鐔津文集 2.28

2.28

聖人之知遠至遠也。聖人之先覺至覺也。是故其教推索乎太極之前。却道乎天地之更始。故其書為博為多為不約。浩浩乎不可以一往求。不可以一日盡。治其書之謂學。學其教之謂審。審其道之謂至。天下非至無本。非教無明。非書無知。是故研聖人之道者不可捨其教也。探聖人之教者不可捐其書也。今辨其道而詎其教。校其教而不顧其書。不亦妄乎。儒曰。雖有嘉肴弗食。不知其旨也。雖有至道弗學。不知其善也不其然哉。謂其道不足法。推己道以辨之。謂其書不足詳援己書以較之。夫與鄉人訟而引家人證當乎。必也不當矣。道也者天下之本也。書也者天下之迹也。事也者天下之異也理也者天下之同也。以理而質事。天下之公也。尋迹以驗本。天下之當也。夫委書而辨道。舍理而斷事天下若此而為之者。公乎當耶。

The sage’s knowledge extends infinitely far; the sage’s prior awakening is the utmost awakening. Therefore, his teachings trace back before the Supreme Ultimate and account for the cyclic renewals of heaven and earth. Thus his writings are broad, voluminous, and unconfined by brevity, so vast that they cannot be grasped in a single undertaking, nor exhausted in a single day. Studying his texts is called learning; examining his teachings is called discernment; realizing his Way is called attainment. In the realm, without attainment there is no root; without teachings there is no illumination; without texts there is no knowledge. For this reason, those who investigate the Way of the sage must not abandon his teachings, and those who explore the teachings of the sage must not discard his texts. Nowadays, to evaluate his Way while rejecting his teachings, or to scrutinize his teachings while disregarding his texts—is that not absurd? A Confucian said: 'Though there be fine food, if one does not eat it, one will not know its flavour; though there be the utmost Way, if one does not study it, one will not know its goodness.' Is this not indeed so? To declare that his Way is unworthy of emulation and deduce from one's own way to dispute it, or to claim that his texts are insufficient in detail and invoke one's own texts to contrast them—is that not like entering a lawsuit with a fellow villager and calling one's own household members as witnesses? Surely that would be inappropriate! The Way is the root of the realm; texts are the traces of the realm. Affairs are the differences of the realm; principle is the common ground of the realm. To test affairs by principle is the impartial standard of the realm; to follow traces to verify the root is the proper course of the realm. Now, to cast aside the texts while disputing the Way, or to abandon principle while judging affairs—if people in the world act like this, is it fair, is it right?