續高僧傳 4.11

4.11

論曰。觀夫翻譯之功。誠遠大矣。前錄所載無德稱焉。斯何故耶。諒以言傳理詣惑遣道清有由寄也。所以列代賢聖。祖述弘導之風。奉信賢明。憲章翻譯之意。宗師舊轍頗見詞人。埏埴既圓稍功其趣。至如梵文天語元開大夏之鄉。鳥跡方韻出自神州之俗。具如別傳。曲盡規猷。遂有僥倖時譽叨臨傳述逐轉鋪詞返音列喻繁略科斷比事擬倫。語迹雖同校理誠異。自非明逾前聖。德邁往賢。方能隱括殊方用通弘致。道安著論五失易窺。彥琮屬文八例難涉。斯並古今通敘。豈妄登臨。若夫九代所傳。見存簡錄。漢魏守本本固去華。晉宋傳揚時開義舉。文質恢恢諷味餘逸。厥斯以降輕靡一期。騰實未聞講悟蓋寡。皆由詞逐情轉義寫情心。共激波瀾永成通式充車溢藏。法寶住持得在福流失在訛競。故勇猛陳請詞同世華。制本受行不惟文綺。至聖殷鑒深有其由。群籍所傳滅法故也。即事可委。況弘識乎。然而習俗生常知過難改。雖欲徙轍終陷前蹤。粵自漢明終于唐運。翻傳梵本多信譯人。事語易明義求罕見。厝情獨斷惟任筆功。縱有覆疎還遵舊緒。梵僧執葉相等情乖。音語莫通是非俱濫。至如三學盛典唯詮行旨。八藏微言宗開詞義。前翻後出靡墜風猷。古哲今賢德殊恒律。豈非方言重阻臆斷是授。世轉澆波奄同浮俗。昔聞淳風雅暢既在皇唐。綺飾訛雜寔鍾季葉。不思本實。妄接詞鋒。競掇芻蕘鄭聲難偃。原夫大覺希言絕世特立。八音四辯演暢無垠。安得凡懷虛參聖慮用為標擬。誠非立言。雖復樂說不窮隨類各解。理開情外詞逸寰中。固當斧藻標奇文高金玉。方可聲通天樂韻過恒致。近者晉宋顏謝之文。世尚企而無比。況乖於此。安可言乎。必踵斯蹤時俗變矣。其中蕪亂安足涉言。往者西涼法讖。世號通人。後秦童壽。時稱僧傑。善披文意妙顯經心。會達言方風骨流便。弘衍於世不虧傳述。宋有開士慧嚴寶雲。世係賢明勃興前作。傳度廣部聯輝絕蹤。將非面奉華胥親承詁訓得使聲流千載。故其然哉。餘則事義相傳。足開神府。寧得如瓶瀉水不妄叨流。薄乳之喻復存今日。終虧受誦足定澆淳。世有奘公。獨高聯類。往還振動備盡觀方。百有餘國君臣謁敬。言議接對。不待譯人。披析幽旨。華戎胥悅。故唐朝後譯不屑古人。執本陳勘頻開前失。既闕今乖未遑釐正。輒略陳此夫復何言。

