廣弘明集 22.21

22.21

來論云。形即是神。神即是形。又云。人體是一。故神不得二。若如雅論此二物不得相離。則七竅百體無處非神矣。七竅之用既異。百體所營不一。神亦隨事而應。則其名亦應隨事而改。神者對形之名。而形中之形各有其用。則應神中之神。亦應各有其名矣。今舉形則有四支百體之異屈申聽受之別。各有其名。各有其用。言神惟有一名而用分百體。此深所未了也。若形與神對。片不可差。何則形之名多。神之名寡也。

Your treatise says: "The body is the spirit; the spirit is the body." It also says: "The human body is a single whole; therefore, the spirit cannot be two." If, as your refined treatise holds, these two things cannot be separated from each other, then there would be no part of the seven apertures and the hundred body parts that is not the spirit. As the functions of the seven apertures are already different and the activities of the hundred body parts are not uniform, and as the spirit also responds according to circumstances, its names should likewise change according to circumstances. "Spirit" is a name given in contrast to "body"; and if the parts within the body each have their own function, then the spirits within the spirit should likewise each have their own name. Now, to speak of the body, there are the differences of the four limbs and hundred parts, and the distinctions between bending and extending, hearing and receiving: each has its own name, and each has its own function. Yet you say the spirit has only a single name, while its functions are divided among the hundred parts; this is something I truly fail to understand. If body and spirit correspond to each other without the slightest divergence, why is it that the names for the body are numerous, while the names for the spirit are few?