X81n1569_五燈嚴統解惑編
卍新續藏第 81 冊 No. 1569 五燈嚴統解惑編
No. 1569
五燈嚴統解惑篇
徑山興聖萬壽寺沙門 通容 述
五燈嚴統刻行矣。而洞下有三宜公。及遠門輩。各著書刊佈。一謂明宗正訛。一謂摘欺說。一謂闢謬說。以共攻同抗。阻抑此書使勿行。約其三人之立意。謂予因仍舊典。以天皇天王兩人。歸於青原南嶽派下。遂鼓予改易龍藏。是無君之過。顧此可勝惜其昏且惑也。殊不知予所宗者。有唐兩巨儒。丘玄素及符載公為二大禪師所作之文。以記其出處顛末。可謂金石之書。不刊之典。編于佛祖通載中。且通載一書。久入神京 皇藏我字函中。普天之下。靡不流通。所以古今皆祟尚其說。用以考據辨文。藉為定論。始明天王與天皇。各屬一宗。而涇渭從此得清也。三宜公見予因仍舊典不能深加博考。反謂予改易龍藏。是無君之過。則汝以。龍藏中所存佛祖通載。亦不肯尊隆其說。而且東引西援。千言萬語。貶駁二公及古今諸大老公論。叱為偽且謬。呵為是邪是欺。不勝橫恣。略無忌憚。如此排訕。非惟不尊龍藏。亦且辟毀 俞旨。則無君之罪。又當何如耶。
今不惜齒頰。為汝分疏其意。蓋三教書史之板。刊藏於內府。以冀其不朽。使後人無能移動。得
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 《五燈嚴統解惑編》刻印發行了。然而，洞下宗有三宜禪師以及遠門等人，各自著書刊印，一本名為《明宗正訛》，一本名為《摘欺說》，一本名為《闢謬說》，共同攻擊和抵制此書的發行。他們三人立意的要點是，認為我沿用舊典，將天皇道悟（天皇）和天王道悟（天王）兩人歸於青原行思和南嶽懷讓的派下，於是指責我擅自改動龍藏（指官方藏經），犯了『無君』的過錯。這實在令人惋惜他們的昏聵和迷惑。殊不知我所依據的，是有唐朝兩位大儒丘玄素和符載為兩位大禪師所作的文章，記載了他們的出身和經過，可謂是金石之書，不可更改的典籍，被編入《佛祖統載》中。而且《佛祖統載》一書，早已進入神京（指京城）的皇藏（皇家藏書），普天之下，無不流通。所以古今都推崇這種說法，用以考據辨析文章，作為定論。這才明確了天王和天皇，各自屬於不同的宗派，涇河和渭河從此得以分清。三宜禪師見我沿用舊典，不能深入廣泛地考證，反而說我改動龍藏，犯了『無君』的過錯。那麼你們對於龍藏中所儲存的《佛祖統載》，也不肯尊重推崇其中的說法，而且東拉西扯，千言萬語，貶低駁斥丘玄素、符載二公以及古今各位大德的公論，斥責為虛偽和謬誤，呵斥為邪說和欺騙，肆意妄為，毫無顧忌。如此排斥詆譭，不僅不尊重龍藏，而且是詆譭俞旨（皇帝的旨意），那麼『無君』的罪過，又該如何承擔呢？ 現在我不惜口舌，為你們分辯其中的意思。大凡儒釋道三教的書籍，都刊刻收藏於內府（皇宮內廷），以期望其不朽，使後人無法隨意改動，得以...
【English Translation】 English version The 'Jiaohuo Bian of Wudeng Yantong' has been printed and distributed. However, within the Dongxia school, there are people like Master Sanyi and Yuanmen, who have each written and published books, one called 'Mingzong Zheng'e', one called 'Zhaiqi Shuo', and one called 'Pimiu Shuo', to jointly attack and resist the circulation of this book. The main point of their intention is that they believe I followed the old classics and attributed both Emperor Tianhuang Daowu (Tianhuang) and Heavenly King Tianwang Daowu (Tianwang) to the lineage of Qingyuan Xingsi and Nanyue Huairang, thus accusing me of arbitrarily altering the Dragon Canon (referring to the official canon), committing the fault of 'disloyalty to the sovereign'. This is truly regrettable for their ignorance and confusion. Little do they know that what I rely on are the articles written by two great Confucian scholars of the Tang Dynasty, Qiu Xuansu and Fu Zai, for the two great Chan masters, recording their origins and experiences, which can be called books of gold and stone, unchangeable classics, and are compiled into the 'Comprehensive Record of Buddhas and Patriarchs'. Moreover, the book 'Comprehensive Record of Buddhas and Patriarchs' has long entered the imperial collection in the capital (referring to the capital city), circulating throughout the world. Therefore, both ancient and modern times have admired this statement, using it to research and analyze articles, and as a definitive conclusion. This clarifies that the Heavenly King and the Emperor each belong to different schools, and the Jing and Wei rivers can be distinguished from then on. Master Sanyi sees that I follow the old classics and cannot deeply and extensively examine them, but instead says that I have altered the Dragon Canon, committing the fault of 'disloyalty to the sovereign'. Then you do not respect and promote the statement in the 'Comprehensive Record of Buddhas and Patriarchs' preserved in the Dragon Canon, and you also draw from the east and west, using thousands of words to belittle and refute the public opinions of the two gentlemen, Qiu Xuansu and Fu Zai, as well as the great virtues of ancient and modern times, scolding them as false and erroneous, and scolding them as heresy and deception, acting recklessly and without restraint. Such exclusion and slander not only disrespects the Dragon Canon, but also slanders Yu Zhi (the emperor's decree), so how should the crime of 'disloyalty to the sovereign' be borne? Now I will not hesitate to speak out and explain the meaning to you. Generally, the books of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism are all engraved and collected in the inner court (the imperial palace), in the hope that they will be immortal and that later generations will not be able to alter them at will, so that...
彌遠弘通。亦且使依從皆有舊制出處。可推詳討論。所以自古三教有頒降之書。如廣弘明集中所載。累朝歷代。有無量名目。多賴 帝王以存不遺。所以太常太史。東觀延閣。永久常存。正以備國君顧問。近臣便於考對。頒行學宮。流通天下。使遠域近陬。無不見聞。或考文考義。並考事蹟。三者若有闕陷。亦任人推詳修補。即其文之繁衍者。何曾禁人刪芟。即其義之未安者。何曾禁人辨論。乃至見其人與事蹟有差謬者。亦何曾禁人考訂。以故著書立言。行於世間。總不出此數種損益。而作經緯。以定裁成。此世出世間。內外經史。所由來任人裁製。朝廷功令不曾禁之大概也。
如宋明教嵩禪師上 仁宗皇帝䟽云。山中嘗力探大藏。或經或傳。校驗其所謂禪宗者。推正其所謂佛祖者。其所見之書果謬。雖古書必斥之。其所見之書果詳。雖古書必取之。又其所出佛祖年世事蹟之差謬者。若傳燈錄之類。皆以眾家傳記與累代長曆。校之修之。垂十萬余言。編成其書。命曰傳法正宗記。可見縱大藏中。是經是傳。亦有詳略正謬之各別。全不曾禁人取斥。修之校之。而折衷成文于其間也。
又如國史春秋以前。固不必論。嗣後有十七史之撰述。其間刪纂批評。縱橫所見。代代有之。而呂東萊之詳節為最著。即綱鑑
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 應使其廣泛傳播，並且讓所有遵循的人都有舊制度的出處可依循，可以推敲詳細討論。因此，自古以來三教都有頒佈的典籍，如《廣弘明集》中所記載的，歷朝歷代有無數的名目，大多依賴帝王儲存而不遺漏。所以太常、太史、東觀、延閣這些機構才能永久存在，正是爲了方便國君顧問，近臣便於考證對照，頒行於學宮，流通於天下，使偏遠地區都能見聞。或者考證文字，或者考證義理，或者考證事蹟，三者若有缺失，也允許人們推敲詳細修補。即使是文字繁瑣冗長的，何曾禁止人們刪減？即使是義理不完善的，何曾禁止人們辨論？乃至發現人物與事蹟有差錯謬誤的，又何曾禁止人們考訂？因此，著書立言，流傳於世間，總不超出這幾種增刪修改的方式，從而作為準繩，加以裁定完成。這無論是世間還是出世間的，無論是內部還是外部的經史，都是由來已久，允許人們裁定製作的，朝廷的功令大概不曾禁止這些。
例如宋代明教嵩禪師（Mingjiao Song, a Chan master of the Song Dynasty）上奏仁宗皇帝（Emperor Renzong）的奏疏中說，『我曾在山中努力探究大藏經（Dazangjing, the Chinese Buddhist canon），無論是經還是傳，都校驗其中所謂的禪宗（Chan school），匡正其中所謂的佛祖（Buddha and Patriarchs）。我所見的書籍如果確實有錯謬，即使是古書也必定駁斥它；我所見的書籍如果確實詳盡，即使是古書也必定採納它。』又如他所考證出的佛祖年歲事蹟的差錯謬誤，如《傳燈錄》（Chuandenglu, Records of the Transmission of the Lamp）之類的書籍，都用各家的傳記和歷代的年曆來校正修訂，總共十萬多字，編成一本書，命名為《傳法正宗記》（Chuanfazhengzongji, Records of the Orthodox Transmission of the Dharma）。可見即使是大藏經中，無論是經還是傳，也有詳略正誤的差別，完全不曾禁止人們取捨駁斥，修訂校正，從而折中成為文章。
又如國史在春秋（Spring and Autumn Annals）以前，自然不必討論。此後有十七史的撰述，其間刪減纂輯批評，縱橫所見，代代都有，而呂東萊（Lu Donglai）的詳細刪節最為著名，即《綱鑑》（Gangjian）。 English version: It should be widely disseminated, and all those who follow it should have a source in the old system to rely on, which can be carefully discussed in detail. Therefore, since ancient times, the three teachings have had promulgated books, as recorded in the 'Guang Hongming Ji'. Throughout the dynasties, there have been countless titles, mostly preserved by emperors without omission. Therefore, the institutions of Taichang (Court of Imperial Sacrifices), Taishi (Grand Historian), Dongguan (Eastern Pavilion), and Yange (Prolonged Pavilion) can exist permanently, precisely to facilitate the emperor's consultation and the close ministers' verification and comparison, to be promulgated in schools and circulated throughout the world, so that even remote areas can see and hear. Either examine the text, or examine the meaning, or examine the deeds; if any of the three are missing, people are allowed to carefully revise and supplement them. Even if the text is verbose and lengthy, has anyone ever forbidden people from deleting it? Even if the meaning is not perfect, has anyone ever forbidden people from debating it? Even if people find errors in the characters and deeds, has anyone ever forbidden people from verifying them? Therefore, writing books and establishing words, circulating in the world, does not exceed these kinds of additions, deletions, and modifications, so as to serve as a guideline for judging and completing. Whether it is worldly or otherworldly, internal or external classics and histories, it has long been the case that people are allowed to judge and create them, and the court's decrees have generally not forbidden these.
For example, Chan Master Mingjiao Song (Mingjiao Song, a Chan master of the Song Dynasty) of the Song Dynasty, in his memorial to Emperor Renzong (Emperor Renzong), said, 'I have diligently explored the Dazangjing (Dazangjing, the Chinese Buddhist canon) in the mountains, whether it is sutra or commentary, and verified what is called the Chan school, and corrected what is called the Buddha and Patriarchs. If the books I have seen are indeed erroneous, I will certainly refute them, even if they are ancient books; if the books I have seen are indeed detailed, I will certainly adopt them, even if they are ancient books.' Furthermore, regarding the errors in the years and deeds of the Buddhas and Patriarchs that he has examined, such as the 'Chuandenglu' (Chuandenglu, Records of the Transmission of the Lamp) and similar books, he used various biographies and historical calendars to correct and revise them, totaling more than 100,000 words, and compiled them into a book named 'Chuanfazhengzongji' (Chuanfazhengzongji, Records of the Orthodox Transmission of the Dharma). It can be seen that even in the Dazangjing, whether it is sutra or commentary, there are differences in detail, correctness, and error, and people have never been forbidden from adopting, rejecting, revising, and correcting them, so as to reconcile them into writing.
Furthermore, as for the national history before the 'Spring and Autumn Annals' (Spring and Autumn Annals), there is naturally no need to discuss it. After that, there were seventeen histories written, and the deletion, compilation, and criticism within them, with various perspectives, existed in every generation, and Lu Donglai's (Lu Donglai) detailed abridgment is the most famous, namely the 'Gangjian' (Gangjian).
【English Translation】 It should be widely disseminated, and all those who follow it should have a source in the old system to rely on, which can be carefully discussed in detail. Therefore, since ancient times, the three teachings have had promulgated books, as recorded in the 'Guang Hongming Ji'. Throughout the dynasties, there have been countless titles, mostly preserved by emperors without omission. Therefore, the institutions of Taichang (Court of Imperial Sacrifices), Taishi (Grand Historian), Dongguan (Eastern Pavilion), and Yange (Prolonged Pavilion) can exist permanently, precisely to facilitate the emperor's consultation and the close ministers' verification and comparison, to be promulgated in schools and circulated throughout the world, so that even remote areas can see and hear. Either examine the text, or examine the meaning, or examine the deeds; if any of the three are missing, people are allowed to carefully revise and supplement them. Even if the text is verbose and lengthy, has anyone ever forbidden people from deleting it? Even if the meaning is not perfect, has anyone ever forbidden people from debating it? Even if people find errors in the characters and deeds, has anyone ever forbidden people from verifying them? Therefore, writing books and establishing words, circulating in the world, does not exceed these kinds of additions, deletions, and modifications, so as to serve as a guideline for judging and completing. Whether it is worldly or otherworldly, internal or external classics and histories, it has long been the case that people are allowed to judge and create them, and the court's decrees have generally not forbidden these. For example, Chan Master Mingjiao Song (Mingjiao Song, a Chan master of the Song Dynasty) of the Song Dynasty, in his memorial to Emperor Renzong (Emperor Renzong), said, 'I have diligently explored the Dazangjing (Dazangjing, the Chinese Buddhist canon) in the mountains, whether it is sutra or commentary, and verified what is called the Chan school, and corrected what is called the Buddha and Patriarchs. If the books I have seen are indeed erroneous, I will certainly refute them, even if they are ancient books; if the books I have seen are indeed detailed, I will certainly adopt them, even if they are ancient books.' Furthermore, regarding the errors in the years and deeds of the Buddhas and Patriarchs that he has examined, such as the 'Chuandenglu' (Chuandenglu, Records of the Transmission of the Lamp) and similar books, he used various biographies and historical calendars to correct and revise them, totaling more than 100,000 words, and compiled them into a book named 'Chuanfazhengzongji' (Chuanfazhengzongji, Records of the Orthodox Transmission of the Dharma). It can be seen that even in the Dazangjing, whether it is sutra or commentary, there are differences in detail, correctness, and error, and people have never been forbidden from adopting, rejecting, revising, and correcting them, so as to reconcile them into writing. Furthermore, as for the national history before the 'Spring and Autumn Annals' (Spring and Autumn Annals), there is naturally no need to discuss it. After that, there were seventeen histories written, and the deletion, compilation, and criticism within them, with various perspectives, existed in every generation, and Lu Donglai's (Lu Donglai) detailed abridgment is the most famous, namely the 'Gangjian' (Gangjian).
一書。實繁多莫紀。議論錯出。末後得朱氏綱目。劉氏前編。司馬氏資治通鑑。其損益始定。流播於今。坊間不啻數十種。顧于秘閣之板。曾無以功罪議之者。而謂改易大藏乎。若竊取其板。擅自改易。則罪在冒死。于不曾禁之功令。敷文演義以修其不足。補其未逮。便謂改易大藏。則從上是僧若儒。博達高人。亦多皆依內典。著書立言。特加分釋。商確淄澠。皆坐其罪。可乎。
今將道原所修景德傳燈錄。及明教嵩傳法正宗記。與大川五燈會元。彼此一較。則詳略之旨。有天壤之異。蓋傳燈與正宗記。雖入在藏中。約二種書。總四十卷。考其人名。如傳燈所載。六祖下一千四百三十四人。如正宗記所載。六祖下一千四百九十六人。于幾千人。而傳燈只以簡易之文。作世次與傳。正宗則僅以節略之筆。敘其嗣法及世系而已。並不曾將二千餘人。昭明舉出。表其宗旨。分其支派。綱領節目。浩繁無緒。故不能使家喻戶曉。雖有其書。而實未盛行於世也。幸而宋朝景定間。有靈隱大川禪師。乃宗門博達之士。間氣而生。觀傳燈錄及正宗記。僅歷敘其嗣法世次。竟無支派宗旨之分。遂將二書所載世次之人。各行語錄。因見西天祖師讖定南嶽馬祖。故錄西天四七東土二三下。便將南嶽列之於前。而青原編之於后。此蓋依
西天般若多羅所讖故也。況傳燈所錄。亦不曾覈定青原為昆。南嶽為季。殊不知青原之前更有十一人之名目在。雖則列青原在南嶽之前。而青原之前。更有十一人。亦為青原之昆乎。足知傳燈錄正宗記二書。只明人數與世次而已。實不曾分支派。表宗旨。何為昆。何為季。只儱侗一式敘成。如紀傳世譜云。
故大川禪師。因兩讖以定兩人後先。而後又分支派。表宗旨。一曰臨濟宗。一曰云門宗。一曰曹洞宗。一曰溈仰宗。一曰法眼宗。五宗既定。支派攸分。縱千子萬孫。于百億世。皆見其有宗有派。有原有委。修集眾典。成一大部書。以作禪宗定史。功不在禹下。所以流通五百餘年以來。無不讚為盛典。然則傳燈錄與正宗記。只敘其人名世次之如彼。而五燈會元之分支表宗又如此。如彼之簡易殊略。如此之詳明顯著。不止天壤之異。自古及今。年多且遠。無人齒及大川公如此立義為改易大藏。即明朝黎眉郭居士。所修教外別傳一十六卷。亦系天王于馬祖之下。載本書第七卷中。
而蓮宗。一主教觀。而規模弘范。已定。故先秉嚴統筆者。無心討論其機緣。近得梁生譚居士所寄年譜履歷。今已補入。伏祈諸大臺臺。以人天正眼。嚴賜護持。則不特容一人荷蒙覆庇。即普天禪衲。當祝讚諸大檀護。與震旦初祖
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這是因為西天般若多羅（Prabhutaratna）（過去佛名）的預言。更何況《傳燈錄》所記載的，也不曾覈定青原行思（Qingyuan Xingsi）為兄，南嶽懷讓（Nanyue Huairang）為弟。殊不知青原行思之前還有十一個人的名目存在。即使列青原行思在南嶽懷讓之前，難道青原行思之前的那十一人，也是青原行思的兄長嗎？足以知道《傳燈錄》和《正宗記》這兩本書，只說明人數和世系而已，實際上不曾分支派、標宗旨。什麼叫做兄，什麼叫做弟？只是含糊籠統地一概敘述完成，如同記載世系家譜一樣。
所以大川禪師，根據兩個預言來確定兩人的先後，而後又分支派、標宗旨。一是臨濟宗（Linji school），二是雲門宗（Yunmen school），三是曹洞宗（Caodong school），四是溈仰宗（Weiyang school），五是法眼宗（Fayan school）。五宗既然確定，支派就此分明。即使有千子萬孫，在百億世之後，都能看到其有宗有派，有本有末。修集眾多典籍，成為一大部書，作為禪宗的確定史。其功勞不在大禹之下。所以流通五百餘年以來，沒有不讚嘆爲盛典的。既然如此，《傳燈錄》和《正宗記》只敘述其人名世系就像那樣，而《五燈會元》的分支表宗又是這樣。像那樣地簡易疏略，像這樣地詳細明顯，不止是天壤之別。自古及今，年代久遠，沒有人提及大川禪師如此立義如同改易大藏經。即使是明朝黎眉郭居士所修的《教外別傳》一十六卷，也是將天王道悟（Tianwang Daowu）放在馬祖道一（Mazu Daoyi）之下，記載在本書第七卷中。
而蓮宗（Lotus school），一主教觀，而規模弘大，已經確定。所以先前秉持嚴謹統緒的筆者，無心討論其機緣。最近得到梁生譚居士所寄的年譜履歷，現在已經補入。伏請各位大德，以人天正眼，嚴加護持，那麼不只是容許我一人蒙受庇護，即使是普天下的禪僧，也應當祝讚各位大檀越，與震旦（China）初祖菩提達摩（Bodhidharma）。
【English Translation】 English version: This is because of the prophecy of Prabhutaratna (past Buddha). Moreover, the 'Transmission of the Lamp' does not confirm Qingyuan Xingsi as the elder brother and Nanyue Huairang as the younger brother. It is not known that there were eleven other names before Qingyuan Xingsi. Even if Qingyuan Xingsi is listed before Nanyue Huairang, are the eleven people before Qingyuan Xingsi also Qingyuan Xingsi's elder brothers? It is enough to know that the two books, 'Transmission of the Lamp' and 'Record of the Orthodox Lineage', only explain the number of people and the lineage, but in fact, they do not branch out or mark the purpose. What is called elder brother, what is called younger brother? It's just a vague and general narrative, like recording a family genealogy.
Therefore, Zen Master Dachuan, based on two prophecies, determined the order of the two people, and then branched out and marked the purpose. One is the Linji school, the second is the Yunmen school, the third is the Caodong school, the fourth is the Weiyang school, and the fifth is the Fayan school. Now that the five schools have been determined, the branches are clear. Even if there are thousands of sons and grandsons, after hundreds of millions of generations, they can see that they have a sect and a school, a root and a branch. Collecting many classics, it becomes a large book, as a definite history of Zen. Its merit is no less than that of Yu the Great. Therefore, for more than five hundred years since its circulation, there has been no one who has not praised it as a grand canon. Since this is the case, the 'Transmission of the Lamp' and the 'Record of the Orthodox Lineage' only narrate the names and lineages of the people like that, while the branching and sect marking of the 'Compendium of Five Lamps' is like this. So simple and sparse like that, so detailed and obvious like this, is not only a world of difference. From ancient times to the present, the years are long and far away, and no one has mentioned that Zen Master Dachuan established righteousness like changing the Great Treasury Sutra. Even the sixteen volumes of 'Separate Transmission Outside the Teaching' compiled by Layman Li Mei Guo of the Ming Dynasty also placed Tianwang Daowu below Mazu Daoyi, which is recorded in the seventh volume of this book.
