[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [廣弘明集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103) › 18.44 # 廣弘明集 18.44 廣弘明集 18.44 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [18.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18.44) 有新論道士以為。寂鑒微妙不容階級。積學無限何為自絕。今去釋氏之漸悟而取其能至。去孔氏之殆庶而取其一極。一極異漸悟能至非殆庶。故理之所去雖合各取。然其離孔釋矣。余謂二談救物之言。道家之唱得意之說。敢以折中。自許竊謂新論為然。聊答下意。遲有所悟。 > There is a scholar of the new treatise who holds that silent mirror-like insight is subtle and profound, not admitting of gradual stages; as accumulating learning is limitless, why cut oneself off? Now, I would discard the gradual awakening of the Śākya clan and adopt their 'can reach it'; I would discard the 'nearly there' of the Kong clan and adopt their 'single ultimate.' A single ultimate differs from gradual awakening; 'can reach it' is not 'nearly there.' Therefore, though what is rejected in principle is reconciled by adopting each, it nevertheless departs from both Confucius and Śākya. I consider the two discourses to be words to rescue beings, while the proclamation of the Daoist masters is an explanation that captures the inner meaning. Daring to strike a balance, I allow myself to privately deem the new treatise to be correct. I shall briefly respond with my humble ideas, awaiting some awakening. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 18.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18.43) - [Next: 18.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18.45) - [Up: 18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103~en-mt.18.44) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.18.44) · Pramāṇa