北山錄 4.2.10

4.2.10

The heavenly course was beset with grave difficulties (kong means very; grave difficulties refers to the turmoil of the Last Ruler of Chen). What the disciples who inherited his enterprise could investigate was not widespread. There was Fayu, who studied and recorded lectures on nearly more than half [of the texts]. What a pity that his life was short and he could not fulfill his aspiration! On the verge of death, he ordered his surviving drafts to be burned, and those who heard of it shed tears. From then on, his followers remained obscure (the treatise on Vijñaptimātra that Master Yu investigated did not exhaust its meaning, until under the Tang, Cien composed the ten-fascicle commentary on Vijñaptimātra). By the time Paramārtha returned south, comprehensive study was no longer heard of. Therefore, the doctrine of form and mind was ultimately rarely heard of in its perfection. Commentators inevitably turned their attention first to the principle of emptiness (after Paramārtha left, teachings on Dharma characteristics were rarely transmitted, and emptiness was mostly promoted).

At the beginning of our dynasty, Xuanzang (in the Zhenguan era) translated the Vijñaptimātra texts and transmitted them to his disciple Ji (Kuilue was surnamed Yuchi, styled Hongdao, nephew of Duke of E Yuchi Jingde; he composed a hundred commentaries and was the preceptor of Cien), accompanied by the Yogācāra (both are Mahāyāna treatises). He translated the Kośa and transmitted it to his disciple Guang (details unclear), accompanied by the Vibhāṣā (both are Hīnayāna treatises). It may be said that the Dharma characteristics shone brilliantly, the terms and numbers were profound and vast; they scoured the ultimate and conventional truths, and penetrated the Great Way. The scholars of the Emptiness school silently felt unable to unfold their ambitions (Tripiṭaka Master Xuanzang traveled to the western countries during the Zhenguan era to study the sūtras, treatises, and Dharma characteristics; upon returning in Zhenguan, he broadly propagated Dharma characteristics; when the followers of emptiness saw this, it was like the wind calming and the waves subsiding). Emperors Taizong and Gaozong composed the "Preface to the Holy Teachings" (now seen crowning the front of the sūtras), its ornate phrasing outshining the celestial patterns, its authentic spirit soaring to the corners of the seas. Down to Xuanzong's commentary on the Prajñāpāramitā, this was indeed the accumulated moisture of the two sagely rulers' grand foundations (Xuanzang's commentary on the Diamond Sūtra currently circulates in the world).

However, the world considers translating sūtras to be easy and translating treatises to be difficult; the same holds for those who transmit them (those who transmit sūtras merely follow the text, analyze the intended meaning, and narrate the ideas consecutively, hence it is easy; those who transmit treatises circle between nature and characteristics and penetrate the profound and subtle, hence it is difficult). This is truly because sūtras merely sever doubts and generate faith; their intention is far-reaching while their language is accessible. Treatises, on the other hand, exhaustively plumb nature and characteristics, illuminating the subtle and intricate; their meaning is necessarily classical, and their language prizes embellishment, interlacing tones and meters, ringing and resplendent (binwei means flourishing and ornate in literary style). Host and guest depend on one another, seeking out the hidden depths as beauty. Unless one possesses supreme wisdom, one cannot see the intention behind their exchanges. Therefore, among those who study them, rarely is one who does not achieve twofold results in heaping up the mountain (those of shallow understanding hear them and mock them, for this is beyond their realm; a mountain of nine cubits begins with a basket of earth). Their debate reaches into divine transformation. Because the transmission of the teaching in the central lands did not initially translate treatises, seeking the way of mutual assistance between master and disciple was difficult (down to the present, those who study sūtras form companions like a forest, while those who thoroughly investigate treatises are like sifting sand to find jewels).

Among companions in the study of the Dharma, those who know the sūtras and the vinaya but do not know the treatises merely praise and narrate their texts directly. When it comes to laying hold of the great meaning, they cannot be called thoroughly discerning (therefore, in Shu today, whoever is skilled in transmitting sūtras also studies treatises, and only then is their teaching regarded as refined). Kumārajīva was meticulous in translating sūtras, but unhurried in translating treatises; Xuanzang was the opposite. Thus, in Kumārajīva's day, sūtra study was superior (superior means preeminent); in Xuanzang's day, treatise study doubled. Formerly, Huixiu wore a single pair of sandals for thirty years; when encountering mud, he went barefoot, saying: "The mud is soft and easy to tread on; I do not wish to wear out the gifts of faithful almsgivers." He often told the assembly: "I have listened to the sūtras and vinaya twenty to thirty times each, yet I still regret having done so little work. I wished to delve into other sections as well, but had no leisure to cover much. Among contemporary scholars, rarely is there anyone with comprehensive mastery; knowing just a smattering of phrases, they already assume the role of teacher and model. When pushed to the limit, they have no idea of the origins. The decline of this Dharma lies with men! That is why I lie awake all night in deep reflection, sighing with emotion."