And the Lotus school, one teaches contemplation, and the scale is grand, and it has been determined. Therefore, the author who previously adhered to the strict lineage had no intention of discussing its opportunity. Recently, I received the chronicle and resume sent by Layman Liang Sheng Tan, which has now been added. I respectfully ask all great virtues to strictly protect and maintain it with the righteous eyes of humans and gods, then not only will I be allowed to receive protection, but even the Zen monks all over the world should praise all the great benefactors, and Bodhidharma, the first ancestor of China.
。于大圓鏡中。同受法供矣。夫既植佛祖之因。同居三界之內。因果報應。不爽絲毫。稍有私心。能不負之而趨乎。至於嚴統一緝。彼輩辟書橫出。海內蚤有定評。想列位臺臺。亦不我遐棄也。潦率布覆。統希始終護持正法。原諒不宣。
復武林越州諸縉紳書
恭惟列位臺臺。儒宗麟鳳。釋氏金湯。現宰官身而說法。具人天眼以護僧。此山野容居恒攝衷乃心之語。藉手敢告于臺端者也。蓋柱石法門。不袒左右。見諸著述。付之劂人。此即一燈有賴。五宗可明。佛祖胥慶。何幸如之。第細讀翰章。諸方尊宿根由。似未親歷。而近日堂頭著作。亦未深詳。既荷鴻云之布。敢陳雀躍之私。瀆聽有道。少辨誵訛。夫五燈會元一書。乃佛祖慧命。五家宗統。從來師師授受。昭若日星。近因續略書出。以素所推定之臨濟。忽然抑之於后。大公編載之曹洞。一旦抬之於前。大翻前案。殊屬乖張。所以然者。邇來洞宗之內。多屬提唱傳帕。以口耳誦習之人。加於真參實悟尊宿之上。奪統乎。不奪乎。翻案乎。不翻乎。質之臺端。不惟昭穆立辨。亦且黑白較然。茍非山野容於嚴統中剔厘一番。則附會影響。遙嗣代付。不可勝言。將師授根源。佛祖印信。付之亡羊岐路矣。且屢見近日諸方唱道尊宿。德固高而道亦隆。獨于師承
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：在清凈明亮的大圓鏡中，一同接受佛法的供養。既然已經種下成佛作祖的因，又共同生活在這三界之內，那麼因果報應，絲毫不會有差錯。稍微有一點私心，難道能夠不辜負它而背道而馳嗎？至於嚴格統一這件事，那些人的駁斥之書紛紛出現，海內早就有了定論。想必各位大人先生，也不會因此而疏遠我吧。草率地陳述完畢，希望各位始終護持正法，請原諒我的言語不周。
《復武林越州諸縉紳書》
恭敬地稟告各位大人先生，你們是儒家的麒麟鳳凰，是佛門的金城湯池。以官員之身說法，以人天之眼護持僧眾。這些話是山野之人容居恒發自內心的肺腑之言，藉此機會敢於向各位大人稟告。柱石法門，不偏袒任何一方。這些都寫在我的著作中，交付給工匠刊印。這就像一燈相傳，五宗的宗旨就可以明白，佛祖都會感到慶幸。多麼幸運啊！只是仔細閱讀這些文章，感覺各位對各方尊宿的根源，似乎沒有親身經歷。而且對於近日各位堂頭的著作，也沒有深入詳細地瞭解。既然承蒙各位大人給予關注，我斗膽陳述我雀躍的心情。冒昧地打擾各位，稍微辨別一下其中的錯誤。五燈會元一書，乃是佛祖的慧命，五家宗派的統緒。向來都是師師相授，昭然若揭。最近因為續略書的出現，把素來推崇的臨濟宗，忽然壓制在後面。把本來公開編入記載的曹洞宗，一下子抬到前面。完全推翻了之前的定案，實在是很荒謬。之所以這樣，是因為近來曹洞宗之內，大多屬於提倡傳授衣缽，把那些只知道口頭誦習的人，放在真正參禪實悟的尊宿之上。這是奪取正統嗎？不是奪取正統嗎？這是翻案嗎？不是翻案嗎？請教各位大人先生，這不僅是輩分高低可以立即分辨清楚的，而且是黑白分明的事情。如果不是山野之人容居恒在嚴格統一中仔細辨別一番，那麼附會影響，遙相繼承，代代相傳的事情，就說也說不完了。這將把師父傳授的根源，佛祖的印信，交付到迷途的歧路上啊！而且我多次看到近日各方弘揚佛法的尊宿，他們的德行固然很高，道行也很深，只是在師承上
【English Translation】 English version: In the great perfect mirror, together we receive the Dharma offering. Now that we have planted the seeds of becoming Buddhas and Patriarchs, and we dwell together within these Three Realms, the retribution of cause and effect will not be off by a hair's breadth. If there is even a little selfishness, how can we not betray it and go against it? As for the matter of strict unification, those people's refutation books have appeared one after another, and there has long been a conclusion within the country. I think that all of you esteemed sirs will not abandon me because of this. I have finished my hasty report, and I hope that you will always uphold the Dharma. Please forgive my inadequate words.
Reply to the Gentlemen of Wulin and Yuezhou
Respectfully, I report to all of you esteemed sirs, you are the Qilin and Phoenix of Confucianism, and the impregnable defense of Buddhism. You expound the Dharma in the guise of officials, and protect the Sangha with the eyes of humans and devas. These words are from the bottom of the heart of the mountain recluse Rong Juhang, and I dare to report them to you. The pillar of the Dharma gate does not favor either side. These are written in my works and given to the craftsmen to print. This is like one lamp relying on another, and the tenets of the Five Schools can be understood. The Buddhas and Patriarchs will all rejoice. How fortunate! However, after carefully reading these articles, I feel that you have not personally experienced the origins of the venerable elders of various places. Moreover, you have not deeply and thoroughly understood the recent works of the abbots. Since I have received the attention of you esteemed sirs, I dare to express my joyful feelings. I presume to disturb you and slightly distinguish the errors in them. The book 'Wudeng Huiyuan' (Compendium of Five Lamps) is the wisdom-life of the Buddhas and Patriarchs, and the lineage of the Five Schools. It has always been transmitted from teacher to teacher, as clear as the sun and stars. Recently, because the 'Xu Lue Shu' (Supplement) appeared, the Linji (Rinzai) School, which was always esteemed, was suddenly suppressed to the back. The Caodong (Soto) School, which was originally publicly compiled and recorded, was suddenly raised to the front. This completely overturned the previous verdict, which is really absurd. The reason for this is that recently, within the Caodong School, most of them belong to those who advocate the transmission of the robe, placing those who only know how to recite orally above the venerable elders who truly practice Chan and realize enlightenment. Is this seizing the orthodox lineage? Is it not seizing the orthodox lineage? Is this overturning the verdict? Is it not overturning the verdict? I ask you esteemed sirs, this is not only a matter of seniority that can be immediately distinguished, but also a matter of black and white. If it were not for the mountain recluse Rong Juhang to carefully distinguish in the strict unification, then the matters of association and influence, remote succession, and transmission from generation to generation would be endless. This would entrust the source of the teacher's transmission and the seal of the Buddhas and Patriarchs to the crossroads of delusion! Moreover, I have repeatedly seen the venerable elders of various places who propagate the Dharma these days. Their virtue is certainly high, and their practice is also profound, but in terms of lineage
授受一事。多依稀贗鼎。致後學晚輩。行愧先型。解慚前喆。尤而效之。長此安窮。不得已。溯流尋源。與同道緇素。日積月累。參考融會。共成此書。實以砥後學之狂瀾。為千百世禪史龜鑑。擬有益於法門。豈敢欺心臆決。自貽刺謬。以駭見聞。如壽昌之於廩山。不過剃度法派。原非承嗣師印。詳在解惑篇中。茲不贅瀆。第容奉教壽昌。亦有年歲。至今想見其不屑諸方。嚴冷自愛之致。未嘗不恍然追隨杖履時也。今列之未詳者。所謂未詳傳法之人。獨出無師之智。推尊極矣。豈云抹去。更披博山和尚。后刻壽昌語錄。竟刪廩山之香。板存經房流通。惟塔銘中有嗣法廩山之言。則當日執筆者未紬繹也。即銘中亦止敘得法惟元來一人。住博山。其他不曾付囑。從可知矣。來諭絕之譜外。不白自明。若雪嶠老人。最初歸依幻有師祖。亦起法名。先師住金粟時。依次刊名塔上。后住天童。仍列禪燈世譜中。雪翁見之。大肆呵詈。自語削去兩刻之諱。故先師即命侍者。逾時刬刓。即雪翁出世拈香。竟酬古之雲門偃。所在上堂。歷皆如是。語錄流行天下。誰不共知。後到天童吊先師時。有六千餘人。寺眾敦請上堂。猶如是拈香。眾皆不悅。懡㦬而散。次至雲門顯聖寺。時三宜公主席。亦請上堂。乃力勸拈香龍池。后應東塔上堂。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：關於傳法授受這件事，很多時候都像是粗製濫造的贗品，導致後來的學人和晚輩，行為上愧對先賢，理解上慚愧於前代的智者。他們甚至還變本加厲地效仿這些錯誤，這樣下去，何時才能擺脫困境呢？ 不得已，我只好追溯源頭，與志同道合的出家和在家修行者，日積月累地參考和融合各種資料，共同完成了這本書。這本書實際上是爲了阻止後學者的狂妄之舉，並作為千百年來禪宗歷史的一面鏡子。希望它能對佛法有所裨益，我怎敢欺騙自己的內心，隨意做出決定，以至於產生謬誤，讓人們感到震驚呢？ 就像壽昌禪師之於廩山禪師，不過是剃度師父和法脈的傳承關係，原本並非是嗣法師父的印可。這些詳細情況都在《解惑篇》中說明，這裡就不再贅述了。只是允許我說一句，我跟隨壽昌禪師學習也有多年了，至今還能想起他不屑於其他宗派，嚴於律己、潔身自好的樣子，我未嘗不恍然地追隨他老人家的足跡。 現在將他列入『未詳』之列，是因為他所謂『未詳傳法之人，獨出無師之智』的說法，已經被推崇到了極點。難道能抹去他的功績嗎？更何況，翻閱博山和尚後來刊刻的《壽昌語錄》，竟然刪去了廩山禪師的香火。經書的印版儲存在經房中流通，只有塔銘中記載了嗣法廩山禪師的說法，這說明當日的執筆者沒有仔細考證。 即使在塔銘中，也只敘述了惟元禪師一人得法，並住持博山寺，其他的人都沒有得到傳法。由此可知，來信中說他不在法脈傳承譜系之內，這不言自明。如果像雪嶠老人那樣，最初歸依幻有師祖，也起了法名，先師住持金粟寺時，依次將名字刻在塔上，後來住持天童寺時，仍然將名字列在禪燈世譜中，雪翁看到后，大肆呵斥，自己說要削去這兩次刻名的恥辱。所以先師就命令侍者，立即將名字剷平磨光。 即使雪翁後來出世拈香，也完全效仿古代的雲門偃禪師。無論在哪裡上堂說法，歷來都是如此。他的語錄流行天下，誰人不知？後來他到天童寺弔唁先師時，有六千餘人，寺里的僧眾懇請他上堂說法，他仍然像以前一樣拈香，大家都感到不悅，掃興而散。後來他到了雲門顯聖寺，當時三宜公主持寺務，也請他上堂說法，他極力勸說三宜公拈香龍池。後來他應邀到東塔上堂說法。
【English Translation】 English version: The matter of Dharma transmission and reception often resembles poorly made forgeries, causing later learners and juniors to feel ashamed of their predecessors in conduct and understanding. They even exacerbate these errors by imitating them. If this continues, when will we escape this predicament? Out of necessity, I have traced the origins, and together with like-minded monastic and lay practitioners, I have accumulated and integrated various materials over time to jointly complete this book. This book is actually intended to curb the arrogance of later learners and serve as a mirror for the history of Chan Buddhism for thousands of years. I hope it will benefit the Dharma. How dare I deceive my own heart and make arbitrary decisions that would lead to errors and shock people? Like Shouchang Chan Master in relation to Linshan Chan Master, it was merely a relationship of tonsure master and Dharma lineage transmission, originally not an approval from a Dharma-inheriting master. These details are explained in the 'Disentangling Doubts' section, so I will not repeat them here. I only ask to say that I have followed Shouchang Chan Master for many years, and I can still recall his disdain for other sects and his strict self-discipline and self-respect. I have never failed to follow in his footsteps with a sense of awe. Now, he is listed among the 'unknown' because his so-called 'unknown Dharma-transmitting person, uniquely possessing wisdom without a teacher' has been elevated to the extreme. Can his merits be erased? Moreover, upon reviewing the 'Shouchang Sayings' later published by Boshan Monk, Linshan Chan Master's incense was actually removed. The printing plates of the sutras are preserved and circulated in the sutra room. Only the inscription on the pagoda mentions the statement of Dharma inheritance from Linshan Chan Master, which indicates that the writer of the inscription did not carefully examine the facts. Even in the inscription, it only narrates that Chan Master Weiyuan alone inherited the Dharma and resided at Boshan Temple, and no one else received the Dharma transmission. From this, it can be known that the letter stating that he is not within the lineage transmission genealogy is self-evident. If it were like Elder Xueqiao, who initially took refuge in Ancestor Master Huanyou and also received a Dharma name, when the former master resided at Jin Su Temple, the names were inscribed on the pagoda in order. Later, when he resided at Tiantong Temple, the names were still listed in the Chan Lamp Genealogy. Upon seeing this, Xue Weng greatly scolded and said that he would remove the shame of these two inscriptions. Therefore, the former master ordered the attendant to immediately scrape and polish the names. Even when Xue Weng later appeared in the world to offer incense, he completely imitated the ancient Yunmen Yan Chan Master. Wherever he gave Dharma talks, it was always the same. His sayings are popular throughout the world, who does not know them? Later, when he went to Tiantong Temple to mourn the former master, there were more than six thousand people. The monks of the temple earnestly requested him to give a Dharma talk, and he still offered incense as before, which made everyone feel displeased and dispersed in disappointment. Later, he went to Yunmen Xiansheng Temple, where Gong Sanyi was in charge of the temple affairs, and he also invited him to give a Dharma talk. He strongly urged Gong Sanyi to offer incense to Longchi. Later, he was invited to give a Dharma talk at Dongta.
拈香亦如顯聖。夫宗門拈香。於人天眾前。原本酬法。為萬古典型。若倏彼倏此。不惟令後學靡所取法。亦且使無稽效顰。安可底止。此宗門慎重之任。豈可如此變幻。譜入未詳。如世諦由光。愜而且允也。
又天王于馬祖。天皇于石頭。皆前人所定之牒。見諸典籍。不啻數十種。非容胸臆私裁。實亦依龍藏中佛祖通載原本根據。庶令統清系白。似有功于兩派。然且不居。奪統之諭。胡為乎來哉。洞宗諸公。屢出辟書。謂容改易藏本等說。茲具解惑篇請正。高明想能鑑諒。若顯聖一燈。紹繼而來。名正言順。夫復何議。但自天童凈以下。至慈舟和尚。自昔未見語錄行世。突然一旦刻出。朱紫之疑。有識所共。矧容力任嚴統之責。敢冒昧增入。以于篡假之誅乎。正如來諭所云。存真黜偽。守闕疑之大義者也。今據遠門摘欺說中。分別其語錄出載。多從萬松評唱採出。改易名字。可勝差錯。如評唱所載人山。遠門作仁山。王山法祖。遠門作王山體。至其語句。乃出自浮山遠公。牽強支吾。誑人耳目。更自謂出何塔銘。出何題詠。尤覺荒唐倒謔之極。可見彼從前歷代老宿。無全語錄行世之明徴大驗矣。故通容但見有語錄行世者。盡皆修入派下。非有私心彼此于其間也。如長翁素有語錄。已曾抄稿付梓。不意督刻者遺失
二葉。今已補入。嗚呼。容修此書。矢公矢慎。十易星霜。總為道法。豈計身名。正欲以至公至正。還之千古。豈甘與無據徒刻者。同類而共𠷣於世也。伏冀列位臺臺。迅提𡱝鏡。為容深照體察。則心同聖賢之心。行同佛祖之行。一切緇衣。均蒙覆蔭。不妨轉斗諍為慈化。變兵戈作慧光。任此書。公同天下。聽龍天。隨世浮沉。知博厚君子。正學大儒。性天之中。包羅萬象。必不以斯刻為介意。誠如來諭。無分於左右之袒。感荷盛德。有同戴天之被矣。臨紙神馳。無任仰瞻之至。
又復武林諸縉紳書
瑤函下頒。名山映色。深見列位臺臺護法之弘願矣。踴躍歡欣。遙望合十。謹讀瑯誨款款。實未詳察鄙衷。蓋釋教著書立言。除譯經外。總為法門起見。不與世諦斗諍同科如山野容所緝嚴統一書。實原本舊頒北藏已定之案。來教優劣尊卑門戶等諭。在容分中。皆屬上林子虛。夫宗派既有真偽。立言自當公正。奈三宜公輩。特生能所。強執我人。辟書之出。至三且王。容亦僅付不見不聞。第诐遁飛騰。投杼難釋。不得已著解惑一篇。普誓公論。茲附臺覽請正。則山野容好新領異之罪。庶幾不白可逭。至於云憨二大師。一主況予以五燈會元中所載之辨文。及藏中刊定兩人之碑窆。更依諸家之公論。總待夫後人會合
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 二葉（指書頁脫落）。現在已經補上了。唉！我容某人修訂此書，以公允和謹慎為準則，歷經十年寒暑，一切都是爲了弘揚佛法，哪裡會考慮個人的名聲。正是想以最公正無私的態度，將真相還給千秋萬代，怎能甘心與那些沒有根據隨意刻印的人，同流合污，一起被世人唾棄呢？懇請各位大人，迅速拿起明鏡，為我容某人仔細照看體察，這樣就能心同聖賢之心，行同佛祖之行，所有的僧人都能蒙受庇護。不妨將爭鬥轉化為慈悲教化，將兵戈化為智慧之光。任憑此書，公之於天下，聽憑龍天護法，隨世事浮沉。相信學識淵博的君子，正統的大學者，他們的心性之中，包羅萬象，一定不會因為這次刻印而介意。這真如佛祖的教誨，不偏袒任何一方。我感激各位的盛德，如同頭頂青天一樣。面對紙張，心神馳往，無比仰慕。 又給武林的各位縉紳的信： 您們賜下的信函，使名山都增添了光彩，我深深地看到了各位大人護持佛法的宏大願望。我歡欣鼓舞，遙望各位合十致敬。我仔細閱讀了您們懇切的教誨，但實際上您們並不瞭解我的心意。釋教著書立說，除了翻譯佛經外，總的來說都是爲了佛法著想，不與世俗的爭鬥相同。比如我山野容所編輯的《嚴統一書》，實際上是根據舊時頒佈的、北藏已經確定的版本。至於來信中關於優劣尊卑門戶等等的說法，在我看來，都像是司馬相如的《上林賦》中的子虛先生一樣，虛構而已。宗派既然有真偽，那麼立論自然應當公正。可是三宜公等人，特別強調能所，頑固地執著於我與人之間的分別。他們所寫的駁斥之書，甚至改了三次。我容某人也只是不看不管不聽罷了。但是謠言四起，像梭子一樣飛快傳播，難以消除。不得已寫了解惑一篇文章，向大眾發誓要秉持公正的言論。現在附上給各位大人審閱指正，這樣我山野容好標新立異的罪名，或許可以免除。至於云憨二位大師，我主要是根據《五燈會元》中所記載的辯論文章，以及藏經中刊定的兩人的碑文，更依據各家的公正評論，總要留待後人來會合。
【English Translation】 English version: Two leaves (referring to missing pages). Now they have been added. Alas! I, Rong, revised this book, adhering to fairness and caution, spending ten years, all for the sake of promoting the Dharma, never considering personal fame. It is precisely to return the truth to posterity with the most impartial attitude, how can I be willing to collude with those who print without basis, and be scorned by the world together? I implore you, esteemed sirs, to quickly take up the mirror and carefully examine me, Rong, so that you can have the same heart as the sages and act like the Buddhas, and all monks can be sheltered. It is better to transform strife into compassionate teachings, and turn weapons into the light of wisdom. Let this book be made public to the world, and let the dragons and gods protect it, drifting with the tides of the world. I believe that knowledgeable gentlemen and orthodox scholars, with their all-encompassing minds, will not mind this printing. This is truly like the Buddha's teachings, not favoring either side. I am grateful for your great virtue, as if wearing the sky on my head. Facing the paper, my mind wanders, with utmost admiration. Also, a letter to the gentry of Wulin: The letter you sent has added luster to the famous mountains. I deeply see your great wish to protect the Dharma. I am overjoyed and respectfully salute you from afar. I have carefully read your earnest teachings, but in reality, you do not understand my intentions. The writing of books in Buddhism, apart from translating scriptures, is generally for the sake of the Dharma, not the same as worldly disputes. For example, the 'Yan Tong Yi Shu' compiled by me, Shanye Rong, is actually based on the old version issued and determined by the Northern Canon. As for the statements in the letter about superiority, inferiority, and sectarianism, in my opinion, they are all like Mr. Zixu in Sima Xiangru's 'Shanglin Fu', fabricated. Since sects have truth and falsehood, then the argument should naturally be fair. However, people like the Sanyi public, especially emphasize ability and place, stubbornly clinging to the distinction between self and others. The refutation books they wrote were even revised three times. I, Rong, simply ignored them. However, rumors spread like shuttles, making it difficult to eliminate them. I had no choice but to write an article to dispel doubts, vowing to uphold fair speech to the public. Now I attach it for your review and correction, so that my crime of being fond of novelty may be avoided. As for the two masters, Yun and Han, I mainly rely on the debate articles recorded in the 'Wu Deng Hui Yuan', as well as the inscriptions of the two people published in the canon, and more on the fair comments of various families, which will be left to future generations to gather.