The appraisal states: Contemplating the achievement of translation, it is truly far-reaching and magnificent. The previous catalogues did not praise its virtue; why is this? Truly, because words transmit principles to their destination, delusions are dispelled, and the Way is clarified—this relies on a medium. Therefore, the virtuous and holy of successive dynasties followed the tradition of broad guidance, and the faithful and wise took the intention of translation as their model. Following the old tracks of previous masters, stylists often emerged; once the clay was rounded, their execution gradually achieved refinement. As for the Indic script and heavenly tongue, they originally unfolded in the region of Tokharistan; the bird-track writing and square rhymes arose from the customs of the Divine Realm. As detailed in separate biographies, they fully demonstrated their models. Yet there were those who chased worldly fame, presumptuously presiding over the transmission, merely deploying words according to changing idioms, reversing sounds, listing metaphors, making arbitrary divisions between conciseness and verbosity, and comparing matters by improper analogy. Though the traces of language were identical, in rectifying the underlying truth they differed greatly. Unless one's clarity surpasses former sages and one's virtue exceeds past worthies, how can one harmonize disparate lands to convey vast intentions? Dao'an composed a treatise on the five losses, easily discerned; Yancong formulated an essay on the eight guidelines, difficult to implement. These are standard accounts of ancient and modern times; how could one rashly ascend to such ranks? As for what has been transmitted across nine dynasties, it remains recorded in concise registers. The Han and Wei maintained the source, guarding the root and discarding superficial ornament; the Jin and Song propagated it, frequently giving rise to doctrinal debates. The literary style and substantial quality were extensive, and their savor left lasting resonance. From that time downward, an era of superficiality prevailed; solid achievement was unheard of, and those who lectured and comprehended were few indeed. This was all because phrasing followed personal fancy, and meaning was written out from emotional preferences. Stirring up waves together, this permanently became the common standard, filling wagons and overflowing the canon. In the maintenance of the Dharma treasure, gain lay in the flow of blessings, while loss lay in corrupt contention. Therefore, even when a valiant plea was submitted, its words conformed to worldly floridity; the texts established for practice did not consider fine fabric. The profound admonitions of the Ultimate Sage had deep reasons; what the various texts record is precisely the cause of the Dharma's decline. This matter can be understood; how much more so by extensive knowledge! However, ingrained habits become customary, and knowing one's errors, they are hard to alter; though one wishes to change tracks, one ends up falling into previous traces. From Emperor Ming of the Han down to the Tang dynasty, the translation and transmission of Indic manuscripts mostly placed trust in interpreters. External narrative words were easy to clarify, but seekers of doctrinal meaning were rarely seen. Applying personal whims to make sole judgments, they relied entirely on scribal skill. Even if there was re-examination and collation, they still adhered to the old thread. When an Indian monk held the leaves, his understanding differed from the scribe's; with speech and language untransmitted, right and wrong became thoroughly mixed. As for the grand scriptures of the three trainings, they only elucidate the intent of practice; the subtle words of the eight collections open the principles of phrasing and meaning. Whether translated before or produced later, the ancestral style did not fall; ancient philosophers and present worthies differed in virtue from ordinary standards. Was it not because dialectal barriers were double-layered, and arbitrary interpretations were imparted? The world shifted toward shallow decadence, suddenly resembling vulgar customs. In former times, we heard of an authentic style and elegant fluency, which was present in the imperial Tang, yet ornate embellishment and corrupt confusion truly fell upon the later era. Without reflecting on original truth, they recklessly engaged in verbal clashes, competing to gather common weeds so that the sounds of Zheng were difficult to silence. Now, the Great Awakened One's rarefied speech stood singularly above the world; with eight sounds and four analytical knowledges, it resonated without bounds. How could mundane minds presumptuously interfere with sage thoughts to serve as standards? It was truly not the establishing of doctrine. Although delightful discourse is inexhaustible and understood according to kind, the principle unfolds beyond mundane emotions, while the words soar above the world. Surely one must polish and display brilliance, with phrasing loftier than gold and jade, before the sound can commune with heavenly music and its rhyme surpass ordinary limits. In recent times, the writings of Yan and Xie in the Jin and Song were admired by the world without equal; how much more so when one departs from this—how can it be expressed? If one must follow such traces, contemporary customs will alter; the disorder within them is hardly worth discussing! Formerly, Dharmakṣema of Western Liang was celebrated as a polymath of his age; Kumārajīva of Later Qin was called an outstanding monk of his time. Good at opening the textual meaning and wonderful at revealing the scriptural mind, they mastered idioms and styles, their substance and bone flowing smoothly, widely expanding in the world without diminishing transmission. In the Song, there were the bodhisattvas Huiyan and Baoyun; succeeding the lineage of worthies, they vigorously revived earlier works, translating extensive divisions with conjoined brilliance that left an unmatched track. Was it not because they personally met the land of Huaxu and received instruction directly, allowing their renown to flow for a thousand years? It was truly so! As for the rest, matters and doctrines were handed down, sufficient to open the spiritual storehouse; yet how could they be like water poured from vessel to vessel, without illicit leakage? The metaphor of diluted milk exists again today; in the end, deficiencies in reception and recitation are sufficient to distinguish the shallow from the pure. In this world, there is Master Xuanzang, who stands uniquely superior above his peers. His journeys back and forth shook the realms, fully exhausting the observation of foreign lands. The rulers and ministers of more than one hundred states paid him reverence; in conversation and dialogue, he did not wait for interpreters. Dissecting profound meanings, both Chinese and barbarians were alike delighted. Therefore, the later translations of the Tang dynasty look down upon the ancients; holding the original text to collate, they frequently expose previous errors. Since current errors are missing and there is no leisure to rectify them, I have merely set this forth briefly; what more is there to say?