景德傳燈錄 30.68

30.68

右景德傳燈錄本。住湖州鐵觀音院僧拱辰所撰。書成將游京師投進途中與一僧同舟。因出示之。一夕其僧負之而走。及至都則道原者已進而被賞矣。此事與郭象竊向秀莊子註同。拱辰謂。吾之意欲明佛祖之道耳。夫既已行矣。在彼在此同。吾其為名利乎。絕不復言。拱辰之用心如此。與吾孔子人亡弓人得之之意同。其取予必無容私。又得楊文公具擇法眼以為之剛定。此其書所以可信。與夫續燈錄遣僧採事而受金廁名以亂真者間矣。或者猶疑。佛祖傳法偈。無傳譯之人。此夏虫不知春秋也。佛祖雖曰傳無傳。至付授之因豈容不知。又達磨具正遍知。華竺之言蓋悉通曉。觀其答問安有傳譯哉。此如世愚人謂教外別傳不立文字。便疑棱伽經宋已有之。非達磨携至。豈不悖哉。福州大中寺知藏僧正自以寇亂而來文籍道厄募緣。再刊此書以便道俗。齎覽扣余為序。因書其後。紹興壬子初冬十日長樂鄭昂題。

The text of the *Record of the Transmission of the Lamp Compiled in the Jingde Era* above was authored by the monk Gongchen, residing at the Iron Guanyin Monastery in Huzhou. When the book was completed, as he was about to travel to the capital to present it to the court, he shared a boat with a monk along the way and showed it to him. One night, that monk took it on his back and ran off. By the time Gongchen reached the capital, Daoyuan had already presented it and received an imperial reward. This matter is identical to Guo Xiang stealing Xiang Xiu's commentary on the *Zhuangzi*. Gongchen said: "My intention was merely to illuminate the Way of the Buddhas and patriarchs. Now that it is already in circulation, whether it came through him or through me is the same. Could I have done it for fame and profit?" He never spoke of it again. Gongchen's state of mind was like this, identical to our Confucius's sentiment when someone said, "A man lost a bow, and a man found it." In his accepting and giving, there was certainly no room for selfishness. Moreover, it was reviewed and settled by Duke Yang Wen, who possessed the eye for discerning the Dharma; this is why this book can be trusted. How far removed it is from the *Continued Lamp Record*, where monks were sent out to collect accounts, took bribes, and smuggled names in, thereby confusing the authentic with the spurious! Some still doubt the transmission verses of the Buddhas and patriarchs, claiming there were no translators. This is the summer insect that knows nothing of spring and autumn. Although it is said of the Buddhas and patriarchs that there is no transmission in transmission, when it comes to the causes and conditions of bestowal and transmission, how could one allow ignorance? Furthermore, Bodhidharma possessed correct and universal knowledge; he was thoroughly conversant with both the Chinese and Indian languages. Looking at his questions and answers, how could there have been any translation? This is just like worldly fools claiming that "a separate transmission outside the teachings, not establishing words and letters" implies doubting whether the *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* already existed in the Song dynasty and was not brought by Bodhidharma—is that not completely absurd? Because the canonical texts met with catastrophe during the bandit rebellions, the Director of the Library, Monk Zheng of the Da-zhong Temple in Fuzhou, raised donations to recarve this book for the benefit of both monastics and laity. Bringing it to me for perusal, he asked me for a preface; hence I wrote this postscript. Inscribed by Zheng Ang of Changle on the tenth day of the first month of winter in the renzi year of the Shaoxing reign era.