之定案。博考深究。補足其文獻。以清天皇之譜。而又歸天王之牒。皆因仍藏中舊章。非憑臆說。事久自然論定。亦成一部禪史。藏之法門。傳之嫡裔。明有宗也。敢不其難其慎與。三宜輩不知讚歎。而反誣以無君。矯為過當之語。可慨也夫。又謂道原為法眼二世孫。修傳燈錄。明教為雲門四世孫。修正宗記。咸以龍潭屬之天皇。然據道原所修傳燈錄。亦多差錯。如魏府大覺。屬臨濟之子。卻修為黃檗法嗣。與臨濟作昆季。則其餘差謬可知。如明教云。其所出佛祖年世事蹟之差謬者。若傳燈錄之類。此其一明證也。且道原之去天王。歲數既遠。世次亦邈。若非盡心查考。如人天眼目所載。止託人捃拾。則遺失人名事蹟。從可知矣。今按世次逆數而上。自道原為一世。天臺韶為二世。法眼益為三世。羅漢琛為四世。玄沙備為五世。雪峰存為六世。德山鑒為七世。(龍潭信為八世。天王悟為九世)以國君年號歷數查考。道原與天王。唐宋相隔二百三十年。又以明教逆數而上。自明教為一世。洞山聰為二世。文殊真為三世。德山密為四世。雲門偃為五世。雪峰存為六世。德山鑒為七世。龍潭信為八世。天王悟為九世。亦以國君年號歷數查考。明教與天王。亦唐宋相隔三百有餘年。其年代既相隔如是之遠。雖為云仍之孫。未嘗
盡心博考于歷代相傳世系。而只宛轉託人捃拾。安能保其不差失自家之宗祖乎。
只如湛老和尚一枝。自大覺老宿而上。至云居膺二十六世。余在老和尚座下。親領教義。出入十有餘年。並不聞老和尚確言其世次人名。分曉明白。蓋從上無來源傳下故也。況老和尚古佛心腸。尋常日用間。無一事不述。無一德不舉。行藏履歷。生平不肯自秘。居恒嘗以大覺老宿所付手卷示余。偈中雲。射得南方半個兒。幅末只出曹洞第二十六代某某而已。近得遠門親到少林。查其歷傳碑載。才有如是世次人名。刊刻出來。繇此以談從前法系。可謂只存代數。如系鼎一線。若不得渠躬往搜尋。吾知二十六代以上世次人名。恐付之夫己氏矣。此亦浙中邇來衲子所共曉。誰得而裝點之。若不信余言。即今報國院無住老兄。尚屬當時親炙聞見言猶在耳。稍一詢問。予言可符矣。
又如覺浪公欲認廩山為壽昌嗣法師。浪公之與廩山。年代既近。世次亦不遠。尚杳然不知其從上世次。據遠門刻中所載其以書與石雨公云。聞法兄曾命門人特往少林。搜洞下一帶源流事實。此正弟先年造嵩之至意也。前弁山兄所集傳燈世譜。其中未考究傳位與紹位之殊云云。即我廩山忠和尚。自稱二十五代者。乞示我一參正之。明見浪公于壽昌。于廩山。世
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：竭盡心力廣泛考證歷代相傳的世系，卻只是委婉地託人蒐集，怎能保證不出現差錯，搞錯自家的宗祖呢？
就拿湛老和尚這一支來說，從大覺老宿往上追溯，到云居膺是第二十六世。我在老和尚座下，親自領受教義，出入十多年，從未聽老和尚確切地說出他的世系人名，分明明白。這是因為從上面沒有來源傳下來的緣故。況且老和尚古佛心腸，尋常的日常生活中，沒有一件事不講述，沒有一德不舉揚，行蹤經歷，生平不肯自己隱瞞。他經常把大覺老宿所付的手卷給我看，偈語中說：『射得南方半個兒。』卷末只寫著曹洞第二十六代某某而已。最近遠門親自到少林寺，查閱歷代傳記碑文，才有了這樣的世系人名，刊刻出來。由此談論從前的法系，可以說是隻存代數，像系鼎的一線。如果不是他親自前往搜尋，我知道二十六代以上的世系人名，恐怕就要付之闕如了。這也是浙中近來衲子所共知的，誰能加以粉飾呢？如果不相信我的話，現在報國院的無住老兄，還屬於當時親身經歷、親耳聽見的，言猶在耳。稍加詢問，我的話就可以得到證實了。
又如覺浪公想要確認廩山為壽昌的嗣法師。覺浪公與廩山，年代既近，世次也不遠，尚且茫然不知其從上的世系。根據遠門刻本中所記載，他寫信給石雨公說：『聽說法兄曾命門人特地前往少林寺，搜尋曹洞宗一帶的源流事實，這正是小弟早年造訪嵩山的至意啊。』前弁山兄所收集的傳燈世譜，其中沒有考究傳位與紹位的區別等等。即使是我廩山忠和尚，自稱是第二十五代，也請您指示我加以參正。』由此可見覺浪公對於壽昌，對於廩山，世系並不清楚。
【English Translation】 English version: To exhaustively examine the genealogies passed down through generations, yet merely entrusting others to collect information, how can one guarantee against errors and avoid mistaking one's own ancestors?
Take the lineage of Chan Master Zhan, for example. Tracing back from Elder Master Dajue to Yunju Ying, he is the twenty-sixth generation. I personally received teachings from the Elder Master, attending him for over ten years, yet I never heard the Elder Master definitively state his lineage names clearly and distinctly. This is because there was no source passed down from above. Moreover, the Elder Master had the heart of an ancient Buddha. In his ordinary daily life, there was nothing he did not speak of, no virtue he did not extol. His conduct and experiences, his life, he never kept secret. He often showed me the handscroll given to him by Elder Master Dajue, in which the verse said: 'Shooting the southern half.' At the end of the scroll, it only stated 'So-and-so, the twenty-sixth generation of the Caodong lineage.' Recently, Yuanmen personally went to Shaolin Temple and examined the historical biographies and inscriptions, only then were such lineage names found and engraved. From this, discussing the previous Dharma lineage, it can be said that only the generations remain, like a single thread holding a tripod. If he had not personally gone to search, I know that the lineage names beyond the twenty-sixth generation would likely be lost. This is also known by the monks of Zhejiang in recent times. Who can embellish it? If you do not believe my words, the Elder Brother Wuzhu of Baoguo Monastery is still among those who personally experienced and heard it at the time, his words still ringing in our ears. A little inquiry will confirm my words.
Furthermore, consider how Master Juelang wished to recognize Linshan as the Dharma successor of Shouchang. Master Juelang and Linshan were close in age and not far apart in generations, yet he was still unaware of their lineage from above. According to what is recorded in Yuanmen's published works, he wrote a letter to Shi Yu Gong saying: 'I heard that Dharma Brother once ordered his disciples to specially go to Shaolin Temple to search for the origins and facts of the Caodong lineage. This is precisely what I intended when I visited Mount Song earlier.' The Transmission of the Lamp genealogy collected by Brother Bianshan earlier did not examine the difference between transmission of position and succession of position, etc. Even I, Linshan Zhong He Shang, who claims to be the twenty-fifth generation, ask you to instruct me to correct it.' From this, it can be seen that Master Juelang was not clear about the lineage of Shouchang or Linshan.
次尚且不遠。猶不知從上代數人名。即湛老和尚。親荷洞宗道法。亦不確知其從上世次人名。而浪公認壽昌為嫡祖。世代最近。都莫曉其授受來歷。何況道原明教。與天王相隔三百有餘年。而參考修集。又系託人捃拾事蹟。安能保其不遺失乎。即將此近代現前事。返覆推詳。甚可曉其真偽。凡有智者。當爲我諒焉。
又以近刻並言之。如遠門所刻曹洞源流正派圖。后附正訛二葉。第二篇謂按永覺禪師源流以廩山常忠。嗣月舟載公。非也。丁亥春。柱走少室。讀載公碑陰。觀其法嗣門人。並無常忠二字。及稽小山書公嗣列。亦無其名。止於參學門人得之。方知廩山為書公嗣也。據遠門此篇考覈。顯見廩山不曾承嗣曹洞。蓋得之參學門人。則屬道聽途傳。何得妄為憑據哉。予昔年親炙壽昌老人提耳面命之言。謂廩山系曹洞法派。非嗣曹洞之法。故特往少林。參無言宗主。及上五臺。參瑞峰和尚。蓋為此也。若當時廩山既有授受。兩行可以不必。況壽昌老人道眼圓明。操行孤標。上無師承。下無濫印。高突諸方一頭地。被龍天推出。而自己實無意於斯也。且系此一時。彼一時。吾知老人若在今時。決不肯爾爾。然則據遠門如此正訛。而浪公欲認壽昌為嫡祖。而不知嫡祖承嗣之下落。於戲。大可笑矣。
又據正訛
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這件事時間上還不太久遠。即使是湛老和尚，他親自繼承了洞宗的道法，人們尚且不確切知道他上面幾代師承的人名。而浪公認定壽昌為嫡傳祖師，世代最近，但大家都不知道他的授受來歷。更何況道原明教與天王相隔三百多年，而且參考修集，又是託人蒐集事蹟，怎麼能保證沒有遺漏呢？即使是這近代眼前的事，反覆推敲詳察，也很容易明白其中的真偽。凡是有智慧的人，應該會諒解我的。 再說說最近刊刻的書。比如遠門所刻的《曹洞源流正派圖》，後面附有《正訛》二頁。第二篇說，按照永覺禪師的源流，廩山常忠（Linshan Changzhong）是月舟載公（Yuezhou Zaigong）的嗣法弟子，這是不對的。丁亥年春天，我柱走少室，讀了載公的碑文，看到他的法嗣門人中，並沒有常忠這兩個字。並且查考小山書公（Xiaoshan Shugong）的嗣法名錄，也沒有他的名字，只在參學門人中找到了他。這才知道廩山是書公的參學弟子。根據遠門這篇考證，很明顯廩山沒有承嗣曹洞宗的法脈，只是從參學門人那裡得來的，屬於道聽途說，怎麼能作為憑據呢？我過去曾親自聆聽壽昌老人（Shouchang Laoren）的教誨，他親口告訴我，廩山是曹洞宗的法派，但沒有承嗣曹洞宗的法。所以我特地前往少林寺，拜訪無言宗主（Wuyan Zongzhu），以及登上五臺山，拜訪瑞峰和尚（Ruifeng Heshang），就是爲了這件事。如果當時廩山真的有授受關係，這兩趟行程就沒有必要了。況且壽昌老人道眼圓明，操行高潔，上無師承，下無濫印，高出其他宗派一頭，被龍天推出，但他自己實際上並沒有這個意願。而且此一時，彼一時，我知道老人如果活在今天，決不會這樣。那麼，根據遠門這樣的正訛，而浪公想要認定壽昌為嫡傳祖師，卻不知道嫡傳祖師的傳承下落，真是太可笑了。 再根據《正訛》
【English Translation】 English version: This matter is not so far removed in time. Even with Venerable Zhan, who personally inherited the Dharma of the Caodong (Tung-shan) school, people do not know for certain the names of the masters in the generations above him. Yet, Langgong recognizes Shouchang (Longevity Temple) as the direct ancestral master, the most recent generation, but no one knows the origin of his transmission. Moreover, Daoyuan Mingjiao is separated from Tianwang by more than three hundred years, and the compilation and collection of information relied on others to gather anecdotes. How can one guarantee that nothing has been lost? Even with this recent, present matter, careful and repeated examination can easily reveal the truth. Anyone with wisdom should understand me. Furthermore, let's discuss the recently published books. For example, the 'Correct Lineage Chart of the Caodong School' engraved by Yuanmen, which includes two pages of 'Corrections and Errors' as an appendix. The second section states that according to the lineage of Yongjue (Eternal Enlightenment) Zen Master, Linshan Changzhong (Linshan Changzhong) is the Dharma heir of Yuezhou Zaigong (Yuezhou Zaigong), which is incorrect. In the spring of Dinghai year, I, Zhuzou, visited Shaoshi (Shaolin) and read the inscription on Zaigong's stele. I observed that among his Dharma heirs and disciples, there were no names of Changzhong. Furthermore, upon examining the list of Xiaoshan Shugong's (Xiaoshan Shugong) Dharma heirs, his name was also absent, only found among the students who attended his lectures. Only then did I realize that Linshan was a student of Shugong. Based on Yuanmen's examination in this section, it is evident that Linshan did not inherit the Dharma lineage of Caodong. He merely obtained it from students who attended lectures, which is hearsay. How can it be used as evidence? In the past, I personally listened to the teachings of Old Man Shouchang (Shouchang Laoren), who told me directly that Linshan belonged to the Caodong Dharma lineage but did not inherit the Caodong Dharma. Therefore, I specifically went to Shaolin Temple to visit the Abbot Wuyan (Wuyan Zongzhu), and ascended Mount Wutai to visit the Venerable Ruifeng (Ruifeng Heshang), all for this matter. If Linshan had truly received transmission at that time, these two trips would have been unnecessary. Moreover, Old Man Shouchang had clear Dharma eyes and noble conduct, without a master above him and without indiscriminate approval below him, standing out among all schools. He was pushed forward by the dragons and gods, but he himself had no intention of doing so. Furthermore, this was one time, and that was another time. I know that if the old man were alive today, he would definitely not do that. Therefore, according to Yuanmen's corrections and errors, Langgong wants to recognize Shouchang as the direct ancestral master, but does not know the whereabouts of the direct ancestral master's transmission. Alas, it is truly laughable. Furthermore, according to the 'Corrections and Errors'
第一葉。謂按弁山一花現瑞。及傳燈世譜。以鹿門覺為石林秀。王山體為玉山體。淳拙文才為拙才淳。中間又少第二十六代。俱空契斌禪師。誤也。遠門又引種種辨明。即此猶見瑞白公于湛老和尚。身出其門。親受其法。而於自派一脈。世次人名。亦杳然不知確實。何況道原明教。與天王相隔三百有餘年。又焉能知其不差失乎。
噫遠門刻此正訛兩葉。實有神鬼所使。帶累瑞白公等與覺浪公。于親枝親派。俱不知其來歷的據。致人談論不已。又顯見古今事蹟存亡。往往多相類如此。
又據丘玄素為天王悟作碑文。系唐元和戊戌十三年。即天王悟圓寂之歲也。又符載為天皇悟作碑文。亦系唐元和丁亥二年。即天皇示逝之歲也。據二名公。固博大文人。為二大老作碑序。身復同時。居復同郡。不相遠隔作文又系圓寂之年。可謂最親最近。最真最實。凡有識見者。亦無得而議。於此二碑不信。更復何信乎。
如洪覺范禪師之辨宗派說。刊佈方冊已久。載在藏中。昭如日星。況更有群籍所載。諸家文獻。旁參側證。汝皆以為偽。則汝俱能焚劈之乎。今詳汝之心。妄吾以改易大藏。則汝今欲泯滅二種藏文。較之誣我之罪。抑相什伯矣。明知三宜公與覺浪公輩。私心偏執。謂二碑文。系是偽造。立種種返復窮辨
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：第一頁。說的是按弁山一花顯現祥瑞，以及傳燈世譜的記載，把鹿門覺誤作石林秀，王山體誤作玉山體，淳拙文才誤作拙才淳。中間又缺少第二十六代，都把空契斌禪師搞錯了。遠門又引用種種辨明，由此可見瑞白公對於湛老和尚，雖出身其門，親身接受其法，卻對於自己宗派的一脈相承，世系人名，也茫然不知確實。更何況道原明教，與天王相隔三百多年，又怎麼能知道他們沒有差錯呢？
唉，遠門刊刻這正訛兩頁，實在是有神鬼在背後驅使。連累瑞白公等人與覺浪公，對於親近的宗枝親近的派別，都不知道其來歷的依據，導致人們議論紛紛。又明顯可見古今事蹟的存亡，往往多有相似之處。
又根據丘玄素為天王悟所作的碑文，是唐元和戊戌十三年，也就是天王悟圓寂的那一年。又符載為天皇悟所作的碑文，也是唐元和丁亥二年，也就是天皇示寂的那一年。根據這兩位名公，都是博學多才的文人，為兩位大德高僧作碑序，而且身處同一時代，居住在同一個郡，相隔不遠，作文又是圓寂之年，可謂是最親近、最真實、最可靠的。凡是有見識的人，也沒有什麼可以議論的。如果對這兩塊碑都不相信，還能相信什麼呢？
如果像洪覺范禪師辨別宗派的說法，刊印完成的書已經很久了，記載在藏經中，像太陽星星一樣明亮。更何況還有眾多書籍所記載，各家的文獻，旁敲側擊地證明。你們都認為是假的，那麼你們都能焚燒劈毀它們嗎？現在詳細考察你們的心，妄圖我來改易大藏經，那麼你們現在想要泯滅兩種藏文，比起誣陷我的罪過，恐怕要多出十倍百倍了。明明知道三宜公與覺浪公這些人，私心偏頗固執，說這兩篇碑文是偽造的，立下種種反覆窮盡的辯解。
【English Translation】 English version: The first leaf. It speaks of the auspicious sign of a flower appearing on Mount Anbian, and the records of the Transmission of the Lamp lineage, mistakenly identifying Lumen Jue (鹿門覺) as Shilin Xiu (石林秀), Wang Shan Ti (王山體) as Yu Shan Ti (玉山體), and Chunzhuo Wencai (淳拙文才) as Zhuocai Chun (拙才淳). Furthermore, the twenty-sixth generation is missing, and they are all mistaken about Zen Master Kong Qibin (空契斌). Yuanmen (遠門) also cites various clarifications, from which it can be seen that although Ruibai Gong (瑞白公) came from the school of Old Master Zhan (湛老和尚) and personally received his Dharma, he is also completely unaware of the lineage and names of his own school. Moreover, Daoyuan Mingjiao (道原明教) is more than three hundred years apart from Tianwang (天王), so how can they know that there are no errors?
Alas, Yuanmen's engraving of these two leaves of corrections and errors is truly driven by gods and ghosts. It implicates Ruibai Gong and others with Jue Lang Gong (覺浪公), who do not know the basis of the origins of their close branches and schools, leading to much discussion. It also clearly shows that the existence and demise of events in ancient and modern times are often similar.
Furthermore, according to the inscription written by Qiu Xuansu (丘玄素) for Tianwang Wu (天王悟), it was the thirteenth year of Yuanhe (元和) Wuxu (戊戌) in the Tang Dynasty, which was the year of Tianwang Wu's passing. Also, the inscription written by Fu Zai (符載) for Tianhuang Wu (天皇悟) was also the second year of Yuanhe Dinghai (丁亥) in the Tang Dynasty, which was the year of Tianhuang's passing. According to these two famous figures, both erudite scholars, who wrote prefaces for the steles of two great eminent monks, and who lived in the same era, resided in the same prefecture, not far apart, and wrote in the year of their passing, they can be said to be the closest, most authentic, and most reliable. Anyone with discernment has nothing to argue about. If you don't believe these two steles, what else can you believe?
If, like Zen Master Hong Juefan's (洪覺范) explanation of the schools, it has been printed into books for a long time, recorded in the Tripitaka, as bright as the sun and stars. Moreover, there are numerous books recorded, various documents, providing corroborating evidence. If you all consider them to be false, then can you all burn and destroy them? Now, examining your hearts in detail, attempting to get me to alter the Great Tripitaka, then your current desire to obliterate the two types of Tripitaka texts is probably ten or a hundred times greater than the crime of slandering me. It is clear that people like Sanyi Gong (三宜公) and Jue Lang Gong are biased and stubborn, saying that these two inscriptions are forged, and establishing various repeated and exhaustive arguments.
。此亦好笑之甚。獨不審世間作文。必有請乞。那有如是等人。造如是偽文。刻如是偽碑。藏於王室。流通今古。炫惑於人。亦將所圖何事耶。為復以馬祖下人。集石頭派下。于伊何疏乎。為復以石頭下人。入馬祖譜內。于伊又何親乎。況雲門法眼二派。皆無傳嗣久矣。其從上二派尊宿。古今莫不尊崇。誰得而親疏之。不過據實考覈其根據。為至公至正之事云爾。三宜公又以石頭派下二十五則機緣事蹟。以作憑據。比例較勘。用擊馬祖下九則之事蹟典故。其實馬祖下事蹟。彰明於世。何止九則。但不暇備抄附錄。此亦不必細為分析。如道原修傳燈時。不能親身討究。第託人捃拾篇章。未免魚魯參差在前。自有多般烏焉繼之於后。所謂一人傳虛。萬人傳實。亦何用予之贅言。
今但以曹洞宗旨一辨。以見德山雪峰一派。非洞宗眷屬。如雪峰存禪師。三登投子。九上洞山。機緣未見相契。職任飯頭。一日于洞山淘米次。洞山偶見問云。淘砂去米。淘米去砂。峰答云。砂米一齊去。洞云。大眾吃個什麼。峰便覆卻盆。洞云。據汝所見。因緣不在此。當往德山。雪峰後果嗣德山。據此公案。則兩家宗旨。判然明白。如嘗臠得鼎。差異見矣。蓋洞宗之旨。要有正偏相參。宛轉夾妙。且語忌十成。機貴回互。如金針玉線。去
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這真是太可笑了。只是不明白世間寫文章，必定有所請求，哪裡有這樣的人，製造這樣的虛假文章，刻這樣的假碑，藏在王室，流傳古今，迷惑世人，他們到底想圖謀什麼呢？是爲了把馬祖（Mazu，唐代禪宗大師）門下的人，歸集到石頭（Shitou，唐代禪宗大師）門下，對他們有什麼疏遠嗎？還是爲了把石頭門下的人，編入馬祖的譜系內，對他們又有什麼親近呢？況且雲門（Yunmen，雲門宗）和法眼（Fayan，法眼宗）二派，都已經很久沒有傳人了。他們從前的二派尊宿，古今沒有不尊崇的，誰能夠對他們親疏呢？只不過是根據事實考覈他們的根據，是至公至正的事情罷了。三宜公又用石頭門下的二十五則機緣事蹟，作為憑據，比例比較勘驗，用來駁斥馬祖門下的九則事蹟典故。其實馬祖門下的事蹟，彰明於世，何止九則，只是沒有時間全部抄錄附上。這些也不必仔細分析。如道原（Daoyuan，《景德傳燈錄》的作者）修撰《傳燈錄》時，不能親自討究，只是託人蒐集文章，難免魚魯參差在前，自然有很多烏焉混淆在後。所謂『一人傳虛，萬人傳實』，又何用我多說呢。 現在只用曹洞宗（Caodong，禪宗五家之一）的宗旨來辨別，就可以看出德山（Deshan，唐代禪宗大師）雪峰（Xuefeng，唐代禪宗大師）一派，不是洞宗（Dongzong，即曹洞宗）的眷屬。如雪峰存禪師，三次登上投子山（Touzi Mountain），九次登上洞山（Dongshan，唐代禪宗大師），機緣沒有相契合。擔任飯頭（負責煮飯的僧人）。一日在洞山淘米時，洞山偶然看見問他說：『淘砂去米，淘米去砂？』雪峯迴答說：『砂米一起去。』洞山說：『大眾吃什麼？』雪峰便把盆子翻了過來。洞山說：『據你所見，因緣不在這裡，應當去德山。』雪峰後來果然繼承了德山。根據這個公案，那麼兩家的宗旨，判然明白。如同嚐了一塊肉就知道鼎的味道，差異顯而易見。因為洞宗的宗旨，要有正偏相參，宛轉夾妙，而且說話忌諱說盡，機鋒貴在回互。如同金針玉線，去縫綴。
【English Translation】 English version: This is truly laughable. It's simply incomprehensible that in the world, when writing, there must be a request, where would such people come from, fabricating such false writings, carving such fake steles, hiding them in the royal palace, circulating them through the ages, and deceiving the world? What are they ultimately trying to achieve? Is it to gather people from the Mazu (Mazu, a Chan master of the Tang Dynasty) lineage into the Shitou (Shitou, a Chan master of the Tang Dynasty) lineage? What estrangement is there between them? Or is it to include people from the Shitou lineage into the Mazu genealogy? What closeness is there between them? Moreover, the Yunmen (Yunmen, Yunmen School) and Fayan (Fayan, Fayan School) schools have not had successors for a long time. The venerable elders of these two schools from the past to the present are all revered, who can be close or distant to them? It's simply a matter of examining their basis according to the facts, a matter of utmost fairness and justice. Furthermore, Abbot Sanyi uses twenty-five instances of opportunities and events from the Shitou lineage as evidence, comparing and examining them proportionally, to refute the nine instances of events and allusions from the Mazu lineage. In reality, the events of the Mazu lineage are clearly evident in the world, far more than just nine instances, but there is no time to copy and append them all. There is also no need to analyze these in detail. For example, when Daoyuan (Daoyuan, author of 'Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp') compiled the 'Records of the Transmission of the Lamp', he could not personally investigate, but entrusted others to collect chapters, inevitably leading to errors and omissions at the beginning, and naturally many confusions followed. As the saying goes, 'One person transmits falsehood, ten thousand transmit truth,' so what need is there for me to say more? Now, by simply distinguishing the tenets of the Caodong (Caodong, one of the five houses of Chan) school, it can be seen that the Deshan (Deshan, a Chan master of the Tang Dynasty) and Xuefeng (Xuefeng, a Chan master of the Tang Dynasty) lineage is not affiliated with the Dongzong (Dongzong, i.e., Caodong school). For example, Chan Master Xuefeng Cun ascended Touzi Mountain (Touzi Mountain) three times and Dongshan (Dongshan, a Chan master of the Tang Dynasty) nine times, but the opportunities did not align. He served as the cook (the monk in charge of cooking). One day, while Xuefeng was washing rice at Dongshan, Dongshan happened to see him and asked, 'Wash away the sand to get the rice, or wash away the rice to get the sand?' Xuefeng replied, 'Wash away the sand and rice together.' Dongshan said, 'What will the assembly eat?' Xuefeng then overturned the basin. Dongshan said, 'According to your understanding, the cause and condition are not here; you should go to Deshan.' Xuefeng later indeed succeeded Deshan. Based on this koan, the tenets of the two schools are clearly distinct. It's like tasting a piece of meat and knowing the flavor of the entire cauldron; the difference is obvious. Because the tenets of the Dongzong school require the interpenetration of the correct and the biased, subtle and roundabout, and speech should avoid being exhaustive, and the key lies in mutual exchange. It's like a golden needle and jade thread, going to sew.
