北山錄 7.1.5

7.1.5

Supposing what one does not oneself know to be unknown to others, one never cross-examines the various masters to resolve one's specialty. Thus one is conversant with trivial goods, yet unversed in what is foolish; regarding one's vessel, it is full and cannot be augmented (entangling the crude and vulgar, and fanning the flames among the mediocre and foolish). Now, one who dreams knows it is a dream only upon awakening; one who is deluded knows it is delusion only upon enlightenment. Supposing one were right in the midst of delusion and dream, if someone called them deluded and dreaming, they would certainly scold and berate them (to scold and berate is to shout in anger). Examining what was composed and written in the past, rare is that which is correct in terms and principles. For instance, the *Continued Biographies of Eminent Monks* says that when a parrot died, it was called 'passing into extinction'; when Daofa passed away from the world, it was called 'sitting transformation within samādhi' (in any mind in samādhi, there is no dying or being born); the elegy for Master [Kumāra]jīva says he 'passed away' (for a Son of Heaven one says *beng*, like heaven and earth collapsing; for feudal lords one says *hong*, like the sound of a mountain crumbling; here Master Jīva is perhaps compared to a feudal lord); and Xuanzang calls the confession of great relinquishment 'relinquishment-fall' (fall is the name of an offense, referring to the thirty *naiḥsargika* offenses; for example, keeping extra robes: within ten days two persons should meet and perform a surrogate relinquishment, which is called 'relinquishment'; if ten days pass without relinquishment, then the *naiḥsargika* offense is incurred, which is called 'fall'; hence it is called 'relinquishment-fall'; now, when relinquishing wealth to repent of offenses, one should simply say 'repentance by relinquishment'). These are superficial errors of common convention, heedless discourse. Confucius said: 'A gentleman is simply not careless in his speech' (careless means remiss). Therefore, when the ruler of Wei awaited the Master to govern, the Master said, 'Must it not be the rectification of names?' (Duke Ling of Wei summoned the Master; Zilu asked, 'If the Master goes to Wei, what will he put first?' The Master said, 'First rectify the names of the myriad things. If names are not correct, then words are not in accord; if words are not in accord, then affairs cannot be completed'). Linggan lectured on the *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* and performed the contemplation of the Lotus Storehouse; as his end drew near, heavenly music came to welcome him, but Gan declined and did not wish to go; in an instant, he saw great waters flooding, and he sat in a lotus flower. If that biographer did not understand, is not the heavenly palace also within the Lotus Storehouse? (The meaning of the narrator was that Linggan did not wish to be born in heaven, but sought to be born in the realms of the buddhas; yet failing to understand that the Lotus Storehouse encompasses the Dharma realm, how could it be without the heavens? It is an error of the biographer). In Tanrong's [time], there was a monk practicing the path who saw seven buddhas within light, who told him: 'This is the Buddha Samantaprabhā of the Bhadrakalpa; now, for a hundred kalpas, he is cultivating the major and minor marks.' Seeking this through the true and transformed bodies, in reality, it cannot be sustained (only after fulfilling the tenth ground and entering the vajropama-samādhi does one cultivate the marks for a hundred kalpas, learn the buddha's deportment for a thousand kalpas, and practice transformation and conduct for ten thousand kalpas; if it were the true body, how could it be seen by an ordinary being? If it were a transformation body, how could it cultivate the marks?). If an event is not worthy of record, and words do not make an enduring standard, why bother with bamboo and paper? (If an affair does not consult antiquity, how is it worthy of being compiled into a chronicle?). Therefore, great eloquence is wordless; if it speaks, it conveys meaning, and the meaning must have a resolution. Hence, one penetrates the subtle and speaks what is essential; one exhausts words while the purport remains profound; and what is spurious is not recorded (as in the preface to the *Continued Biographies*, where Fajin performed the water contemplation; when his household gathered firewood, they saw pure clear water on the rope bed and placed two stones in it; when Jin returned in the evening, he felt pain in