廣弘明集 18.66

18.66

竺法綱問。敬披高論探研宗極。妙判權實存旨儒道。遺教孔釋昌言折中。允然新論。可謂激流導源瑩拂發暉矣。詳複答勗維之問。或謂因權以通。或學而非悟爾。為玄句徒設。無關於胸情焉。竊所未安。何以言之。夫道形天隔幾二險絕。學不漸宗曾無髣髴。馳騁有端思不出位。神崖曷由而登幾峰所從而超哉。若懃務於有而坐體於無者。譬猶揮毫鍾張之側功侔羿養之能。不然明矣。蓋同有非甚閡尚不可以翫此而善彼。豈況乎有無之至背而反得以相通者耶。

Zhu Fagang asks: I have respectfully perused your lofty treatise and explored the ultimate principle; you wonderfully discriminate between the provisional and the real, preserving the purports of Confucianism and Daoism; you hand down the teachings of Confucius and Śākyamuni, using glorious words to strike the mean. Truly this is a new discourse, which can be said to stir the stream, guide the source, polish away defilement, and bring forth radiance! Examining your repeated answers to Xu and Wei, you either state that comprehension is gained through the expedient, or that learning is not awakening. These are merely profound phrases set forth in vain, bearing no relevance to the state of mind; I inwardly feel unsettled by them. Why do I say this? The Way and forms are as separated as heaven and earth, and the two subtleties are precipitous and cut off. If learning does not gradually approach the principle, not even a resemblance will be had. Galloping about with boundaries, one's thoughts do not exceed their station. Whence could the divine precipice be mounted, and from where could the subtle peak be scaled? If one diligently engages in existence yet abruptly embodies non-existence, this is like waving a brush beside Zhong You and Zhang Zhi, or having skill equal to that of Hou Yi and Yang Youji; that this is not so is evident! Even within existence, where there is no extreme obstruction, one still cannot enjoy this and be good at that; how much less so when existence and non-existence are completely contrary, could they conversely be made to communicate?