來不墮偏枯而有端的也。所謂寶鏡澄明驗正偏。珠璣宛轉看兼到。如雪峰此段機緣。一語一機而無回互夾妙。故洞山不肯印證。以語脈不契其宗。所謂語脈不通非眷屬是也。其于德山門下。則一任掀翻聖凡。不落窠臼。施大機。發大用。更無留礙。既見兩家宗旨之攸異。則從上古人所定支派。確然不差。三宜輩。於此宗旨上。不能吐一辭。只虛爭名分為家翁。尋常一味粗心浮氣。講演經論為事。不知何年何日。忽得芒毫穿于金針之鼻。玉線入于機紐之樞。莫道余心粗莽好。
然則以宗旨驗之。龍潭信德山鑒雪峰存。非天王馬祖之派而何。且如此辨別宗旨。繇來尚矣。非特今日。既紹其宗。不以宗旨豎義。則為不知識法者懼。總屬亂統禪和。如麻似粟。更可笑者。如弁山傳燈世譜。浪公祖印圖。及遠門五燈續略。一皆私尊其所自之祖而顛倒其所續之書。蓋南嶽臨濟。從來在前。青原曹洞。自屬居后。今一旦列青原曹洞于南嶽臨濟之前。既背西天祖讖。更將千古聖賢。名位倒置。是猶以思孟駕于顏曾之上。其誰信之。不知傳燈錄所載法系長次渾融之未核。亦不知會元建宗立義之深旨已定。而欲續會元。乃反強飭其說。謂南嶽在六祖室中作侍者。故當在後。青原在六祖門內充首座。故當在前。如此評論。可發深笑。審
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 來處不落入偏頗或枯寂，而是有明確的目標。這就是所謂的『寶鏡澄明，檢驗正偏』，『珠璣宛轉，看顧兼到』。就像雪峰的這段機緣，一句話一個機鋒，沒有含糊不清或夾雜隱晦之處。所以洞山不肯印證，因為話語的脈絡不符合他的宗風。這就是所謂的『語脈不通，非眷屬』。至於德山門下，則完全是掀翻聖凡，不落俗套，施展大機用，發揮大作用，沒有任何阻礙。既然看到了兩家宗旨的差異，那麼從上古先人所確定的支派，確實沒有差錯。三宜這些人，在這個宗旨上，不能說出一句話，只是虛假地爭奪名分，自稱為家翁，平常總是粗心浮氣，以講解經論為事。不知道哪年哪月，才能忽然將毫毛穿過金針的鼻孔，將玉線放入機紐的關鍵之處。不要說我的心粗疏魯莽就好。 然而用宗旨來驗證，龍潭、信德山、雪峰都是繼承了德山的宗風，不是天王、馬祖的流派又是什麼呢？而且如此辨別宗旨，由來已久，並非只是今天才這樣。既然繼承了宗風，如果不以宗旨來樹立義理，那就是不瞭解佛法的人，令人擔憂。總而言之，都是些擾亂禪宗法統的和尚，多如麻粟。更可笑的是，像弁山《傳燈世譜》、浪公《祖印圖》、以及遠門《五燈續略》，都私自尊崇自己所出自的祖師，而顛倒了他們所續寫的書籍。南嶽、臨濟，從來都是在前，青原、曹洞，自然是居后。現在一旦將青原、曹洞排列在南嶽、臨濟之前，既違背了西天祖師的預言，更是將千古聖賢的名位顛倒。這就像用孟子、子思駕馭在顏回、曾參之上，有誰會相信呢？他們既不知道《傳燈錄》所記載的法系長幼順序是渾然融合而未經覈實的，也不知道《會元》建立宗派、樹立義理的深刻宗旨已經確定，卻想要續寫《會元》，反而強行改變其說法，說南嶽在六祖慧能的房間里做侍者，所以應當在后；青原在六祖門下擔任首座，所以應當在前。這樣的評論，真是可笑至極。仔細審察！
【English Translation】 English version: Coming without falling into bias or stagnation, but with a clear goal. This is what is meant by 'The precious mirror is clear and bright, examining what is right and wrong,' and 'The pearls are round and smooth, watching over everything.' Like this opportunity of Xuefeng (Snowy Peak), one word, one opportunity, without ambiguity or hidden obscurity. Therefore, Dongshan (Cave Mountain) was unwilling to endorse it, because the context of the words did not match his sect's style. This is what is meant by 'If the context of the words does not connect, they are not family.' As for the disciples of Deshan (Virtue Mountain), they completely overturn the sacred and the mundane, not falling into clichés, applying great opportunities and exerting great functions, without any hindrance. Since the differences between the two families' tenets are seen, then the branches determined by the ancient predecessors are indeed without error. People like Sanyi (Three Suitable) cannot utter a word on this tenet, only falsely vying for titles, calling themselves family elders, usually being careless and impetuous, taking lecturing on scriptures and treatises as their business. I don't know in what year or month they will suddenly be able to thread a fine hair through the eye of a golden needle, or insert a jade thread into the pivot of a machine. Don't say that my heart is rough and reckless and that's okay. However, verifying it with the tenets, Longtan (Dragon Pool), Xinde Shan (Faith Virtue Mountain), and Xuefeng (Snowy Peak) all inherited the style of Deshan (Virtue Mountain). What else could they be but the lineage of Tianwang (Heavenly King) and Mazu (Patriarch Ma)? Moreover, such discernment of tenets has been around for a long time, not just today. Since they inherited the tenets, if they do not establish principles based on the tenets, then they are people who do not understand the Dharma, which is worrying. In short, they are all monks who disrupt the Chan (Zen) lineage, as numerous as hemp and millet. Even more laughable are things like the 'Genealogy of the Transmission of the Lamp' by Bianshan (Cap Mountain), the 'Ancestral Seal Chart' by Langgong (Wave Public), and the 'Continued Outline of the Five Lamps' by Yuanmen (Distant Gate), all of which privately revere their own ancestral teachers and reverse the books they continued. Nanyue (South Mountain) and Linji (Linji), have always been in the front, while Qingyuan (Green Source) and Caodong (Caodong) naturally belong to the rear. Now, once Qingyuan (Green Source) and Caodong (Caodong) are placed before Nanyue (South Mountain) and Linji (Linji), they both violate the prophecies of the Western Heaven patriarchs and reverse the positions of the sages of the ages. This is like using Mencius and Zisi to ride above Yan Hui and Zeng Shen, who would believe it? They neither know that the order of seniority in the Dharma lineage recorded in the 'Transmission of the Lamp' is a unified and unverified whole, nor do they know that the profound purpose of establishing sects and establishing principles in the 'Huiyuan' has been determined, but they want to continue the 'Huiyuan', but instead forcibly change their statement, saying that Nanyue (South Mountain) served as an attendant in the room of the Sixth Patriarch Huineng (Wisdom Energy), so he should be in the rear; Qingyuan (Green Source) served as the head seat under the Sixth Patriarch, so he should be in the front. Such comments are extremely ridiculous. Examine carefully!
如是。則六祖在黃梅槽廠中春米。而神秀在堂中為導師。亦當六祖在後。而神秀在前。今神秀之名雖列在前。獨不見載為旁出另錄乎。又如坐脫立亡首座亦當在前。而得衣缽九峰侍者應須在後矣。不遵大川公制之典。特生偏頗之見。曷足怪乎。至於二株嫩桂久昌昌之讖。何不覓少林秘要一看。以知其屬誰耶。一味杜說。奚益於事。
又曇照臨終機緣與天王相合。便疑駁之。而不知從上先德。或在榻坐化。或吉祥而逝。相同處不一而多。總不之疑。獨於二老撒手相似。遽疑且謗。謂是後人扭捏耶。果如此。何事不可。而獨以曇照臨終之事。妄作天王行實乎。聽言當以理觀。況以時按之。曇照又在最後。寂音尊者一生任董狐之筆。既辨兩家宗派。刊之方冊載在藏中。又復囑侯公作僧寶傳序。則亦當刪去舊說。而不刪者。益知侯公見別書作文託詞之意。蓋尋常才士屬文借言。往往皆然。如海岸黃公作禪燈世譜序。謂壽昌是臨濟的血骨兒孫。豈黃公亦系壽昌之囑乎。此亦不推而明。又古之君子。如無盡張公。夏卿呂公。皆具宗門爪牙。即我圓悟祖大慧祖。悉推服其大手眼。三宜公輩。概貶為千古笑具。譏為矮人看戲。使盡未來際人。驚心駭目。貶駁先賢。得罪名教。安所逃哉。
五燈會元序。謂元朝至正間云壑公
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果這樣說成立，那麼六祖慧能在黃梅的槽廠里舂米，而神秀在寺堂里作為導師，就應該是六祖在後，而神秀在前了。現在神秀的名字雖然排在前面，但難道沒有看到他被記載為旁出，另行記錄嗎？又比如坐脫立亡的首座也應該排在前面，而得到衣缽的九峰侍者應該在後面了。不遵循大川禪師制定的典章制度，特別產生偏頗的見解，這有什麼奇怪的呢？至於『二株嫩桂久昌昌』的預言，為什麼不去少林寺的秘要中看一看，以瞭解它指的是誰呢？一味地胡亂說，對事情有什麼好處呢？ 又因為曇照臨終時的機緣與天王相似，就懷疑駁斥他。卻不知道從前的先德，有的在床上坐化，有的吉祥而逝，相同之處不止一處，卻都不懷疑。唯獨對兩位老和尚撒手人寰的方式相似，就立刻懷疑並且誹謗，說是後人捏造的嗎？如果真是這樣，什麼事情不可以捏造？為什麼單單拿曇照臨終的事情，妄作天王的事蹟呢？聽人說話應當用理智來觀察，何況還要用時間來驗證。曇照又在最後。寂音尊者一生擔任董狐的史官之筆，既辨別了兩家的宗派，刊印完成的書，記載在藏經中，又囑託侯公寫《僧寶傳》的序言，那麼也應當刪去舊的說法，而不刪去，更加知道侯公看到別的書籍，作文只是託詞而已。大概尋常的才子寫文章，借用言辭，往往都是這樣。比如海岸黃公寫《禪燈世譜》的序言，說壽昌是臨濟的血骨兒孫，難道黃公也是受壽昌的囑託嗎？這也不用推論就很明白了。還有古代的君子，如無盡張公、夏卿呂公，都具備宗門的手段，即使是我的圓悟祖師、大慧祖師，都推崇佩服他們的大手眼。三宜公之流，都被貶低為千古的笑柄，譏笑為矮人看戲，使盡未來世的人，驚心動魄。貶低駁斥先賢，得罪名教，哪裡能夠逃脫罪責呢？ 《五燈會元》序言中說，元朝至正年間，云壑公（Yun He Gong)
【English Translation】 English version: If this were the case, then Huineng (Huineng), the Sixth Patriarch, would be pounding rice in the mill at Huangmei (Huangmei), while Shenxiu (Shenxiu) would be the instructor in the hall. It would mean the Sixth Patriarch was behind, and Shenxiu was in front. Although Shenxiu's name is listed first now, haven't you seen that he is recorded as a collateral line, separately documented? Furthermore, the head monk who achieved 'sitting liberation' (zuo tuo li wang) should also be in front, while the attendant of Jiufeng (Jiufeng) who received the robe and bowl should be behind. To not follow the established rules of Great Master Dachuan (Dachuan), and to generate biased views, is that not strange? As for the prophecy of 'two tender osmanthus trees growing long and flourishing' (er zhu nen gui jiu chang chang), why not look at the secret teachings of Shaolin (Shaolin) to understand who it refers to? To just speak wildly, what good does it do? Furthermore, because the circumstances of Tanzhao's (Tanzhao) death coincided with the Heavenly King (Tian Wang), you suspect and refute him. Yet you don't know that among the virtuous predecessors, some passed away sitting on their beds, others passed away auspiciously. There are many similarities, yet you don't doubt them. Only when the manner of death of these two old monks is similar do you immediately suspect and slander, saying it was fabricated by later generations? If that were the case, what couldn't be fabricated? Why single out the circumstances of Tanzhao's death to falsely attribute the deeds of the Heavenly King? When listening to words, one should observe with reason, and moreover, examine them with time. Tanzhao was also the last. Venerable Jiyin (Jiyin) served as the historian's pen of Dong Hu (Dong Hu) his entire life, distinguishing the lineages of both schools, publishing them in books, and recording them in the Tripitaka. He also entrusted Lord Hou (Hou Gong) to write the preface to the 'Biographies of Sangha Treasures' (Seng Bao Zhuan), so the old sayings should also be deleted. The fact that they were not deleted further shows that Lord Hou saw that the writing in other books was just a pretext. Generally, ordinary talented scholars borrow words when writing, and this is often the case. For example, Huang Gong (Huang Gong) of the Coast wrote the preface to the 'Lineage of Zen Lamps' (Chan Deng Shi Pu), saying that Shouchang (Shouchang) was a blood descendant of Linji (Linji). Was Huang Gong also entrusted by Shouchang? This is clear without further deduction. Moreover, ancient gentlemen, such as Lord Zhang Wujin (Zhang Wujin), and Lord Lu Xiaqing (Lu Xiaqing), all possessed the means of the Zen school. Even my Patriarch Yuanwu (Yuanwu) and Patriarch Dahui (Dahui) all admired their great vision and skill. The likes of Lord Sanyi (Sanyi) were all denigrated as laughingstocks for all time, ridiculed as dwarfs watching a play, shocking people for all future ages. To denigrate and refute virtuous predecessors, offending the teachings and principles, where can one escape blame? The preface to the 'Compendium of Five Lamps' (Wu Deng Hui Yuan) says that during the Zhizheng (Zhizheng) period of the Yuan Dynasty, Master Yunhe (Yunhe)
作心燈錄。特援丘玄素所制塔銘以龍潭信出馬祖下。致或人阻抑不大傳於世。識者惜焉。嗟乎奇哉。云壑之作心燈。先得我心。余今詳定嚴統。亦合先轍。彼時即有或人阻之不行。而今亦有三宜輩共攻力拒。則淺見之人。古今皆有。今但據藏典及眾說彌多。則難逃公論。前所謂久而論定者。亦頗顯微闡幽發前人未發之旨。庶乎理長義就。當有明哲知音。共扶南董。何愁乎世上之不行耶。
據伊正訛中。謂夫符載碑云。靈鑒請居者。非馬祖下之天王。乃石頭下之天皇。以此按之。可見有一天王。非天皇之謂。豈曰竟無天王之云乎。天皇下慧真幽閑文賁三人。一曰一世俱嗣天皇。一曰三世相繼便絕。此亦有彷彿處。或三世同時。公孫一堂。常有是事。如密先師在時。亦有三世同闡化道。二者之間。記筆不定。達觀穎舉丘碑時。雖與明教修正宗記同。其實省郡。彼此相隔最遠。況明教不過因天臺出傳法藏。以辟達磨一宗。亟亟修此記以救其害。而無暇遠討爾。嚴統凡例云。評唱之儔。未明本分。皆出自湛和尚及壽昌博山三大老之言。蓋常檢點其不能提持本分。非一朝夕之辭。蓋人所共知。圓悟雖有碧巖集行世。亦一方便為人處。但不談心說性。引舉亦不支離。且圓卓活潑。此亦湛老和尚及先師所嘗言者。幸而不曾教授
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 我創作了《心燈錄》。特別引用丘玄素所撰寫的塔銘，以證明龍潭信出自馬祖門下。因此，有些人阻撓壓制，以致此書未能廣泛流傳於世。有識之士對此感到惋惜。唉，真是奇妙啊！云壑所作的《心燈》，先符合了我的心意。我如今詳細審定並加以嚴謹的統理，也符合前人的做法。那時就有人阻撓，使之無法推行，而現在也有像三宜這樣的人共同攻擊、極力抵制。可見淺薄之見的人，古往今來都有。現在我只是根據藏經和眾多的說法，更加廣泛地加以論證，那麼就難以逃脫公正的評論。前面所說的經過長久時間才能論定的，也頗能顯現精微、闡發幽深，闡明前人未曾闡發的宗旨。或許道理長存，意義成就，應當有明智的知音，共同扶持南宗的董氏，何愁此書不能在世上推行呢？
根據伊正訛中的說法，符載碑文中說：『靈鑒請居者』，不是馬祖門下的天王，而是石頭門下的天皇。以此來考察，可見確實有一位天王，而不是天皇。難道能說竟然沒有天王這種說法嗎？天皇門下有慧真、幽閑、文賁三人。有的說一代就繼承了天皇的法脈，有的說三代相繼就斷絕了。這也有相似之處。或許三世同時存在，公孫一堂，常常有這樣的事情。就像密先師在世時，也有三世同時闡揚教化。這兩者之間，記載筆法不定。達觀穎舉丘碑時，雖然與明教修正宗記相同，但實際上省郡之間，彼此相隔最遠。況且明教不過是因為天臺宗傳出法藏，爲了駁斥達磨一宗，急切地修訂此記來挽救其弊端，而沒有時間去遠方考證罷了。嚴統凡例說，評唱之輩，不明白本分，都出自湛和尚及壽昌博山三大老的言論。大概是常常檢查他們不能提持本分，不是一朝一夕的說法，這是人們都知道的。圓悟雖然有《碧巖集》流傳於世，也是一種方便為人處世的方法。只是不談心說性，引用的事例也不支離破碎。而且圓融、卓絕、活潑，這也是湛老和尚及先師曾經說過的。幸運的是，我沒有教授過他。
【English Translation】 English version: I composed the 'Record of the Mind Lamp'. I especially cited the epitaph written by Qiu Xuansu to prove that Longtan Xin came from the lineage of Mazu (Master Ma, 709-788). Therefore, some people obstructed and suppressed it, so that this book could not be widely circulated in the world. Those with knowledge regret this. Alas, how wonderful! The 'Mind Lamp' written by Yunhe first conformed to my heart. I am now carefully reviewing and rigorously managing it, which also conforms to the practices of the predecessors. At that time, some people obstructed it, making it impossible to promote, and now there are people like Sanyi who jointly attack and resist it. It can be seen that people with shallow views have existed in ancient and modern times. Now I am only based on the Tripitaka and numerous sayings, and more extensively demonstrate it, then it will be difficult to escape public opinion. What was said before, that it can only be determined after a long time, can also quite reveal the subtle, elucidate the profound, and clarify the purpose that the predecessors have not clarified. Perhaps the truth will last, the meaning will be achieved, and there should be wise confidants who will jointly support the Dong family of the Southern School, why worry that this book cannot be promoted in the world?
According to Yi Zheng's 'Correction of Errors', the inscription on Fu Zai's stele says: 'The one who asked Lingjian to reside is not the Heavenly King of Mazu's lineage, but the Heavenly Emperor of Shitou's lineage.' Examining this, it can be seen that there is indeed a Heavenly King, not a Heavenly Emperor. How can it be said that there is no such thing as a Heavenly King? Under the Heavenly Emperor are three people: Huizhen, Youxian, and Wenben. Some say that one generation inherited the Heavenly Emperor's Dharma lineage, and some say that it was cut off after three generations. This also has similarities. Perhaps the three generations existed at the same time, like Gongsun Yitang, such things often happen. Just like when the late Master Mi was alive, there were also three generations who simultaneously expounded the teachings. Between these two, the writing style is uncertain. When Daguan Yingju wrote Qiu's stele, although it was the same as the Mingjiao's 'Revised Record of the Sect', in fact, the provinces and counties were the farthest apart from each other. Moreover, Mingjiao only because the Tiantai School transmitted the Dharma Treasury, in order to refute the Daruma School (Bodhidharma's school), eagerly revised this record to save its drawbacks, and did not have time to investigate from afar. The general rules of Yantong say that those who comment and criticize do not understand their fundamental duty, all come from the words of Zen Master Zhan and the three great elders of Shouchang Boshan. It is probably because they often check that they cannot uphold their fundamental duty, it is not a saying of one morning or evening, this is what people know. Although Yuanwu (Wuzu Fayan, 1063-1135) has the 'Blue Cliff Record' circulating in the world, it is also a convenient way to deal with people. It's just that he doesn't talk about mind and nature, and the examples he cites are not disjointed. Moreover, he is harmonious, outstanding, and lively, this is also what Zen Master Zhan and the late Master have said. Fortunately, I have not taught him.