his back, etc.; this is exceedingly erroneous; moreover, practicing contemplation is a solo mental image, a mere imaginative projection; if others are made to see it, then it belongs to the realm of real nature; this is reckless talk by Master Daoxuan). What arouses the world must be recorded; this is called the standard norm. For the Ruists and Laozi, it is also thus! If one appraises past and present and examines the good and bad, one cannot praise on account of honor and reverence, nor dismiss on account of lowliness and disgrace; one cannot take sides on account of close intimacy, nor show bias on account of enmity and grudge (for writing history: the first is talent, the second is learning, and the third is judgment; unless one is of the like of Dong Hu or the Historian of the South, none can undertake this duty). Did the knowledge of the Three Huan families of Lu (the Jusun, the Zhongsun, and the Shusun; all were descendants of Duke Huan of Lu) equal that of Yan [Hui] and Min [Ziqian]? Did the talent of the Seven Nobles of the Han (the clans of Jin and Zhang, noble and flourishing for seven generations; Zuo Si said: 'Jin and Zhang drew upon ancestral heritage, wearing the sable tails of Han for seven generations') surpass that of Yang [Xiong] and Ma [Sima Xiangru] (Yang Xiong, courtesy name Ziyun, authored the *Taixuanjing*, *Fayan*, *Fangyan*, etc.; Sima Xiangru, courtesy name Changqing, authored the *Fengshanwen*, *Wenfuti*, etc.)? Youzi, seeing the four-inch paulownia coffin, knew that in death one does not wish for rapid decay; Bu Shang cited the poet's inspirational verses, evoking the sigh: 'It is Shang who stimulates me!' (The Master said: 'Shang is the one who stimulates me'). Since the golden words gathered from afar, compositions have followed many paths. Broad editions and abridged editions differ in names and meanings; single translations and re-translations vary in omissions and additions (a single translation in the canon is called 'single'; two, three, or more are called 're-translations'). Therefore, the Great Sage instructed one to rely on the meaning and not on the words; this is the clarity of his foresight. The Buddha has eight sounds and four unhindered eloquence[s] (the eight sounds: first, pure sound; second, gentle sound; third, harmonious sound; fourth, clear and distinct sound; fifth, non-feminine sound; sixth, unerring sound; seventh, deep and distant sound; eighth, inexhaustible sound; the four unhindered eloquences: first, unhindered eloquence regarding dharmas; second, unhindered eloquence regarding phrasing; third, unhindered eloquence regarding meanings; fourth, unhindered eloquence of dhāraṇī), transcending all existence; his sagacious mind shines clearly, and his divine edicts are true and elegant. Yet translators follow personal whim and adopt superficial simplicity, their chapters and verses leaking and negligent, causing officials and scholars (those who tuck the tablet in their sash and wear wide sleeves; tucking the tablet and wearing a large belt; wide sleeves being the attire of Ruists) to look at one another and find fault in their hearts (because the phrasing was not classic and refined, as with An Shigao). Meanwhile, some gathered from classic histories and embellished words, their phrasing overly steeped in the worldly (such as the sūtras translated by Zhu Fahu, Zhi Qian, and others; the writing entirely resembles the style of independent works), their principles deviating from precision, greatly losing the aphorisms of the sage. How difficult it is! In ancient and modern proclamations and translations, all defer to the school of Master [Kumāra]jīva. Substance and ornamentation, complexity and brevity, were fittingly placed; opening the scroll and lending an ear, there is the cool breeze of ancient style. I have often directed my thoughts to the translators: was it done by adhering to the Sanskrit texts, or by polishing and pruning? As in the 'Dharmabhāṇaka' chapter of the *Lotus Sūtra*, Kumārajīva did not include its beginning; and in the 'Samantamukha' chapter, Jñāna[gupta] later supplemented its end (the text of this *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra* was shorter, whereas the *Zheng fahua* and the *Tianpin* texts were complete). Among them, there are also those who made errors in the text: for instance, Paramārtha translated the *Abhidharmakośa*, stating that the dharma of seeing has *aprāpti*; Xuanzang published the *Vibhāṣā*, adding sixteen characters (the *Mahāvibhāṣā* was merely added upon the *Kośa* translated by the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha).