥山與新豐，竝前諸德所出，超過入正位，是玄談奇特句已。次到小小得力者，即且抽入正位，此例吾常用也，吾緣住持多緒，不及子細，略明少分許。汝等諸人不須容易輕慢，若更有疑帶，旋當決了，直須厲力修行令未來際不斷，此事不得慢洩，或值純忖者，是奇器也，亦不可隱耳。」

Or there are those who come with both integrated: here one does not speak of having words or being without words; within speech one must go directly straight ahead. Here it cannot but turn round smoothly; phenomena must turn round smoothly. Yet speech along the road is entirely an affliction. A person must first be able to distinguish words and phrases that go directly straight ahead: having words is coming like this; being without words is going like that. Among adept masters there is not no speech, yet it is not involved with having words or being without words. This is called speech of integration; it has nothing of a fixed mark at all. When Senior Monk Zhi was about to pass away, he said to someone: "Yunyan did not know the existence [of It]; I regret not having told him at that time. Although this is so, it does not go against Yaoshan's Caizi." Look at how Senior Monk Zhi had such grandmotherly [kindness]! Nanquan called it "practicing among different species," and Master Mi did not know it.
Appraising each rank, he said: "Those who come with both integrated—because the force of the words is neither biased nor correct, neither existent nor non-existent, like complete yet not complete, like deficient yet not deficient—only manage to go directly straight ahead. Thus the mark is not established. If the mark is not established, these are words of ultimate subtlety; the realm does not conform to the matters of ordinary feelings. It is like our late master's words regarding Mañjuśrī drinking tea: 'Can one borrow this and look at it?' It is also like Cuiwei saying: 'What do you gorge on every day?' There is also integration within merit, which resembles the higher matter; distinguish it when the occasion arises. If one falls into a pure and subtle place, one must know that there is a matter [remaining]. When one wants to go, go; when one wants to stop, stop. By all means turn round smoothly and do not be reckless. A person of great ignorance serves as the whole body, differing from an icchantika. An icchantika knows the existence [of It], but as for phenomena, he covers them up. Although he covers them up, it turns out to be filial piety. One who covers them up does not retain the ancestors and Buddhas, nor his own fundamental parents. A person who is red and festering does not return to the whole to shoulder it, and does not establish the supreme. A person of great preservation thrusts his feet into the mud; it is no minor maintenance."
Appraising separately, he said: "Those who come with both integrated do not fall into having words or being without words, like Yaoshan's words about carrying a knife. This is speech of integration. When the occasion arises, observe the incoming force of the words: either going directly straight ahead facing the head, or being empty within difference. If this phrase is not subtly comprehended, one is thousands of leagues away. Further, adducing examples of words coming with both integrated: like the words about Mañjuśrī drinking tea, along with 'Where has this person gone?'; Yunyan saying: 'Doing what? Doing what?'; and also: 'Right now, how is it?' There are many such examples."
Appraising at another time, he said: "Mutual integration is not involved with the two tracks of biased and correct. This single rank is supremely transcendent; its subtle purport is difficult to distinguish. It is called integration entirely to clarify this single matter; how much more so when it is different from the correct rank."
The Scholar's appraisal said: "Question: 'What is the ancestral master's intention?' Answer: 'Wait until a bull gives birth to a calf, and then I will tell you.' The appraisal says: 'This comes from within the correct rank.' This example of speech must strictly not be called coming from within the correct rank; it may be said to be question and answer on the path of dark learning, both being so—it is another path altogether. Nor can it be called mutual integration, because it is explicitly revealed; even if guest and host interchange, it can only be called integration with affliction. Again, asking about the dark purport, the answer was: 'Like a dead person's tongue.' Again, like asking: 'Throughout the twelve periods of the day, what should one offer?' The answer: 'Nothing.' These two examples of speech must not be called coming from within the biased rank; they must be appraised separately. If it is the example of the dark purport, it can be likened to the ancestral master's intention. Also, like 'Throughout the twelve periods of the day, what should one offer?' and answering 'Nothing'—this example of speech can be likened to merit. Both of these two examples of speech must not be called the biased rank or integration. It was already made clear before: borrowing merit to clarify rank, and borrowing rank to clarify merit are identical to this. Again, standing solitary and aloof outside things, arising before all the holy ones, saying this is the correct rank and yet complete—this in fact wrongs the correct rank. This example is [where] what the ancients spoke of still leaves traces behind; they have not yet attained being without words within words. This is again called not the correct rank, because there are words within words. This may be called integration with affliction, because there are words within words; it must not be called coming with both integrated. Now, those that come with both integrated must strictly be like the words about Mañjuśrī drinking tea, our late master's answer to Yunyan about hoeing ginger, Monk An's words in the Dharma hall, and Yaoshan's words on his cloth robe and bathing the Buddha. Among them, the most subtle integration is none other than Yaoshan answering Yunyan about carrying a knife, and Baizhang stepping down from the hall: when the assembly was about to disperse but had not yet dispersed, he demanded: 'What is it?' Yaoshan, hearing this from afar, said: 'It is right here.' This was called integration in the dark: borrowing merit to clarify phenomena, borrowing phenomena to clarify merit, borrowing faults to clarify merit, borrowing merit to clarify faults, and so forth. If brought forth by Yaoshan, Xinfeng, and the other former virtuous masters, it surpasses and enters the correct rank; these are profound discourse and extraordinary phrases. Next, when one reaches having gained minor strength, one temporarily withdraws into the correct rank; this is an example I frequently use. Because of my duties as abbot being manifold, I have not had time to be meticulous, and have merely clarified a tiny portion. All of you must not take it lightly or be careless. If there are still lingering doubts, resolve them in due course. You must exert effort in practice so that it will not be interrupted into the future. This matter must not be rashly divulged. If you encounter one who is genuine and reflective, that is a rare vessel; it must not be concealed from them either."