子孫。習熟作講席中物。大慧亦曾劈毀其板。恐後人落其窠臼。誠為幾先之燭。若萬松等評唱。則未免多涉教義心性。支離汗漫。亦先人所嘗言。而況又作講席提唱相傳受哉。昔人謂洞下一宗。至講評唱一大變矣。汝遠門必以講背評唱傳帕為的確真傳。又憎人據公談論。則少林一派下。如萬松老宿所載。已有一百二十人。無言老宿親授。亦幾百餘人。其他相傳。共計何止千數。汝必執為諦當。則當以此干數人。刻入續略。汝今不刻者。亦知汝有所料簡。兼具藻鑒分明得湛老和尚傑出偉人。承紹其一線之脈。復振洞上之宗。則從前相繼之人。縱然如何。亦聽人品量。又奚礙於事乎。余昔親聆老人之言曰。自師大覺以上數代。俱是提評唱傳授者。於我分中。既獲開悟。必假師承印證。故不忽其授受名目。以表法系世次之來歷。免玄䇿所謂無師自悟。盡屬天然外道即付我手卷中機緣語句。亦是老僧寫就。呈送大覺和尚。遂命謄清付我。蓋言其不工於筆墨故也。當時老人直心直行。太公之言。如雷灌人耳目。誰不共聞。故凡紀行由歷履。須憑實述出。才是真正知識。稍有裝點。便屬虛偽。然則遠門又何怪予述老人平素之言以入凡例也。且汝不知修續五燈。佛祖慧命。法門關係。於前人往行。語言出載有成錄刊行者。方可譜入燈
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 子孫們啊，（你們）習慣於把（這些東西）當作講席中的內容。（大）慧杲禪師也曾經劈毀過（這些評唱的）木板，（這是）恐怕後人落入（評唱的）窠臼。這實在是預見到事物發展先兆的明智之舉。如果像萬松行秀等人那樣評唱，那就未免過多地涉及教義心性，（內容）支離破碎，漫無邊際。這也是先輩們曾經說過的話。更何況又把（這些東西）當作講席內容，提倡傳授呢？ 過去的人說，洞下宗（曹洞宗）到了講經評唱就發生了很大的改變。你（作為）遠門（湛然圓澄的弟子），必定認為講經、背誦、評唱、傳法衣（是）確鑿無疑的真傳，又憎恨別人依據公理談論。那麼少林一派（的傳承），就像萬松老宿所記載的，已經有一百二十人，無言老宿親自傳授的，也差不多有幾百人，其他輾轉相傳的，總共算起來何止千數。你必定認為（這些）是真理，那麼就應當把這幾千人刻入《續略》（《續傳燈錄》）。你現在不刻入，也是知道你有所選擇。兼具鑑別能力，分明地知道湛老和尚（湛然圓澄）是傑出偉人，繼承紹續了（曹洞宗）一線命脈，復興了洞上宗。那麼從前相繼之人，縱然如何，也聽憑人品評衡量，又有什麼妨礙呢？ 我過去親自聽湛然老人說過：『自從師祖大覺禪師以上數代，都是提倡評唱傳授的人。在我這裡，既然已經開悟，必須藉助師承印證，所以不敢忽略其授受的名目，以此表明法系世次的來歷，避免玄策所說的『無師自悟，盡屬天然外道』。』即使是付給我的手卷中的機緣語句，也是老僧寫好，呈送給大覺和尚，於是（大覺和尚）命令謄寫清楚交付給我，（湛然老人）是說自己不擅長筆墨的緣故啊。當時湛然老人直心直行，（他的）話，如同雷聲灌入人的耳目，誰沒有一起聽到？所以凡是記載行由經歷，必須憑據事實陳述出來，才是真正的知識，稍微有所裝飾，就屬於虛偽。既然如此，遠門你又何必怪我陳述湛然老人平素的話語來寫入凡例呢？ 況且你不知道續修《五燈會元》，關係到佛祖慧命，法門興衰。對於前人往昔的言行，已經有記載完成的書刊行於世的，才可以編入燈錄。
【English Translation】 English version: Descendants, (you) are accustomed to treating (these things) as content for lectures. Great Master Dahui (Zonggao) once even chopped up (these commentaries') wooden boards, fearing that later generations would fall into their trap. This was truly a wise move that foresaw the signs of things to come. If one were to comment and chant like Wan Song Xing Xiu and others, then it would inevitably involve too much doctrine and mind-nature, (the content) fragmented and boundless. This is also what the predecessors once said. Moreover, how much more so to treat (these things) as lecture content, advocating transmission? People of the past said that the Dongxia Sect (Caodong Sect) underwent a great change when it came to lecturing and commenting. You (as) Yuanmen (a disciple of Zhanran Yuancheng), must believe that lecturing, reciting, commenting, and transmitting the Dharma robe (are) undoubtedly the true transmission, and hate others who discuss based on public principles. Then the lineage of Shaolin, as recorded by Elder Wan Song, already has one hundred and twenty people. Elder Wuyan personally transmitted to nearly several hundred people, and others transmitted in turn, totaling no less than thousands. You must believe that (these) are the truth, then you should engrave these thousands of people into the 'Continued Outline' ('Continued Records of the Transmission of the Lamp'). The fact that you do not engrave them now also shows that you have made some choices. Possessing discernment, you clearly know that Venerable Zhan Lao (Zhanran Yuancheng) is an outstanding great man, inheriting and continuing the lifeline of (the Caodong Sect), and reviving the Dongshang Sect. Then, no matter what the people who succeeded in the past were like, let people evaluate and measure them, what harm is there? I once personally heard Elder Zhanran say: 'Since the generations above Grandmaster Dajue, they have all been people who advocated commenting and chanting transmission. In my case, since I have already attained enlightenment, I must rely on the seal of approval from the teacher, so I dare not neglect the titles of transmission and reception, in order to show the origin of the Dharma lineage and the order of generations, and avoid what Xuan Ce said, 'Self-enlightenment without a teacher all belongs to naturalistic heretics.' Even the statements of opportunity in the hand scroll given to me were written by the old monk and presented to Grandmaster Dajue, who then ordered them to be copied clearly and given to me. (Elder Zhanran) said that it was because he was not good at writing.' At that time, Elder Zhanran was straightforward and honest, (his) words, like thunder, poured into people's ears and eyes, who did not hear them together? Therefore, whenever recording the journey and experience, one must state the facts based on the truth, that is true knowledge, if there is any embellishment, it belongs to falsehood. Since this is the case, Yuanmen, why do you blame me for stating Elder Zhanran's usual words to be included in the general rules? Moreover, you do not know that continuing to compile the 'Five Lamps Gathered,' is related to the Buddha's wisdom-life and the rise and fall of the Dharma gate. For the past words and deeds of predecessors, those that have been recorded in books and published in the world can be included in the lamp records.
內。若殘言剩語。片羽偶現。豈可輕易修集。惹今時人效顰。不可與他世楷式。蓋此世禪者行腳。誰不有一冊兩冊。杜臆之談。都可修入傳燈。則禪籍雜糅。從此創始。抑見汝不能揣時度務。確量今古矣。且此書不比世間人徴修詩詞歌賦。東取西拾。不論根據。匯成帙部。此固無怪。然汝所修續略。不特未辨金鍮。而且無擇臧否。如曇茂先雖付囑。后是還俗之僧。即車溪一脈久絕。予兩參古卓備悉因由。汝將遙認數人。盡修牒內。至於或剽或竊蕪穢煩冗。亦訂派入下。何以感動世人之景仰。然如是製作。僅為外史小言。更公售于楞嚴坊間。我亦何所咎而掩蔽之。但睹此紊亂。用是精嚴氾濫。以博訂其從前統系。明若大圓鏡。妍媸立辨。較汝所續之書。不啻淵天。正所謂仁者見之謂之仁。知者見之謂之知。彼此雖然相隔。其實亦有相須甚殷之用。嘆汝無能賞鑑取益。反遽哆口磨滅。呵我為外道魔王。夫此二種名義。汝尚茫然未諳。我不惜一筆。與汝註明。夫外道者。佛在世時。當機對辨。知其無本可據。不明唯心。向外別求。故輒指是外道。若世上尋常人。將一分外之語加之。是魔是外。分明不具正遍知。何稱曰佛。蓋聖凡平等故也。至於魔王。據華嚴經載七地菩薩。才能現魔。又如維摩經云。十方魔王。皆住于不思議
境界。據汝如此譭謗老僧。其實讚歎老僧不少也。又即以近理言之魔者磨也。磨滅人善根。毀壞人佛性。老僧承先師付囑以來。主盟斯宗。已二十餘年。海內誰不知予造詣識見為若何。曾有人謂我磨滅人善根。破敗人佛性否。設或有之。亦是汝邪見之儔。天下人既俱無妄說。獨待汝一後生晚輩。呵叱是外道魔王。想亦難逃天下公論。自有人痛罵汝在。何用老僧紙筆。與汝頡頏哉。只如大慧杲。手眼圓明。波瀾闊大。雖然呵叱諸方。不曾明指指何人屬魔。何人屬外汝奚人斯。放肆無忌。如斯之甚也。即我或形諸紙筆。或出諸語言。句句皆尊崇湛老和尚。以我昔時曾皈依起名。汝師是我師弟。汝今是我師侄。應當惡口犯上乎。異日到雲門塔上。以名分處責汝不晚也。閱注四家頌。昔聞之先師云。因洞下人每譏濟宗儱侗。不知差別名義。故著是書。以服其心。並不曾傳授人作講席套耳。又以今時不曾經名師印證。而僭竊公符者。遙比古時興化之嗣臨濟。報本之嗣黃龍。曷不悉興化在臨濟作侍者。參叩日久。後於大覺痛棒下。會得臨濟吃三頓棒底道理。此宛如臨濟于黃檗受棒而後得大愚點發。似同一轍。豈比今人毫無干涉。遽認以為師印者。可同年而共語耶。只如當時黃龍法席人盛。于報本先有記莂。而後忘之。非報本于黃龍
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：境界。憑你這樣譭謗老僧，其實也讚歎老僧不少啊。再就近理來說，魔就是磨，磨滅人的善根，毀壞人的佛性。老僧我自從秉承先師的囑託以來，主持這個宗派已經二十多年了。天下有誰不知道我的造詣和見識如何？曾有人說我磨滅人的善根，破壞人的佛性嗎？即使有，也是你這種邪見之徒。天下人都不會胡說，唯獨等你這個後生晚輩，呵斥我是外道魔王，想必也難逃天下人的公論，自然有人痛罵你。哪裡用得著老僧我動用紙筆，與你爭論呢？就像大慧杲（Dahui Gao，禪宗大師），手眼圓明，氣魄宏大，雖然呵斥各方，卻不曾明確指明誰是魔，誰是外道。你又是什麼人，如此放肆無忌，太過分了！即使我有時形諸紙筆，或出於言語，句句都尊崇湛老和尚（Zhan Lao Heshang，一位受尊敬的僧人），因為我昔日曾皈依他並由他起名。你師父是我的師弟，你現在是我的師侄，難道應當惡語犯上嗎？將來到了雲門塔（Yunmen Pagoda，一座塔的名字）上，以名分來責問你也不晚。閱讀註解四家頌（Sijia Song，四位禪宗大師的頌詩），以前聽先師說，因為洞下宗（Dongxia School，禪宗的一個分支）的人經常譏笑濟宗（Ji School，禪宗的另一個分支）的儱侗（lǒng dòng，含糊不清），不瞭解差別名義，所以寫了這本書，用來使他們信服，並不曾傳授人用來作為講席的套話。再說現在那些沒有經過名師印證，就僭越使用公符的人，遙比古時候興化（Xinghua，一位禪宗大師）嗣臨濟（Linji，一位禪宗大師），報本（Baoben，一位禪宗大師）嗣黃龍（Huanglong，一位禪宗大師），為什麼不說興化在臨濟那裡做侍者，參叩日久，後來在大覺（Dajue，一位禪宗大師）的痛棒下，會得臨濟吃三頓棒的道理。這宛如臨濟在黃檗（Huangbo，一位禪宗大師）那裡受棒，然後得到大愚（Dayu，一位禪宗大師）的點撥，似乎是同一途徑。哪裡像現在的人毫無干涉，就遽然認為師父印可了自己？可以同年而語嗎？就像當時黃龍法席人盛，對於報本先有記莂（jì bié，預先的認可），然後忘記了，不是報本在黃龍 English version: Realm. According to your slander of this old monk, you are actually praising this old monk quite a bit. Furthermore, to speak reasonably, a 'demon' (魔, mó) is something that 'grinds' (磨, mó), grinding away people's roots of goodness and destroying their Buddha-nature. Since I, this old monk, received the entrustment of my late teacher, I have been leading this school for more than twenty years. Who in the country does not know what my attainments and insights are like? Has anyone ever said that I grind away people's roots of goodness or destroy their Buddha-nature? Even if there were, they would be of your kind of heretical views. Everyone in the world would not speak nonsense, only waiting for you, a younger generation, to scold me as a heretical demon king. I think it will be difficult to escape the public opinion of the world, and someone will naturally scold you severely. Why should I, this old monk, use paper and pen to argue with you? Just like Dahui Gao (大慧杲, Dahui Gao, a Chan master), his hands and eyes were clear and bright, and his spirit was broad and vast. Although he scolded various parties, he never explicitly pointed out who belonged to the demons and who belonged to the heretics. Who are you to be so presumptuous and unrestrained, so excessive! Even if I sometimes express myself in writing or in speech, every sentence respects the old monk Zhan (湛老和尚, Zhan Lao Heshang, a respected monk), because I once took refuge in him and was given a name by him. Your teacher is my junior brother, and you are now my grand-nephew. Should you be speaking abusively and offending your superior? When you arrive at the Yunmen Pagoda (雲門塔, Yunmen Pagoda, the name of a pagoda) in the future, it will not be too late to question you based on your position. Reading the Annotations on the Four Masters' Verses (四家頌, Sijia Song, verses by four Chan masters), I once heard my late teacher say that because the people of the Dongxia School (洞下宗, Dongxia School, a branch of Chan Buddhism) often ridiculed the Ji School (濟宗, Ji School, another branch of Chan Buddhism) for being vague and unclear, not understanding the differences in names and meanings, he wrote this book to convince them, and he never taught it to people as a set of formulas for lectures. Furthermore, those who now have not been certified by famous teachers but presumptuously use public seals are remotely compared to Xinghua (興化, Xinghua, a Chan master) succeeding Linji (臨濟, Linji, a Chan master) in ancient times, and Baoben (報本, Baoben, a Chan master) succeeding Huanglong (黃龍, Huanglong, a Chan master). Why not say that Xinghua served as an attendant to Linji, consulted him for a long time, and later, under Dajue's (大覺, Dajue, a Chan master) painful stick, understood the reason why Linji received three blows? This is just like Linji receiving blows from Huangbo (黃檗, Huangbo, a Chan master) and then being enlightened by Dayu (大愚, Dayu, a Chan master), seemingly the same path. How can it be compared to people today who have no involvement and immediately think that their teacher has certified them? Can they be spoken of in the same breath? Just like when Huanglong's Dharma seat was flourishing, there was a prior recognition (記莂, jì bié, prior recognition) of Baoben, and then it was forgotten, it was not that Baoben was at Huanglong's
【English Translation】 Realm. According to your slander of this old monk, you are actually praising this old monk quite a bit. Furthermore, to speak reasonably, a 'demon' (魔, mó) is something that 'grinds' (磨, mó), grinding away people's roots of goodness and destroying their Buddha-nature. Since I, this old monk, received the entrustment of my late teacher, I have been leading this school for more than twenty years. Who in the country does not know what my attainments and insights are like? Has anyone ever said that I grind away people's roots of goodness or destroy their Buddha-nature? Even if there were, they would be of your kind of heretical views. Everyone in the world would not speak nonsense, only waiting for you, a younger generation, to scold me as a heretical demon king. I think it will be difficult to escape the public opinion of the world, and someone will naturally scold you severely. Why should I, this old monk, use paper and pen to argue with you? Just like Dahui Gao (Dahui Gao, a Chan master), his hands and eyes were clear and bright, and his spirit was broad and vast. Although he scolded various parties, he never explicitly pointed out who belonged to the demons and who belonged to the heretics. Who are you to be so presumptuous and unrestrained, so excessive! Even if I sometimes express myself in writing or in speech, every sentence respects the old monk Zhan (Zhan Lao Heshang, a respected monk), because I once took refuge in him and was given a name by him. Your teacher is my junior brother, and you are now my grand-nephew. Should you be speaking abusively and offending your superior? When you arrive at the Yunmen Pagoda (Yunmen Pagoda, the name of a pagoda) in the future, it will not be too late to question you based on your position. Reading the Annotations on the Four Masters' Verses (Sijia Song, verses by four Chan masters), I once heard my late teacher say that because the people of the Dongxia School (Dongxia School, a branch of Chan Buddhism) often ridiculed the Ji School (Ji School, another branch of Chan Buddhism) for being vague and unclear, not understanding the differences in names and meanings, he wrote this book to convince them, and he never taught it to people as a set of formulas for lectures. Furthermore, those who now have not been certified by famous teachers but presumptuously use public seals are remotely compared to Xinghua (Xinghua, a Chan master) succeeding Linji (Linji, a Chan master) in ancient times, and Baoben (Baoben, a Chan master) succeeding Huanglong (Huanglong, a Chan master). Why not say that Xinghua served as an attendant to Linji, consulted him for a long time, and later, under Dajue's (Dajue, a Chan master) painful stick, understood the reason why Linji received three blows? This is just like Linji receiving blows from Huangbo (Huangbo, a Chan master) and then being enlightened by Dayu (Dayu, a Chan master), seemingly the same path. How can it be compared to people today who have no involvement and immediately think that their teacher has certified them? Can they be spoken of in the same breath? Just like when Huanglong's Dharma seat was flourishing, there was a prior recognition (jì bié, prior recognition) of Baoben, and then it was forgotten, it was not that Baoben was at Huanglong's
。未曾得旨。乃今之來見也。漸源之於石霜。先亦已中其毒。后乃發覺而嗣之。乃不忘其本如此。我幻師翁。久于笑巖座前。曾有機緣語句源流。並一笠之授。以表師印。何昧心佯而不識乎。海舟慈一謂常熟錢氏。一謂蜀中人。乃集者之訛。非源流有差也。又以會元第七卷辨注一篇。系元至正間添入。此說並無出載。揣度之言。誠不足信。黃公明示一張。及集生余公致黃公書牘。當時先師密老人曾酬辨已詳。及后王大含亦以宗旨深論。茲不必再理此葛藤可也。亦謂余修集嚴統。乃管他家宗派。是非短長。咸責余為多事。不知此書之修。固余素志。因時勢多故。未遑卒業。茲因遠門續略書出。多顛倒從上聖賢。以累及我宗。故不得已。亟為清楚。豈好為多事歟。百愚闢謬一冊。概屬莽蕩粗浮。不足經眼。故不以一言及之。大抵顯聖諸昆仲輩。全不知予一片好心。於此書中。歷敘洞上一支。人名世次。載之不朽。而十六位語錄雖因素不曾見。無獲刊入。其實宗譜已成金石。將來曷能移易其一絲哉。此即余素常所積之公心也。不達此意。反左袒捏根據覺浪公。受其搖惑。借用筆鋒相觸。多而更廣。將俗事比之。以金助鍮。抑不自揣其甚而且錯矣。更譏余以名世事蹟。自編位次。蓋遠門續略中。亦曾修入。何況緝續門人。得無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 未曾得到允許，所以現在才來拜見您。漸源禪師在石霜禪師處，起初也已中了石霜的禪毒，後來才發覺並繼承了他的衣缽。他不忘根本，就是這樣。我的幻師翁，長久在笑巖座前，曾有機緣領悟語句的源流，並接受了一笠的授予，以表明師父的印可。為何要昧著良心假裝不認識呢？海舟慈一說常熟錢氏，又說蜀中人，是收集者搞錯了，並非源流有差別。又說會元第七卷辨注一篇，是元朝至正年間添入的，這種說法沒有任何依據，只是揣測之言，實在不足相信。黃公明確地展示了一張，以及集生余公致黃公的書信，當時先師密老人曾詳細地酬答辯論過，之後王大含也以宗旨進行了深入的討論。現在不必再理會這些糾葛了。又說我修訂集嚴統，是管他家宗派的是非長短，都責怪我多事。不知道此書的修訂，本來就是我的夙願，因為時局多變，沒有來得及完成。現在因為遠門續略書出版，很多地方顛倒了從前的聖賢，以至於牽連到我宗，所以不得已，趕緊加以澄清。難道是喜歡多事嗎？百愚闢謬一冊，大概都是些粗疏浮躁的東西，不值得一看，所以不屑一顧。大抵顯聖諸位昆仲等人，完全不瞭解我一片好心。在這本書中，歷歷敘述了洞上一支的人名世次，記載下來使其不朽。而十六位語錄雖然因為向來沒有見過，無法刊入。其實宗譜已經像金石一樣牢固，將來怎麼能移動改變它一絲一毫呢？這就是我平時所積累的公心啊。不理解這個意思，反而偏袒捏造，根據覺浪公的說法，受到他的迷惑，借用筆鋒來觸犯，而且越來越多，將俗事與之相比，用銅來冒充金子，難道不自己衡量一下，這樣做太過分而且錯誤了嗎？更譏諷我用名世事蹟，自己編排位次。大概遠門續略中，也曾修訂收入。何況緝續門人，難道沒有 English version: Having not received prior permission, I come to see you now. Zen Master Jian Yuan, at Shi Shuang's place, was initially poisoned by Shi Shuang's Zen poison, and later realized it and inherited his mantle. He did not forget his roots, that's how it is. My Illusion Master Weng, for a long time before Xiao Yan's seat, had the opportunity to understand the origin and flow of the phrases, and received the granting of a bamboo hat to signify the master's approval. Why feign ignorance against your conscience? Hai Zhou Ci Yi said that Changshu Qian's family, and also said that people from Sichuan, are mistakes made by the collectors, not differences in origin and flow. Also, saying that the commentary and annotation in the seventh volume of Hui Yuan was added during the Zhi Zheng period of the Yuan Dynasty, this statement has no basis, it's just speculation, and is really not credible. Huang Gong clearly showed a Zhang, and the letters from Ji Sheng Yu Gong to Huang Gong. At that time, the late Master Mi Lao had responded and debated in detail, and later Wang Da Han also had in-depth discussions on the principles. There is no need to pay attention to these entanglements now. Also, saying that I revised Ji Yan Tong, is minding other people's sectarian affairs, and blaming me for being meddlesome. Not knowing that the revision of this book was originally my long-cherished wish, but because of the changing times, I didn't have time to complete it. Now, because the book 'Yuan Men Xu Lue' has been published, many places have reversed the former sages, to the point of implicating my sect, so I had no choice but to quickly clarify it. Is it that I like to be meddlesome? The book 'Bai Yu Pi Miu' is probably all rough and superficial things, not worth reading, so I don't bother with it. Generally, the brothers of Xian Sheng and others, completely do not understand my good intentions. In this book, I have clearly narrated the names and generations of the Dongshan branch, recording them to make them immortal. And although the sixteen recorded sayings have never been seen, they cannot be included. In fact, the genealogy is already as solid as gold and stone, how can it be moved or changed in the slightest in the future? This is the impartiality that I have accumulated in my daily life. Not understanding this meaning, but instead favoring fabrications, based on the words of Jue Lang Gong, being confused by him, using the pen to offend, and more and more, comparing worldly affairs to it, using brass to impersonate gold, don't you measure yourself, isn't doing this too much and wrong? Even mocking me for using famous worldly deeds to arrange the order myself. Probably in 'Yuan Men Xu Lue', it was also revised and included. Moreover, the disciples who continued the compilation, wouldn't they have
