禪林寶訓 3.68

3.68

萬菴曰。少林初祖衣法雙傳。六世衣止不傳。取行解相應世其家業祖道愈光子孫益繁。大鑑之後石頭馬祖皆嫡孫。應般若多羅懸讖要假兒孫脚下行是也。二大士玄言妙語流布寰區。潛符密證者比比有之。師法既眾學無專門。曹溪源流派別為五。方圓任器水體是同。各擅佳聲力行己任。等閒垂一言出一令網羅學者。叢林鼎沸非苟然也。由是互相詶唱顯微闡幽。或抑或揚佐佑法化。語言無味如煮木札羹炊鐵釘飯。與後輩咬嚼目為拈古。其頌始自汾陽。暨雪竇宏其音顯其旨。汪洋乎不可涯。後之作者。馳騁雪竇而為之。不顧道德之奚若。務以文彩煥爛相鮮為美。使後生晚進不克見古人渾淳大全之旨。烏乎予遊叢林及見前輩。非古人語錄不看。非百丈號令不行。豈特好古。蓋今之人不足法也。望通人達士。知我於言外可矣。

Wan'an said: “The first patriarch of Shaolin transmitted both the robe and the Dharma; in the sixth generation the robe ceased and was not transmitted, taking the correspondence of practice and understanding to inherit the family estate, whereby the ancestral Way shone brighter and descendants became ever more numerous. After Dajian, Shitou and Mazu were both direct lineage descendants, fulfilling Prajñātāra’s prophecy that ‘One must rely on the steps of descendants.’ The profound words and wondrous expressions of these two Great Beings circulated throughout the realm, and those who secretly coincided and covertly verified them were numerous. Once masters and teachings multiplied, study had no single door. The source of Caoxi branched into five; though rectangular or round depending on the vessel, the substance of water is identical. Each possessed fine renown and vigorously practiced their own task. Leisuring casually, they dropped a single word or issued an order to catch students; the seething ferment of the monastic grove was not accidental! Thereupon they sang and responded to each other, revealing the subtle and expounding the obscure, either suppressing or extolling to assist the Dharma transformation. Their words were tasteless, like cooking wood-chip soup or boiling iron-nail rice, for later generations to chew on, termed ‘raising the ancients’ (niangu). The verse commentaries began with Fenyang, and with Xuedou their resonance was amplified and their tenets made evident, vast and boundless. Later authors competed with Xuedou in composing them, paying no heed to the state of the Way and virtue, striving only for brilliant literary embellishment to vie in beauty, causing later generations and newcomers to be unable to see the whole, unadorned substance of the ancients' tenet. Alas, in my travels through monastic groves and encounters with predecessors, unless it was the recorded sayings of the ancients, they did not read it; unless it was an order of Baizhang, they did not execute it. Was it merely a fondness for antiquity? It is because people of today are not worthy to be taken as models! I hope that comprehensive men and reached scholars will understand me beyond words (Zhilin ji).”