【English Translation】 English version: Having not received prior permission, I come to see you now. Zen Master Jian Yuan (Jian Yuan Chanshi), at Shi Shuang's (Shi Shuang) place, was initially poisoned by Shi Shuang's Zen poison, and later realized it and inherited his mantle. He did not forget his roots, that's how it is. My Illusion Master Weng (Huan Shi Weng), for a long time before Xiao Yan's (Xiao Yan) seat, had the opportunity to understand the origin and flow of the phrases, and received the granting of a bamboo hat to signify the master's approval. Why feign ignorance against your conscience? Hai Zhou Ci Yi (Hai Zhou Ci Yi) said that Changshu Qian's (Changshu Qian) family, and also said that people from Sichuan, are mistakes made by the collectors, not differences in origin and flow. Also, saying that the commentary and annotation in the seventh volume of Hui Yuan (Hui Yuan) was added during the Zhi Zheng (Zhi Zheng) period of the Yuan Dynasty, this statement has no basis, it's just speculation, and is really not credible. Huang Gong (Huang Gong) clearly showed a Zhang, and the letters from Ji Sheng Yu Gong (Ji Sheng Yu Gong) to Huang Gong. At that time, the late Master Mi Lao (Mi Lao) had responded and debated in detail, and later Wang Da Han (Wang Da Han) also had in-depth discussions on the principles. There is no need to pay attention to these entanglements now. Also, saying that I revised Ji Yan Tong (Ji Yan Tong), is minding other people's sectarian affairs, and blaming me for being meddlesome. Not knowing that the revision of this book was originally my long-cherished wish, but because of the changing times, I didn't have time to complete it. Now, because the book 'Yuan Men Xu Lue' (Yuan Men Xu Lue) has been published, many places have reversed the former sages, to the point of implicating my sect, so I had no choice but to quickly clarify it. Is it that I like to be meddlesome? The book 'Bai Yu Pi Miu' (Bai Yu Pi Miu) is probably all rough and superficial things, not worth reading, so I don't bother with it. Generally, the brothers of Xian Sheng (Xian Sheng) and others, completely do not understand my good intentions. In this book, I have clearly narrated the names and generations of the Dongshan (Dongshan) branch, recording them to make them immortal. And although the sixteen recorded sayings have never been seen, they cannot be included. In fact, the genealogy is already as solid as gold and stone, how can it be moved or changed in the slightest in the future? This is the impartiality that I have accumulated in my daily life. Not understanding this meaning, but instead favoring fabrications, based on the words of Jue Lang Gong (Jue Lang Gong), being confused by him, using the pen to offend, and more and more, comparing worldly affairs to it, using brass to impersonate gold, don't you measure yourself, isn't doing this too much and wrong? Even mocking me for using famous worldly deeds to arrange the order myself. Probably in 'Yuan Men Xu Lue', it was also revised and included. Moreover, the disciples who continued the compilation, wouldn't they have
紀載。固是於我無與。然子輿著孟子。見知自任。馬遷修史記。自序頗雄。意在斯乎。人言何恤。固難為淺見寡聞道也。祁王及邢三位居士。因甚隨遠門輩。饃糊眼目。為作序文。全不知世外人著書立言。只闡明佛法禪道為事。於世法國紀。毫不相干。何得以弒君父世諦慘毒之言。用傷風化。學道之人。乃如是耶。今也老朽以兩宗支派。引證辨解。孰真孰偽。各有根據。不較自明。不彰自著。始見老朽素非鹵莽之人。然則滿篇慘毒之言。三位居士。當一擔收歸。自坐可否。如不信。再引數語以明之。如雲門拈世尊初生話。謂一棒打殺與狗子吃。亦是弒君父之謂乎。又文喜粥鍋上打文殊。鄧隱峰碾折馬祖之腳。黃檗因呼近前來。遂打百丈。臨濟自大愚歸。舉話亦打黃檗。所謂棒下無生忍。臨機不見師。乃至五宗之人。皆有語言機用。激揚風烈。不可指屈。即大慧杲祖。初參洞下尊宿。經七八員。后在圓悟老人會下撒手。遂力詆從前尊宿之說又如教家清涼觀國師。先與天臺荊溪尊者之席。深曉五時八教之旨。後到清涼。主張五教十玄。及論法性。多覆天臺之義。據古人于禪于教。或抑或揚。多屬超情入道之語。人焉廋哉。三位居士。倘與之同時。悉能以君父之過罪之乎。老朽今亦只勸居士等。且惜取舌頭。
三宜公
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
這段記載，本來與我無關。然而子輿寫《孟子》，認為自己有責任；司馬遷修《史記》，自序寫得頗為雄壯，大概就是這個意思吧。別人說什麼，何必在意？本來就難以和見識淺薄、孤陋寡聞的人講道理。祁王和邢三位居士，因為一時糊塗，被遠門之輩矇蔽了眼目，為他們寫序文。完全不知道世外之人著書立言，只是爲了闡明佛法禪道，與世俗的法國紀律毫不相干。怎麼能用弒君父這種世俗慘毒的言論，來敗壞風俗呢？學道之人，怎麼能這樣呢？現在我這個老朽之人，用兩宗的支派，引證辨解，誰真誰偽，各有根據，不用爭辯自然明白，不用宣揚自然顯著。這才可以看出我向來不是個粗魯莽撞的人。既然如此，滿篇慘毒的言論，三位居士應當全部收回，自己承擔責任。如果不相信，再引幾句話來證明。比如雲門拈出世尊初生的話頭，說『一棒打殺與狗子吃』，也是弒君父的意思嗎？又如文喜在粥鍋上打文殊，鄧隱峰碾折馬祖的腳，黃檗因此叫近前來，就打百丈，臨濟從大愚歸來，舉話也打黃檗。所謂『棒下無生忍，臨機不見師』，乃至五宗之人，都有語言機用，激揚風氣，不可屈指責備。即使是大慧杲祖，最初參訪洞下尊宿，經歷了七八位，後來在圓悟老人會下放手，就極力詆譭從前的尊宿之說。又如教家的清涼觀國師，先與天臺荊溪尊者同席，深曉五時八教的宗旨，後來到了清涼，主張五教十玄，以及論法性，多有推翻天臺的義理。根據古人在禪在教，或抑或揚，大多屬於超脫情感進入道境的言語，人怎麼能掩蓋得了呢？三位居士，倘若與他們同時，難道都能以君父的過錯來責備他們嗎？我今天也只是勸告各位居士，還是珍惜你們的舌頭吧。
三宜公 English version:
This record is originally unrelated to me. However, Ziyu wrote 'Mencius', feeling responsible; Sima Qian compiled 'Records of the Grand Historian', and his preface was quite magnificent, probably meaning the same thing. Why bother about what others say? It's inherently difficult to reason with those who are shallow and ignorant. Laymen Qi Wang and Xing, due to temporary confusion, were blinded by the Yuǎn Mén (distant gate/sect) and wrote prefaces for them. They completely don't understand that people outside the world write books and establish words only to elucidate the Buddha-dharma and Chan (Zen) path, which has nothing to do with secular French discipline. How can they use the worldly, cruel words of regicide and patricide to corrupt customs? How can those who study the Way be like this? Now, this old man uses the branches of the two schools to cite and distinguish, who is true and who is false, each has its own basis, it will be clear without arguing, and it will be obvious without publicizing. Only then can it be seen that I have never been a rude and reckless person. Since this is the case, the three laymen should take back all the cruel words in the full text and bear the responsibility themselves. If you don't believe it, I will quote a few more words to prove it. For example, when Yunmen (a Chan master) picked up the story of the Buddha's birth, saying 'Beat him to death with a stick and feed him to the dogs', does that also mean regicide and patricide? Also, Wenxi (a monk) hit Mañjuśrī (Bodhisattva of wisdom) on the porridge pot, Deng Yin-feng crushed Mazu's (a Chan master) foot, Huangbo (a Chan master) therefore called him closer and beat Baizhang (a Chan master), and Linji (a Chan master) returned from Dayu and also beat Huangbo when he raised the topic. The so-called 'No forbearance under the stick, no teacher seen at the moment', and even the people of the five schools all have linguistic mechanisms to inspire the atmosphere, which cannot be blamed. Even the ancestor Dahui Gao (a Chan master), initially visited the venerable monks of Dongxia, experienced seven or eight, and later let go at the meeting of the old man Yuanwu, and strongly slandered the previous venerable monks. Also, like the Qingliang Guanshi (National Teacher) of the teaching school, he first shared a seat with the Venerable Jingxi of Tiantai, deeply understanding the purpose of the Five Periods and Eight Teachings, and later arrived at Qingliang, advocating the Five Teachings and Ten Mysteries, and discussing Dharma-nature, mostly overturning the righteousness of Tiantai. According to the ancients, whether suppressing or promoting Chan or teaching, most of them belong to words that transcend emotions and enter the realm of the Tao, how can people hide it? The three laymen, if they were at the same time as them, could they all blame them for the faults of the ruler and father? Today, I am just advising you laymen to cherish your tongues.
Sanyi Gong
【English Translation】 This record is, indeed, not related to me. However, Ziyu wrote 'Mencius', seeing knowledge as his own responsibility. Sima Qian compiled 'Records of the Grand Historian', his preface being quite grand, perhaps with this intention. Why worry about what others say? It is indeed difficult to reason with those of shallow views and limited knowledge. Laymen Qi Wang and Xing, due to being misled by the Yuǎn Mén (distant gate/sect), had their eyes blurred and wrote prefaces for them. They are completely unaware that people outside the world write books and establish words solely to elucidate the Buddha-dharma and Chan (Zen) path, having no connection whatsoever with worldly French discipline. How can they use the worldly, cruel words of regicide and patricide to corrupt morals? How can those who study the Way be like this? Now, this old man uses the branches of the two schools to cite and distinguish, who is true and who is false, each has its own basis, it will be clear without arguing, and it will be obvious without publicizing. Only then can it be seen that I have never been a rude and reckless person. Since this is the case, the three laymen should take back all the cruel words in the full text and bear the responsibility themselves. If you don't believe it, I will quote a few more words to prove it. For example, when Yunmen (a Chan master) picked up the story of the Buddha's birth, saying 'Beat him to death with a stick and feed him to the dogs', does that also mean regicide and patricide? Also, Wenxi (a monk) hit Mañjuśrī (Bodhisattva of wisdom) on the porridge pot, Deng Yin-feng crushed Mazu's (a Chan master) foot, Huangbo (a Chan master) therefore called him closer and beat Baizhang (a Chan master), and Linji (a Chan master) returned from Dayu and also beat Huangbo when he raised the topic. The so-called 'No forbearance under the stick, no teacher seen at the moment', and even the people of the five schools all have linguistic mechanisms to inspire the atmosphere, which cannot be blamed. Even the ancestor Dahui Gao (a Chan master), initially visited the venerable monks of Dongxia, experienced seven or eight, and later let go at the meeting of the old man Yuanwu, and strongly slandered the previous venerable monks. Also, like the Qingliang Guanshi (National Teacher) of the teaching school, he first shared a seat with the Venerable Jingxi of Tiantai, deeply understanding the purpose of the Five Periods and Eight Teachings, and later arrived at Qingliang, advocating the Five Teachings and Ten Mysteries, and discussing Dharma-nature, mostly overturning the righteousness of Tiantai. According to the ancients, whether suppressing or promoting Chan or teaching, most of them belong to words that transcend emotions and enter the realm of the Tao, how can people hide it? The three laymen, if they were at the same time as them, could they all blame them for the faults of the ruler and father? Today, I am just advising you laymen to cherish your tongues. Sanyi Gong
。更設客問十三則語。尤見鼓不風之波。多屬妄生枝節。欲吾與渠妄生斗諍。豈是擔荷法門之人之所行乎。故付之於無言之天。至於壽昌和尚之承嗣未詳。與雪嶠老人之拈香返覆。及天童凈下十六世語錄。不曾刻入嚴統等駁。殆不知已先秉筆者。既有公論臚列于凡例之中。近復縉紳書中。又略剖其微。今亦不當復辨矣。若仍復加辨。正所謂清濫則傷刻核。峻防祇益我山。尤見多事。故吾略之。
大凡世上人。集諸家文獻。以成一書。行於宇內。自有大主意。亦有所尊崇。茲余以輿論所尊之藏典。及五燈會元合成嚴統者。蓋會元有經有法。有條有理。宗旨之於支派。不假考而明。昭而顯。令后之人。見千百世前。佛祖授受。師資相承。于禪統法系。嚴如風霜。不致紊亂。此即予今日。為法門濫觴。中流一柱之大志也。三宜公等。攻予之惑固當解入于無諍三昧矣。時歲次甲午正月日也(徑山龍藏系明朝神宗皇帝欽賜通載三十六卷)。
著解惑篇業已付梓。適會稽陶氏。貽我曹溪通志。翻閱之。始見憨大師駁余襄公法堂記。謂以南華住持自青原始。而至普遂。則當九世。非也。然青原自得法后。但執侍數年。即開化一方。並未領曹溪山門事。據此則遠門所謂青原居東。南嶽居西。皆屬強扯。虛爭名位。背西天祖
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 此外，還設定了十三則客人的提問，更加顯得是無風起浪，大多屬於無端生出事端，想要我和他們無意義地爭鬥，這難道是承擔佛法重任的人應該做的嗎？所以對此我保持沉默。至於壽昌和尚的傳承關係不清楚，以及雪嶠老人的拈香反覆，還有天童凈下十六世的語錄，沒有被刻入《嚴統》等書的反駁中，大概是因為不知道已經有執筆者，已經在凡例中公開評論了。最近縉紳的書籍中，又稍微剖析了其中的細微之處，現在也不應該再辨論了。如果仍然要辨論，正如所說的『過於苛求則會傷害刻核，過分防備只會增加我的負擔』，更加顯得是多事，所以我省略了。
大凡世上的人，收集各家的文獻，來完成一本書，流傳於世，自然有大的主旨，也有所尊崇的。現在我將輿論所尊崇的藏典，以及《五燈會元》合編成《嚴統》，是因為《會元》有經有法，有條有理，宗旨和支派的關係，不用考證就很明白，清清楚楚，讓後人看到千百年前，佛祖的傳授，師資的相承，在禪宗的法統上，嚴謹如風霜，不至於紊亂。這也就是我今天，為佛法開創局面，成為中流砥柱的宏大志向。三宜公等人，攻擊我的迷惑之處，本來就應該用無諍三昧來化解。時間是甲午年正月。
《解惑篇》已經付梓印刷。恰好會稽陶氏，送給我《曹溪通志》，翻閱之後，才看到憨山大師駁斥余襄公的法堂記，說從南華寺的住持從青原行思開始，到普遂為止，應該是九世，這是不對的。然而青原行思自從得法之後，只是侍奉了數年，就到一方開化，並沒有領管曹溪山門的事情。根據這個，那麼遠門所說的青原行思住在東邊，南嶽懷讓住在西邊，都屬於強行牽扯，虛假地爭奪名位，違背了西天祖師的本意。 English version: Furthermore, thirteen guest questions were set up, which further showed that waves were created without wind, and most of them belonged to creating incidents for no reason, wanting me to fight with them meaninglessly. Is this what a person who bears the burden of the Dharma should do? Therefore, I remain silent on this. As for the succession relationship of Monk Shouchang is not clear, as well as the incense offering and repeated discussions of Old Man Xueqiao, and the records of the sixteenth generation of Tiantong Jingxia, they were not engraved in the rebuttals of books such as 'Yantong', probably because they did not know that there were already writers who had publicly commented in the examples. Recently, in the books of the gentry, the subtle points have been slightly analyzed, and there is no need to argue about them now. If we still want to argue, it is just as the saying goes, 'Being too demanding will hurt the engraving, and excessive defense will only increase my burden', which is even more troublesome, so I omit it.
Generally speaking, people in the world collect documents from various sources to complete a book and spread it to the world. Naturally, there is a major theme and something to be respected. Now I have compiled the 'Yantong' by combining the Tibetan scriptures respected by public opinion and the 'Wudeng Huiyuan' because the 'Huiyuan' has scriptures and laws, and it is well-organized. The relationship between the purpose and the branches is clear without verification, so that future generations can see the transmission of the Buddha and ancestors thousands of years ago, and the inheritance of teachers and students. In the lineage of Zen, it is as strict as wind and frost, so as not to be chaotic. This is my great ambition today to create a situation for the Dharma and become a pillar in the torrent. San Yi Gong and others should resolve my confusion with the 'Samadhi of Non-Contention'. The time is January of the Jiawu year.
The 'Explanation of Confusion' has been printed and published. Coincidentally, Tao of Kuaiji sent me the 'General History of Caoxi'. After reading it, I saw that Master Hanshan refuted Yu Xiangong's Dharma Hall Record, saying that the abbot of Nanhua Temple, from Qingyuan Xingsi to Pusui, should be nine generations, which is not correct. However, Qingyuan Xingsi only served for a few years after obtaining the Dharma, and then went to one side to enlighten, and did not lead the affairs of the Caoxi Mountain Gate. According to this, then what Yuanmen said that Qingyuan Xingsi lived in the east and Nanyue Huairang lived in the west are all forced and falsely competing for fame and position, violating the original intention of the Western Heavenly Ancestor.
【English Translation】 Furthermore, thirteen guest questions were set up, which further showed that waves were created without wind, and most of them belonged to creating incidents for no reason, wanting me to fight with them meaninglessly. Is this what a person who bears the burden of the Dharma should do? Therefore, I remain silent on this. As for the succession relationship of Monk Shouchang is not clear, as well as the incense offering and repeated discussions of Old Man Xueqiao, and the records of the sixteenth generation of Tiantong Jingxia, they were not engraved in the rebuttals of books such as 'Yantong', probably because they did not know that there were already writers who had publicly commented in the examples. Recently, in the books of the gentry, the subtle points have been slightly analyzed, and there is no need to argue about them now. If we still want to argue, it is just as the saying goes, 'Being too demanding will hurt the engraving, and excessive defense will only increase my burden', which is even more troublesome, so I omit it. Generally speaking, people in the world collect documents from various sources to complete a book and spread it to the world. Naturally, there is a major theme and something to be respected. Now I have compiled the 'Yantong' by combining the Tibetan scriptures respected by public opinion and the 'Wudeng Huiyuan' because the 'Huiyuan' has scriptures and laws, and it is well-organized. The relationship between the purpose and the branches is clear without verification, so that future generations can see the transmission of the Buddha and ancestors thousands of years ago, and the inheritance of teachers and students. In the lineage of Zen, it is as strict as wind and frost, so as not to be chaotic. This is my great ambition today to create a situation for the Dharma and become a pillar in the torrent. San Yi Gong and others should resolve my confusion with the 'Samadhi of Non-Contention'. The time is January of the Jiawu year. The 'Explanation of Confusion' has been printed and published. Coincidentally, Tao of Kuaiji sent me the 'General History of Caoxi'. After reading it, I saw that Master Hanshan refuted Yu Xiangong's Dharma Hall Record, saying that the abbot of Nanhua Temple, from Qingyuan Xingsi to Pusui, should be nine generations, which is not correct. However, Qingyuan Xingsi only served for a few years after obtaining the Dharma, and then went to one side to enlighten, and did not lead the affairs of the Caoxi Mountain Gate. According to this, then what Yuanmen said that Qingyuan Xingsi lived in the east and Nanyue Huairang lived in the west are all forced and falsely competing for fame and position, violating the original intention of the Western Heavenly Ancestor.
師之讖。徒附會近說。以誑飭人耳目也。因再摘出。以告高明。
遠門又謂會元所載。洞宗終十四卷。濟宗終二十卷。先書者先續。后竟者后書。據此議論續略當與會元串合同行。共編卷帙。則此語可通。今劈空以曹洞居卷首。豈所謂先書先續也。分明與傳燈世譜祖印圖等著。同一線索。更暗埋青原居東。南嶽居西等話。顛倒翻案。究竟無益。徒增忉怛耳。吾恐如是用心。將來濟宗子孫。同起共論。有捫心咋舌日子不徹在。
又謂嚴統皆竊彼續略所訂。不想余徴修一啟。已於壬午年出布。海內共見。即彼續略自序。亦謂邇來明眼宗師。徴修有年。未見刻出。何前後自相矛盾也。余書固不具論。即會元一書。已經五百餘年。續略序則謂其始終條理。一以貫之。摘欺說則謂其未具眼在。不許入藏。一人之口筆。始贊之而終毀之。摘欺耶。自欺耶。為之拈出。肺肝如見矣。
又謂獨存棠城而刪興善。不知車溪示寂于萬曆辛亥年。法嗣已絕。衣缽僅為師弟古卓老宿所藏。卓翁又終。其衣缽相傳於南明之手。十有餘年。南明寂后。送歸溪翁嗣法師無趣老人之施庵。及南明之孫玄微。于金粟作堂主時。求先師覓人代付。先師不肯。此衣只貯金粟方丈數載。先師赴天童后。石車法弟主席。又復送還施庵。如是展轉
十餘歲玄微自建寧普明寺歸嘉禾省親。有東塔寺當家號馥生者。慫恿緇素。謂此衣乃玄微家物。持以送之。玄微入閩。因石雨公闡化閩中。遂求證焉。此三十年來。遠近衲子。共所洞悉。不知普明既已無法可傳。何以謂之刪去。至於妄言欺普明之孱弱。不揣其本。謬之謬矣。更怪其引浮山投子相證不思浮山乃受太陽之囑。普明曾為何人所囑乎。此與續略凡例所云。圓通善。王山濟。法嗣俱莫可考冀有後獲等語。同一心行。以開遙嗣代付之竇。予之所謂嚴統者。此物此志也夫。
又謂嚴統譚序。乃余賺誤。夫掃庵當代宗工。見真識確。豈有被人賺誤之理。抑老僧真心實行。素足信人。豈肯賺誤於人。惟口起羞何不自審。更誣居士于浪公前求懺悔等語。又何涂污高賢之甚也。設果有影響。昨歲掃翁貽書徑山中。不啻數四。且謂作序時。若有神助。即予侍者。兩登著作堂。了不聞其咳及。謂或有所回互。則予門人嚴𨍏轢居士。乃其的親中表。豈無片語逗漏。以此觀之。枝葉之詞。概可睹矣。噫。五戒不持。人天路絕。既主法席。當如是耶。請以問之掃翁。
又謂即復假託詞林作序。為後來爭端張本。夫詞林弁首。惟曹韋二大家。曹峨翁則辛卯年同予于華亭超果寺。促膝茶筵。商確嚴統。甚愜高懷嗣作序文相寄。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 玄微（Xuanwei，人名）十餘歲時，從建寧普明寺（Jianning Puming Temple）回到嘉禾省親。有東塔寺（Dongta Temple）的當家，法號馥生（Fusheng），慫恿僧人和俗人說：『這件袈裟是玄微家的東西，拿去送給他。』玄微去了福建，因為石雨公（Shiyu Gong，人名）在福建弘揚佛法，就去向他求證這件事。這三十年來，遠近的僧人都清楚地知道這件事。不知道普明寺既然已經沒有佛法可以傳授，為什麼要說是刪去呢？至於妄言欺負普明寺的弱小，不考慮事情的本來面目，真是荒謬至極。更奇怪的是他引用浮山（Fushan，地名）和投子（Touzi，地名）來互相印證，卻不想浮山是接受了太陽（Taiyang，人名）的囑託，普明寺曾經被什麼人囑託過呢？這和《續略凡例》（Xuluo Fanli，書名）里所說的『圓通善（Yuantong Shan，人名），王山濟（Wangshan Ji，人名），法嗣都無法考證，希望以後能有人獲得』等話，是同樣的心態和行為，想要開啟遙嗣代付的門路。我所說的嚴統（Yantong，人名）所重視的，就是這種東西和這種志向啊！ 又說嚴統的譚序（Tan Xu，文章名），是我欺騙誤導的。掃庵（Sao'an，人名）是當代的宗師，見解真實，認識明確，怎麼會被人欺騙誤導呢？而且老僧我真心實行佛法，一向值得人信任，怎麼會欺騙誤導別人呢？只有口說羞愧，為什麼不自我反省呢？更誣陷居士在浪公（Lang Gong，人名）面前求懺悔等等，又何必這樣玷污賢人呢？如果真的有影響，去年掃翁給我寫信到徑山（Jingshan，地名）中，不止三四次，而且說作序的時候，好像有神助一樣。即使我的侍者，兩次登上著作堂（Zhuzuo Tang，地名），也沒有聽到他說過什麼。如果說有什麼改變，那麼我的門人嚴𨍏轢居士（Yan E'li Jushi，人名），是他的親戚，難道沒有一點訊息透露出來嗎？從這件事來看，那些枝節末梢的話，大概都可以看清楚了。唉！五戒不持，人天之路斷絕。既然主持法席，應當是這樣嗎？請拿這個問題去問掃翁吧。 又說我假託詞林（Cilin，指文人）作序，為後來的爭端埋下伏筆。詞林的領袖，只有曹（Cao，姓）韋（Wei，姓）兩大家。曹峨翁（Cao E'weng，人名）在辛卯年和我一起在華亭超果寺（Huating Chaoguo Temple）促膝茶敘，商量確定嚴統的事情，非常符合他的心意，後來寫了序文寄給我。
【English Translation】 English version: When Xuanwei (玄微, personal name) was over ten years old, he returned to Jiahe to visit his family from Jianning Puming Temple (建寧普明寺). The abbot of Dongta Temple (東塔寺), named Fusheng (馥生), incited monks and laypeople, saying, 'This robe belongs to Xuanwei's family, take it and give it to him.' Xuanwei went to Fujian, and because Shiyu Gong (石雨公, personal name) was propagating Buddhism in Fujian, he sought verification from him regarding this matter. For the past thirty years, monks from near and far have been well aware of this. I don't understand why, since Puming Temple has no Dharma to transmit, it is said to be deleted. As for falsely accusing Puming Temple of being weak and bullying it, without considering the true nature of things, it is extremely absurd. Even more strange is that he cites Fushan (浮山, place name) and Touzi (投子, place name) to corroborate each other, but he doesn't consider that Fushan received instructions from Taiyang (太陽, personal name), and who instructed Puming Temple? This is the same mentality and behavior as what is said in 'Preface Examples Continued' (續略凡例, book title): 'Yuantong Shan (圓通善, personal name), Wangshan Ji (王山濟, personal name), the Dharma heirs cannot be verified, hoping that someone will obtain it in the future,' wanting to open the path for remote succession and entrustment. What I, Yantong (嚴統, personal name), value is this thing and this aspiration! Furthermore, it is said that the preface by Tan (譚序, article title) for Yantong was obtained through my deception and misleading. Sao'an (掃庵, personal name) is a master of the contemporary era, with true insights and clear understanding, how could he be deceived and misled by others? Moreover, I, an old monk, sincerely practice the Dharma and have always been trustworthy, how could I deceive and mislead others? Only speaking of shame, why not examine oneself? Even more, he falsely accuses the layman of seeking repentance before Lang Gong (浪公, personal name), why defile the virtuous in such a way? If there were indeed any influence, last year Sao'weng wrote to me in Jingshan (徑山, place name) more than three or four times, and said that when writing the preface, it was as if divinely assisted. Even my attendant, who twice ascended the Zhuzuo Hall (著作堂, place name), did not hear him say anything. If there is any change, then my disciple, Layman Yan E'li (嚴𨍏轢, personal name), is his close relative, wouldn't there be a single word revealed? From this, the words of the branches and leaves can be seen clearly. Alas! Without upholding the Five Precepts, the path to humans and gods is cut off. Since presiding over the Dharma seat, should it be like this? Please ask Sao'weng about this question. Furthermore, it is said that I falsely claim the literary circle (詞林, referring to literati) to write a preface, laying the groundwork for future disputes. The leaders of the literary circle are only the two great families of Cao (曹, surname) and Wei (韋, surname). Cao E'weng (曹峨翁, personal name) and I, in the year Xinmao, had a close tea conversation at Huating Chaoguo Temple (華亭超果寺), discussing and confirming the matter of Yantong, which greatly pleased him, and he later wrote a preface and sent it to me.
韋念翁則壬辰年為其太翁稱壽。請余于武林慧云寺上堂設供畢。遂索嚴統細閱。欣然椽筆簡頭。爭端之謗從空飛下。此現在宰官。是欺非欺可即親質。安同古之無盡夏卿。丘符諸公。得以比類唾叱乎。請試思之。
又謂搖尾乞憐于諸士大夫之門。虛借名姓較正。為曰后護身符子。正自取殺身滅種之禍。不知嚴統較正名氏或全篇訂裁。或片義取決。必經歷耳目者。方敢登刻。如峨雪曹公聲玉韋公。念莪韋公。質生單公。素心李公。安仁周公。覲周徐公。予固張公。臣共李公。仲嘉張公。子谷蔡公。士材李公。皆摛文掞藻。吮墨含毫共照黎燈同摩柏幾。出鴻儒之錦心。成禪宗之繡史。虛借之謗。為辭已甚。其他不經翰墨。止鐫名氏。或檀那。或護法。皆系愿植般若之因。同增正信之種。堪為典訓于中原。可作標榜於法苑。亦猶楊大年。李淡齋。陸務觀。諸大老之裁訂序述。各傳燈燈錄諸書者也。若夫中柱張翁。阮仙劉翁。克猷劉翁。介子范翁。小暹宋翁。仲生石翁。六君子者。皆韋念翁親筆所書。命予刻入。彼時山僧期期未敢。念翁云。余往 都門。即為款致。諸公皆法中樑棟。我為譜入自是歡喜踴躍耳。嗟乎。清理禪宗。匡扶祖印。上不幹國家之朝政。下不涉民生之利獘。何必為護身符。安在為滅種事。噫嘻。其
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：韋念翁在壬辰年為他的祖父祝壽。邀請我在武林慧云寺上堂設供完畢后，於是拿出《嚴統》讓我仔細閱讀。我欣然提筆，卻引來了無端的誹謗。說現在的官員，是否欺騙可以親自去查證，怎能和古代的無盡夏卿、丘符等諸位賢士相比，可以隨意唾罵呢？請仔細思考。
又說（我）搖尾乞憐于各位士大夫的門下，虛假地借用他們的名姓來校正，說是爲了以後的護身符。這正是自取殺身滅族的大禍。卻不知《嚴統》校正名氏，或是對全文進行修訂，或是對片言隻語進行決斷，必定是經過親耳聽到、親眼看到的人，才敢刊登。比如峨雪曹公、聲玉韋公、念莪韋公、質生單公、素心李公、安仁周公、覲周徐公、予固張公、臣共李公、仲嘉張公、子谷蔡公、士材李公，他們都文采飛揚，揮毫潑墨，在黎明燈光下共同研討，如同在柏樹幾案上切磋琢磨，展現出大學者的錦繡心腸，成就了禪宗的輝煌歷史。說我虛假借用（他們的名姓）的誹謗，用詞太過分了。其他沒有經過翰墨潤色的，只是鐫刻名氏，或是檀那（施主），或是護法，都是希望種下般若（智慧）的因，共同增長正信的種子，可以作為中原地區的典範，可以作為佛法界的榜樣。也就像楊大年、李淡齋、陸務觀等各位大老對各傳燈錄等書籍進行修訂和序述一樣。至於中柱張翁、阮仙劉翁、克猷劉翁、介子范翁、小暹宋翁、仲生石翁這六位君子，都是韋念翁親自書寫，命我刻入。當時山僧我猶豫不決。念翁說：『我前往都門，就為各位款待引薦。諸位都是佛法中的棟樑，我為他們譜入（書中）自然是歡喜踴躍啊。』唉！清理禪宗，匡扶祖印，上不干涉國家的朝政，下不涉及民生的利弊，何必需要護身符？又哪裡會有滅族的事情呢？唉！這真是……
【English Translation】 English version: Wei Nianweng celebrated his grandfather's birthday in the year of Renchen. He invited me to set up a memorial service at Huiyun Temple in Wulin. After the service, he asked me to carefully read the 'Yantong'. I gladly took up the pen, but it attracted unwarranted slander. It is said that the current officials, whether they are deceiving or not, can be verified in person. How can they be compared to the ancient virtuous scholars such as Wujin Xiaqing and Qiu Fu, who can be scolded at will? Please think carefully.
It is also said that (I) wag my tail and beg for pity at the doors of various scholar-officials, falsely borrowing their names for correction, saying it is for future amulets. This is precisely inviting the great disaster of killing oneself and exterminating one's clan. But little do they know that the 'Yantong' corrects names, or revises the entire text, or makes decisions on fragments of words, and it must be done by those who have heard and seen it with their own ears and eyes before daring to publish it. For example, Cao Gong of Exue, Wei Gong of Shengyu, Wei Gong of Nian'e, Shan Gong of Zhisheng, Li Gong of Suxin, Zhou Gong of Anren, Xu Gong of Jinzhou, Zhang Gong of Yugu, Li Gong of Chen Gong, Zhang Gong of Zhongjia, Cai Gong of Ziguzi, and Li Gong of Shicai, they are all talented and eloquent, wielding their pens and ink, discussing together under the lamplight of dawn, as if honing each other on cypress desks, showing the splendid hearts of great scholars, and achieving the glorious history of Zen Buddhism. The slander that I falsely borrow (their names) is too extreme in its wording. Others who have not been embellished by writing, but only have their names engraved, whether they are 'dana' (patrons) or 'Dharma protectors', all hope to plant the cause of 'prajna' (wisdom) and jointly increase the seeds of right faith, which can serve as a model for the Central Plains and as a benchmark for the Buddhist community. It is also like Yang Danian, Li Danzhai, Lu Wu Guan and other great elders revising and prefacing various books such as the 'Transmission of the Lamp' records. As for Zhang Weng of Zhongzhu, Liu Weng of Ruanxian, Liu Weng of Keyou, Fan Weng of Jiezhi, Song Weng of Xiaoshan, and Shi Weng of Zhongsheng, these six gentlemen were all personally written by Wei Nianweng and ordered me to engrave them. At that time, I, the mountain monk, hesitated. Nianweng said: 'I will go to the capital and entertain and introduce them to everyone. All of you are pillars of the Dharma, and I am happy and excited to include them (in the book).' Alas! Cleaning up Zen Buddhism and supporting the ancestral seal, it does not interfere with the national government above, nor does it involve the interests and disadvantages of the people below. Why would it need an amulet? And where would there be such a thing as exterminating the clan? Alas! This is really...
立言也亦甚矣憊。
又謂庚寅夏。有僧參彼寶壽。問其名。假稱達源。命坐細談續略。其僧杜口而退傍有識者曰。此從徑山差來。此僧回徑山。阿意曲從方丈。以圖付法不以實告。獨曰。得之殿前碑也。不知此僧來自天童。偶過福嚴談及。一時之話。遂捏許多口業。吁。他語不必深詳。只從徑山差來一語辨之。予赴徑山之請。乃庚寅十月廿七也。其夏正在福嚴。焉有先半載。逆知為徑山主人。而故遣人作無根之談耶。立言所以存不朽。梨刻現在。請付諸方公評之。
又謂若碑無機語。立之何為。據伊如此強設。將謂少室天涯。無能到者。誰知我徑山門下。昔年親知親見者。尤不知其幾何。咸謂殿前碑。只列代數。不存機語。即如盧舍庵首座老師。系北地人。久住少林。亦曾備悉其根源。而且出言慷慨。直謂並無機語。是則親知親見之一證也。
又謂若本分不明。焉能評唱。且引圓悟天奇二祖。評釋四家頌古。以為比擬獨不思少林評唱。非能自出手眼。圓活古今。特依樣葫蘆而講演之耳。此如法師講諸經典謂經典非佛口所出不可。謂經典即法師所出可乎。若真本分事明。決不肯為如此講演評唱之行矣。夫佛果天奇二老之注不過為人方便疏通。是猶舉業家之偶為詩賦。豈詩賦即其舉業乎。略大求細。舍
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
著書立說這件事，真是讓人感到非常疲憊啊！ 又說庚寅年夏天，有個僧人去拜訪寶壽禪師，問他的名字，他假稱自己叫達源。寶壽禪師讓他坐下，想和他詳細地談談禪法。那個僧人卻一言不發地退下了。旁邊有認識他的人說，『這個人是從徑山來的。』這個僧人回到徑山後，爲了討好方丈，以便將來能得到衣缽的傳授，沒有說實話，只說，『（這些話）是從殿前碑上看到的。』卻不知道這個僧人是從天童寺來的，偶然路過福嚴寺時談到了這件事，於是就編造了許多謊言。唉！其他的話不必深究，只要從『從徑山差來』這句話來辨別真偽。我接受徑山的邀請，是在庚寅年十月二十七日。那個夏天我正在福嚴寺，怎麼可能提前半年就知道自己會成為徑山的主人，而故意派人去散佈毫無根據的謠言呢？著書立說是爲了流傳不朽，現在已經刻在梨木板上，請各位方家公開評判。 又說如果碑上沒有玄妙的禪機，立碑做什麼呢？按照他這樣強行捏造，是以為少室山地處偏遠，沒有人能到達那裡。誰知道我徑山門下，當年親身經歷、親眼見到這件事的人，還不知道有多少。大家都說殿前碑上，只列了歷代祖師的名號，沒有記載任何禪機。就像盧舍庵的首座老師，是北方人，在少林寺住了很久，也詳細地瞭解了這件事的來龍去脈，而且他說話很坦率，直接說碑上沒有任何禪機。這就是親身經歷、親眼見證的一個證據。 又說如果自己對本分事不明白，怎麼能評唱古人的頌古呢？而且還引用圓悟禪師和天奇禪師對四家頌古的評釋，來作為自己的比擬。難道沒有想到少林寺的評唱，並不是自己能夠獨出手眼，圓融貫通古今，只不過是照葫蘆畫瓢地講解罷了。這就好比法師講解各種經典，說經典不是佛親口說的就不行，難道說經典是法師自己創作的就可以嗎？如果真的對本分事明白了，決不會做這種講解評唱的事情。佛果禪師和天奇禪師的註解，不過是爲了方便人們理解疏通，就像讀書人偶爾寫寫詩賦一樣，難道詩賦就是他的正業嗎？捨本逐末，舍
【English Translation】 English version:
Writing and establishing words is indeed a very tiring endeavor! Furthermore, it is said that in the summer of the Gengyin year, a monk visited Baoshou Monastery. When asked his name, he falsely claimed to be Dayuan. Baoshou invited him to sit down for a detailed discussion on the continuation of the lineage. However, the monk remained silent and withdrew. An acquaintance nearby remarked, 'This one came from Jingshan.' Upon returning to Jingshan, this monk flattered the abbot in order to secure the Dharma transmission, not truthfully reporting the matter. He merely stated, 'I obtained it from the stele in front of the hall.' Little did he know that this monk came from Tiantong Monastery and had casually discussed the matter while passing through Fuyan Monastery. Consequently, he fabricated much karmic speech. Alas! Other details need not be deeply investigated; simply examine the statement 'came from Jingshan.' My acceptance of the invitation to Jingshan was on the 27th day of the tenth month of the Gengyin year. That summer, I was at Fuyan Monastery. How could I have known half a year in advance that I would become the master of Jingshan and deliberately send someone to spread baseless rumors? Establishing words is for preserving immortality. Now that it is engraved on pear wood blocks, please submit it to all quarters for public evaluation. Furthermore, it is said that if the stele contains no subtle Zen insights (jī yǔ), what is the purpose of erecting it? According to his forced fabrication, he assumes that Shaoshi Mountain is remote and inaccessible. Little does he know that among my disciples at Jingshan, there are countless who personally knew and witnessed the events of that year. Everyone says that the stele in front of the hall only lists the generations of patriarchs and contains no Zen insights. For example, the head seat (shǒuzuò) of Lushe Hermitage, a native of the north, resided at Shaolin Monastery for a long time and was fully aware of the origins of the matter. Moreover, he spoke frankly, directly stating that there were no Zen insights on the stele. This is one piece of evidence from personal knowledge and witnessing. Furthermore, it is said that if one's own fundamental understanding (běnfèn) is unclear, how can one comment on and praise (píng chàng) the ancient verses (sòng gǔ)? Moreover, he cites the commentaries of Zen Master Yuanwu and Zen Master Tianqi on the 'Four Houses' Verses' (Sì Jiā Sòng Gǔ) as a comparison. Does he not realize that the commentaries at Shaolin Monastery are not from one's own unique insight and ability to connect the past and present, but merely a mechanical imitation and explanation? This is like a Dharma master explaining various sutras, saying that the sutras must be spoken by the Buddha himself. Can it be said that the sutras are created by the Dharma master himself? If one truly understands one's own fundamental matter, one would never engage in such commentary and praise. The annotations of Elder Foguo and Elder Tianqi are merely for the convenience of people to understand and clarify, just like a scholar occasionally writing poetry. Is poetry his main occupation? Neglecting the fundamental and pursuing the trivial, abandoning
本論末。欺乎不欺乎。自有明眼在。
又棠城為西禪法嗣。夙已契印。后與楚山對機。山云。俊哉衲子。不忝西禪之嗣。城曰人天證明。謝師印可。此乃當機讚揚之語。自古皆然。遠門妄添其末曰山乃代付。擬藉一時之辨端。流為百世之口實。所謂毫釐有差。天地懸隔。何昧之甚歟。
又謂二株嫩桂。獨主青原下少林一脈而南嶽無聞。是以祖師之語。當爲等閑。顛倒弄筆。何無畏忌之甚也。不思達磨受法時。問般若尊者云。我當往何國而作佛事。者乃讖以二株嫩桂之偈。蓋明指少林道法久遠。兼容幷包而言。並未分南嶽青原也。又問。此後如何。者云。卻後二百二十年。林下見一人。當得道果。未有金雞解銜一粒粟。供養十方羅漢僧之讖。蓋(單指南嶽系金州人)為金雞銜粟。馬祖為什邡縣人。羅漢寺僧也此西天祖師聖口宣說。千古敬信無疑。且六祖又面囑南嶽曰。西天般若多羅。讖汝足下出一馬駒踏殺天下人。明白證據。何得謂予錯認。以西天祖師之定讖。遠門擅敢貶駁。畏聖人之言謂何。是可無忌憚也。孰不可無忌憚也。區區嚴統之詆譭。固屬末節矣。噫必欲扭捏筆尖。排謗聖語。誑惑世人。弁髦祖讖。果報之隨。鳴鼓之攻。吾知其不免矣。
又謂具眼縉紳。唐推楊李。宋首蘇黃。數百年中。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 本論的結尾。這是欺騙嗎？不是欺騙嗎？自有明眼人在這裡。
又說棠城是西禪的法嗣（繼承人），早就已經心領神會。後來與楚山對機（禪宗用語，指通過對話來啓發對方）。楚山說：『好一位俊才衲子（僧人），沒有辱沒西禪的傳承。』棠城說：『人天證明，感謝師父的印可。』這乃是當機讚揚的話語，自古以來都是這樣。遠門妄自新增在後面說楚山乃是代替（西禪）付法。想要憑藉一時的爭辯，流傳為百世的笑柄。所謂差之毫釐，失之千里，這是多麼的糊塗啊！
又說兩株嫩桂，獨自主持青原山下少林一脈，而南嶽（衡山）卻默默無聞。因此祖師的話，應當被看作是等閑之語。顛倒弄筆，怎麼如此沒有畏懼之心呢？不想達磨（菩提達摩）受法時，問般若尊者說：『我應當往哪個國家去作佛事？』般若尊者就用兩株嫩桂的偈語來預言。這明明是指少林的道法長久，兼容幷包而言，並沒有區分南嶽和青原。又問：『此後如何？』般若尊者說：『卻後二百二十年，林下見一人，當得道果。』並沒有金雞解開銜著的一粒粟米，供養十方羅漢僧的預言。蓋（僅僅指南嶽一系是金州人）因為金雞銜粟，馬祖（道一）是什邡縣人，羅漢寺的僧人。這是西天祖師（指印度祖師）聖口宣說，千古敬信無疑。而且六祖（慧能）又當面囑咐南嶽（懷讓）說：『西天般若多羅，預言你足下會出一匹馬駒踏殺天下人。』明白的證據，怎麼能說我錯認了呢？用西天祖師的確定預言，遠門竟然敢貶低駁斥，對聖人的話又作何解釋？這是可以沒有顧忌的嗎？還有什麼是不可以沒有顧忌的呢？區區嚴統的詆譭，本來就是末節小事了。唉！一定要扭捏筆尖，誹謗聖語，誑惑世人，把祖師的預言當成破爛，果報的隨之而來，就像鳴鼓而攻之，我知道他是免不了的。
又說有眼光的縉紳（官員），唐朝推崇楊（楊炎）李（李泌），宋朝首推蘇（蘇軾）黃（黃庭堅），數百年中。
【English Translation】 English version: The end of this treatise. Is it deception or not? Clear-sighted individuals are present here.
Furthermore, it is said that Tangcheng was a Dharma heir (successor) of Xichan (West Chan), having already attained a tacit understanding. Later, he engaged in a Dharma exchange with Chushan. Chushan said, 'What a talented monk! He does not disgrace the lineage of Xichan.' Tangcheng replied, 'Heaven and humanity bear witness, I thank the master for his approval.' These are words of praise appropriate to the occasion, as has been the case since ancient times. Yuanmen presumptuously added at the end that Chushan was bestowing the Dharma on behalf (of Xichan). He intended to use a momentary dispute as material for centuries of ridicule. It is said that a difference of a hair's breadth leads to a separation as vast as heaven and earth. How utterly deluded!
Furthermore, it is said that the two young osmanthus trees alone preside over the Shaolin lineage beneath Qingyuan Mountain, while Nanyue (Mount Heng) remains unheard of. Therefore, the words of the patriarch should be regarded as trivial. Reversing and manipulating the pen, how can one be so fearless? One does not consider that when Damo (Bodhidharma) received the Dharma, he asked Prajnatara, 'To which country should I go to perform Buddhist deeds?' Prajnatara then prophesied with a verse about two young osmanthus trees. This clearly refers to the long-standing and all-encompassing nature of the Shaolin Dharma, without distinguishing between Nanyue and Qingyuan. He also asked, 'What will happen after this?' Prajnatara said, 'Two hundred and twenty years later, a person will be seen under the trees, who will attain the fruit of the Way.' There was no prophecy of a golden rooster untying a grain of millet to offer to the Arhats of the ten directions. Gai (referring only to the Nanyue lineage being from Jinzhou) because of the golden rooster offering millet, Mazu (Daoyi) was from Shifang County, a monk of Luohan Temple. These are the sacred words spoken by the Western Heaven Patriarchs (referring to Indian Patriarchs), trusted and revered throughout the ages without doubt. Moreover, the Sixth Patriarch (Huineng) personally instructed Nanyue (Huairang), saying, 'The Western Heaven Prajnatara prophesied that from beneath your feet will emerge a colt that will trample all people under heaven.' Clear evidence, how can it be said that I have mistaken it? Yuanmen dares to denigrate and refute the definite prophecy of the Western Heaven Patriarchs. How does he explain the words of the sages? Is it permissible to have no restraint in this? What is it that is not permissible to have no restraint in? The mere slander of Yantong is originally a minor matter. Alas! Insisting on twisting the pen, slandering the sacred words, deceiving the world, and treating the patriarch's prophecies as worthless, the consequences of karma will follow, like attacking with drums. I know he will not escape it.
Furthermore, it is said that discerning gentry (officials) in the Tang Dynasty esteemed Yang (Yang Yan) and Li (Li Bi), and in the Song Dynasty, they primarily esteemed Su (Su Shi) and Huang (Huang Tingjian) for hundreds of years.
指未多屈。今五十八位。一時許可。法運盛至此乎之語。然無盡夏卿。固所憎惡。不必再提。如陸景山。裴公美。楊無為。郭功甫。張子韶。李漢老輩。盡有可觀。何故一概拒絕。是亦曾為偽碑來耶。若今之五十八位。雖未必宗門爪牙畢具。而邪正自是瞭然。稱為具眼以入較訂。何所不可。此如古今著史。首推馬班。下此固不能媲美。亦豈無片長足錄。若欲擠之深淵。必令龍門扶風。至今存可也。雖然不以世諦言。我亦以世諦喻。嬰兒無丁畦。殆是之謂乎。
又謂為我代設三䇿。其上。翻然毀板。佈告諸方。蓋此書乃十方檀那。共成勝事。且印刷數百部。流佈江楚閩廣之間久矣。正信人稱揚讚歎之牘。不勝踵至。抑行以蔽天下之眼。若猶未也。毀板以昧檀那之因。毋乃不可乎其次。謂默然自悔。暗毀不行。蓋此書緝修十有餘年。字字皆正眼。篇篇咸苦心。既正見之已定。復就裁于多人。商確者盡正大高賢。秉筆者皆名儒碩喆。原慎重於後悔。甘貽毀於今茲。鉛槧已久。桓譚自多。其三。謂遂過飭非。遁辭強辨。徒損方寸。愈敗聲名。蓋此書有功佛祖。得罪今時。過乎非乎。任之知罪既依據北藏勘定之本。又拈出諸方源流之自。重門洞開。方寸何損。至於聲名二字。古人有一池荷葉衣無盡。幾樹松花食有餘之語。
計及於此。風斯下矣。雖然自處如是。猶恐不諒我衷。亦奉君儕三䇿。聊表猜忌無心。上䇿。亦著一書。與嚴統並行。任從世賞。次䇿。將遠門續略。附入會元。或再將全書。更翻名位。以泄其憤。下䇿。結連偏見同心。肆刻辱罵。明阻嚴統之莫行。暗媒叢林之多事。且取快於一時。更何論夫千古。是亦不可已矣乎。必滅此而後朝食。如是而已。君無尤焉。解惑篇已將客問十三則。付無言之天。茲以太甚者三段。摘附末簡。兼告同人。共發一燦。
五燈嚴統所訂南嶽下天王悟禪師。青原下天皇悟禪師。兩派譜傳。俱按往造舊典。茲再逐一錄出附后。呈似儒禪宗匠。幸搜原本。共證非余杜撰。庶知述者苦心云。唐正議大夫戶部侍郎平章事。荊南節度使丘公玄素。為天王悟撰碑銘。出北藏佛祖通載。唐協律郎符公載。所撰天皇悟碑銘。亦佛祖通載所出也。其通載梵本計卷。三十有六。久入北京 皇藏我字函中。元朝華亭念常禪師所集之書。歷今幾四百年矣。若唐聞人歸登所制南嶽讓禪師碑中列法孫數人。天王道悟其一也。至圭峰禪師答宰相裴公宗趣狀。列馬祖法嗣六人。首曰江陵道悟。及權德輿氏撰馬祖塔銘。載弟子慧海智藏等十一人。道悟在焉。乃若歷代帝王稽古略。其書編為四大卷。載天王天皇兩支。明白詳盡
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：考慮到這些情況，風波才得以平息。雖然我這樣約束自己，仍然擔心人們不理解我的心意，所以也向各位同仁提出三條計策，以表明我沒有猜忌之心。上策是，也寫一本書，與《嚴統》並行，任憑世人褒獎或貶低。中策是，將《遠門續略》附入《會元》，或者再將全書重新編排名位，以發泄他們的憤怒。下策是，勾結那些有偏見、與自己同心的人，肆意刻印書籍進行侮辱謾罵，明面上阻止《嚴統》的推行，暗地裡挑起叢林中的事端，只圖一時痛快，哪裡還顧得上千秋萬代？這也是不得已而為之啊，一定要消滅對方然後才能安心吃飯，就是這樣而已，各位不要責怪我。解惑篇已經將客人提出的十三個問題，付諸無言的天空（不再爭辯）。現在將其中最過分的三段，摘錄附在書末，兼告各位同仁，共同發出光芒。
《五燈嚴統》所訂立的南嶽下天王悟禪師（Nanyue Xia Tianwang Wu Chanshi，南嶽懷讓禪師的法嗣天王道悟），青原下天皇悟禪師（Qingyuan Xia Tianhuang Wu Chanshi，青原行思禪師的法嗣天皇道悟）兩派的譜系傳承，都是按照以往的舊典。現在再逐一抄錄出來附在後面，呈給精通儒學和禪宗的宗師們，希望他們搜尋原本，共同驗證這不是我杜撰的，從而知道著述者的苦心啊。唐朝正議大夫、戶部侍郎、平章事、荊南節度使丘公玄素（Qiu Gong Xuansu）為天王悟撰寫碑銘，出自北藏《佛祖統載》。唐朝協律郎符公載（Fu Gongzai）所撰寫的天皇悟碑銘，也是《佛祖統載》所出。這部《佛祖統載》梵文版本共計三十六卷，很久以前就進入了北京皇藏我字函中。元朝華亭念常禪師（Nianchang Chanshi）所編輯的書，至今已經有四百多年了。如果看唐朝聞人歸登（Gui Deng）所撰寫的《南嶽讓禪師碑》，其中列舉了法孫數人，天王道悟就是其中之一。至於圭峰禪師（Guifeng Chanshi）回答宰相裴公（Pei Gong）宗趣的信中，列舉了馬祖（Mazu）的法嗣六人，首位就是江陵道悟。以及權德輿（Quan Deyi）撰寫的《馬祖塔銘》，記載了弟子慧海（Huihai）、智藏（Zhizang）等十一人，道悟也在其中。還有歷代帝王稽古略，這本書編為四大卷，記載了天王和天皇兩支的傳承，明白而詳盡。
【English Translation】 English version: Considering these circumstances, the storm has subsided. Although I restrain myself in this way, I am still worried that people will not understand my intentions. Therefore, I also offer three strategies to my colleagues, to show that I have no suspicion. The best strategy is to also write a book, running parallel with the 'Yantong', letting the world praise or criticize it as they see fit. The second strategy is to attach the 'Yuanmen Xulue' to the 'Huiyuan', or to rearrange the names and positions in the entire book to vent their anger. The worst strategy is to collude with those who are biased and of the same mind, to wantonly print books for insult and abuse, openly preventing the implementation of the 'Yantong', and secretly provoking incidents in the Sangha, only seeking temporary pleasure, and not caring about the future. This is also a last resort, to eliminate the opponent before being able to eat in peace, that's all, please do not blame me. The 'Jiehuo Pian' (解惑篇, Disentangling Doubts Chapter) has already consigned the thirteen questions raised by the guest to the silent sky (no longer arguing). Now, the three most excessive paragraphs are excerpted and attached to the end of the book, and also inform my colleagues, to jointly emit light.
The lineage transmission of Nanyue Xia Tianwang Wu Chanshi (南嶽下天王悟禪師, Dharma heir of Nanyue Huairang, Tianwang Daowu) under Nanyue, and Qingyuan Xia Tianhuang Wu Chanshi (青原下天皇悟禪師, Dharma heir of Qingyuan Xingsi, Tianhuang Daowu) under Qingyuan, as established in the 'Wudeng Yantong', are all based on past precedents. Now, I will transcribe them one by one and attach them later, presenting them to the masters who are proficient in Confucianism and Zen, hoping that they will search for the original versions and jointly verify that this is not my fabrication, so that they will know the painstaking efforts of the author. Qiu Gong Xuansu (丘公玄素), Grand Master of Tang Zheng Yi, Vice Minister of the Ministry of Revenue, and Military Commissioner of Jingnan, wrote an epitaph for Tianwang Wu, which is from the Northern Canon 'Fozu Tongzai'. The epitaph of Tianhuang Wu written by Fu Gongzai (符公載), a Tang Xie Lu Lang, is also from 'Fozu Tongzai'. This 'Fozu Tongzai' has a Sanskrit version of thirty-six volumes, which has long been in the Beijing Imperial Collection. The book compiled by Nianchang Chanshi (念常禪師) of Huating in the Yuan Dynasty is now more than four hundred years old. If you look at the 'Nanyue Rang Chanshi Bei' written by Gui Deng (歸登), a famous person in the Tang Dynasty, it lists several Dharma grandsons, and Tianwang Daowu is one of them. As for the letter from Guifeng Chanshi (圭峰禪師) answering Prime Minister Pei Gong's (裴公) questions about the purpose, it lists six Dharma heirs of Mazu (Mazu), the first of which is Jiangling Daowu. And Quan Deyi's (權德輿) 'Mazu Ta Ming' records eleven disciples such as Huihai (慧海) and Zhizang (智藏), and Daowu is also among them. There is also the 'Lidai Diwang Jigu Lue', which is compiled into four volumes, recording the transmission of the Tianwang and Tianhuang branches in a clear and detailed manner.
。出第三卷三十四葉中。迨趙宋佛國白禪師修續燈錄。計梵本三十六卷。敘雪竇顯為馬祖九世孫。益知雲門一宗。不屬曹洞派下無疑。如宋洪覺范禪師。辨明天王天皇兩支宗派。則林間錄上卷十三葉中。燦然明備。亦北藏我字函所收者。更如祖源通要一書。編卷三十。亦載天王為馬祖之嗣。則有宋西余山拱辰禪師所集也。已上十種。或隱或顯。不少概見。若靈隱大川禪師之五燈會元。幾經翻刻。藍弦剎誦。內注一篇。辨明天王天皇兩派。確實雅馴。總之不離古文者近是。他若人天眼目內載覺夢堂重較五家宗派序。並明天王天皇兩支。又何詳引而博論也。事具五卷一十三葉中。嗣是宋尚書員外郎夏卿呂公之銘雪竇塔也。乃謂禪師諱重顯。馬祖九世孫。智門之法嗣。夫雪竇顯為馬祖九世孫。則雲門一宗。出自南嶽派下。夫復何疑。爰及張相國無盡。議論宗派。皆稱道悟嗣馬祖。信從有徴也。且有擇法驗人不謬之語。更別出手眼矣。即云壑心燈錄。並如前制。天王歸入馬祖下。迄有明那羅延窟之汝稷瞿公。所集指月錄三十卷。分清天王天皇。兩派不差。第九卷五十葉中。實詳且盡。后海昌宰官黎眉郭居士。集教外別傳一十六卷。亦以天王繫馬祖派下。證據頗詳。見本書第七卷首葉。雪嶠大師為之弁首。至我天童密老和尚直說
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 出自第三卷第三十四頁中。直到趙宋佛國白禪師修訂《續燈錄》，計算梵文版本共三十六卷，敘述雪竇顯（Xuedou Xian，禪師名）為馬祖（Mazu，禪師名，即道一）的九世孫。更加明確雲門宗（Yunmen School）不屬於曹洞宗（Caodong School）的派系。例如宋朝洪覺范禪師辨明天王（Tianwang，禪師名）和天皇（Tianhuang，禪師名）兩支宗派，在《林間錄》上卷第十三頁中，記載得非常清楚詳盡，也被北藏我字函所收錄。再如《祖源通要》一書，第三十卷也記載天王是馬祖的後嗣，這是由宋朝西余山拱辰禪師所編輯的。以上十種記載，或隱晦或明顯，大致可見。至於靈隱大川禪師的《五燈會元》，幾經翻刻，在藍弦寺被誦讀，其中一篇註釋，辨明天王和天皇兩派，確實雅正馴順。總而言之，不脫離古文的記載比較接近事實。其他如《人天眼目》內記載覺夢堂重新校對五家宗派的序言，也明確了天王和天皇兩支。又何必詳細引用而廣泛討論呢？事情記載在第五卷第十三頁中。之後是宋朝尚書員外郎夏卿呂公為雪竇塔撰寫的銘文，說禪師名諱重顯，是馬祖的九世孫，智門（Zhimen，禪師名）的法嗣。雪竇顯是馬祖的九世孫，那麼雲門宗出自南嶽（Nanyue）派下，還有什麼可懷疑的呢？以及張相國無盡議論宗派，都稱道悟（Daowu，禪師名）是馬祖的後嗣，信從有證據。並且有擇法驗人不會出錯的說法，更是別具手眼。即使是《云壑心燈錄》，也和之前的記載一樣，將天王歸入馬祖門下。直到明朝那羅延窟的汝稷瞿公所編輯的《指月錄》三十卷，清楚地劃分了天王和天皇兩派，沒有偏差。第九卷第五十頁中，記載得非常詳細且完整。後來海昌宰官黎眉郭居士編輯《教外別傳》一十六卷，也把天王歸於馬祖派下，證據非常詳細，見本書第七卷首葉，雪嶠大師為之作序。至於我天童密老和尚直說
【English Translation】 English version From the thirty-fourth leaf of the third volume. Until the Zhao Song dynasty, the Buddhist monk Baichan revised the 'Continued Records of the Lamp,' calculating thirty-six volumes of the Sanskrit version, narrating Xuedou Xian (禪師名, a Chan master's name) as the ninth-generation descendant of Mazu (禪師名, a Chan master's name, namely Daoyi). It is even clearer that the Yunmen School (Yunmen School) does not belong to the Caodong School (Caodong School). For example, the Song dynasty Chan master Hongjue Fan distinguished the two branches of Tianwang (禪師名, a Chan master's name) and Tianhuang (禪師名, a Chan master's name), which are recorded very clearly and in detail in the thirteenth leaf of the first volume of 'Linjianlu,' and are also included in the Northern Canon, letter 'Wo.' Furthermore, in the book 'Zuyuan Tongyao,' the thirtieth volume also records that Tianwang is a descendant of Mazu, which was compiled by the Song dynasty Chan master Gongchen of Xiyushan. The above ten records, whether obscure or obvious, are roughly visible. As for Chan master Dachuan of Lingyin's 'Wudeng Huiyuan,' it has been repeatedly reprinted and recited in Lanxian Temple, with a commentary distinguishing the two schools of Tianwang and Tianhuang, which is indeed elegant and docile. In short, records that do not deviate from ancient texts are closer to the truth. Others, such as the preface to the re-collation of the five schools by Juemengtang recorded in 'Renyantianmu,' also clearly state the two branches of Tianwang and Tianhuang. Why bother to quote in detail and discuss extensively? The matter is recorded in the thirteenth leaf of the fifth volume. Afterwards, Xia Qing Lu Gong, a Song dynasty official of the Ministry of Works, wrote an inscription for the Xuedou Pagoda, saying that the Chan master's name was Chongxian, the ninth-generation descendant of Mazu, and the Dharma heir of Zhimen (禪師名, a Chan master's name). Xuedou Xian is the ninth-generation descendant of Mazu, so the Yunmen School comes from the Nanyue (Nanyue) lineage, what else is there to doubt? And Zhang Xiangguo Wujin discussed the schools, all saying that Daowu (禪師名, a Chan master's name) was the successor of Mazu, and there is evidence to believe. Moreover, there is a saying that choosing the Dharma and testing people will not go wrong, which is even more unique. Even the 'Yunhe Xindenglu' follows the previous records, placing Tianwang under Mazu's lineage. Until the thirty volumes of 'Zhiyuelu' compiled by Ru Ji Qu Gong of Naluoyan Cave in the Ming dynasty, clearly dividing the two schools of Tianwang and Tianhuang without error. In the fiftieth leaf of the ninth volume, it is recorded very detailed and complete. Later, Li Mei Guo Jushi, a magistrate of Haichang, compiled sixteen volumes of 'Jiaowai Biezuan,' also placing Tianwang under the Mazu lineage, with very detailed evidence, see the first leaf of the seventh volume of this book, with a preface by Master Xueqiao. As for our Abbot Mi of Tiantong directly said
內。致司理海岸黃公書牘。辨論天王天皇兩派。見於七卷一十三葉中。又判至公說所辨兩支。詳明顯著。附直說第八卷后也。復有禪燈世譜。所編天王天皇世系較然。詳具本書九卷中。又有福唐居士吳侗氏。制祖師圖。亦收天王于馬派。盡皆百世同風。未得明孝廉大含王谷居士。著有宗門正名錄。證辨兩家支派。發明宗旨。纖悉畢具。豈非年世逾邁。音徽如旦者歟。博雅君子。觀之往古。驗之當世。述者之心。庶有豸乎。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 內中收錄了致司理海岸黃公的書信，辯論天王（Deva-Raja，意為天上的國王）和天皇（Tenno，日本天皇的稱號）兩派的觀點，見於第七卷第十三頁中。又判別了至公的說法所辯論的兩支，詳細明顯地闡述出來，附在直說第八卷之後。還有禪燈世譜，其中所編的天王和天皇的世系非常清晰。詳細內容都記載於本書第九卷中。又有福唐居士吳侗先生，製作了祖師圖，也將天王歸於馬派。這些都體現了百世以來的共同風尚。幸好有明朝的孝廉大含王谷居士，著有《宗門正名錄》，考證辨析了兩家的支派，闡明了宗旨，纖毫畢現，無所遺漏。這難道不是年代越久遠，音容笑貌越清晰嗎？博學高雅的君子，觀察過去，驗證當今，敘述者的心意，或許能略有所知吧。
【English Translation】 English version: Inside, there is a letter to Huang Gong, the Sili Coast official, debating the two schools of Deva-Raja (Deva-Raja, meaning Heavenly King) and Tenno (Tenno, the title of the Japanese Emperor), found in Volume 7, page 13. It also distinguishes the two branches debated in Zhigong's sayings, explaining them in detail and clearly, appended after Volume 8 of 'Straight Talk'. Furthermore, there is the 'Genealogy of the Zen Lamp', which clearly compiles the lineages of Deva-Raja and Tenno. Detailed information is recorded in Volume 9 of this book. Additionally, there is Wu Tong, a lay Buddhist from Futang, who created a portrait of the Patriarchs, also placing Deva-Raja in the Ma (Mazu Daoyi's) lineage. All of these reflect the common practice of hundreds of generations. Fortunately, there is the Ming Dynasty's Xiaolian Da Han Wang Gu, who wrote 'A Correct Naming Record of the Sect', examining and distinguishing the branches of the two schools, clarifying the doctrines in minute detail, without omission. Isn't it true that the further back in time we go, the clearer the voices and appearances become? Learned and elegant gentlemen, observing the past and verifying the present, perhaps can understand the narrator's intentions to some extent.