X86n1604_法門鋤宄
卍新續藏第 86 冊 No. 1604 法門鋤宄
No. 1604-A 重刻法門鋤宄(並)五家辨正序
仲弓指綠林之徒目為樑上君子。豈意我法門中容此奸矣。白巖符公此編一出。宿奸老蠹無爾措足處。雖嚴燈及禪燈若干締構。不足一捏而已。所以海市蜃樓多少駢闐。皎日麗天則悉為烏有也。余頃塞于諾責著五家辨正。于其言也支桑巧拙。不能無異其義。偶歸一揆。故忘狗尾續貂之丑。僅以劍環一呎之鳴。謾當明宗正訛之鼓唱云爾。
元祿庚午春姑洗穀旦
贊陽沙門 存德巖題
No. 1604-B 法門鋤宄序
元至正間。越天衣清公翻刻大川所編燈元惑。廷俊序引偽言小注于天皇章下。後人不察其妄。遂以為然。有若以尹氏為正卿。為隱母往往然也。數百年來從未有能決其孰是。今錢塘白巖和尚考之以編年。原之以情理。真偽審。誵訛辨。披重昏而睹太陽。何其明顯。雲門法眼兩宗之祖。今而後人不敢更東扯西拽。有惠後學其亦至矣。茲特單梓公諸天下。庶幾乎非徒使知丘玄素之為烏有。而且得使知張無盡決未及見金山穎公。必也討得二碑之說可立破之而無遺孑。當不復更贅一辭。
康熙八年己酉冬至前三日雲門顯聖禪院住持自若深道人題于寶鏡
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 仲弓把綠林強盜稱為樑上君子，哪裡想到佛門中竟然也容納了這種奸賊！白巖符公的這部著作一出，那些老奸巨猾之徒將無處藏身。即使嚴燈和禪燈之流再怎麼結黨營私，也不堪一擊。所以，海市蜃樓無論多麼壯觀，在皎潔的太陽照耀下都會化為烏有。我之前因為推脫不掉責任，寫了《五家辨正》，對他們的言論進行辯駁，雖然有些牽強附會，但大義上並沒有什麼不同，姑且忘記狗尾續貂的醜陋，僅以劍環微弱的鳴叫，權當是匡正謬誤的鼓聲罷了。 元祿庚午年（1690年）春日，贊陽沙門存德巖題。 《法門鋤宄序》 元至正年間（1341-1368年），越地天衣清公翻刻了大川所編的《燈元惑》，廷俊在序言中引用了虛假的言論，並在天皇章下作了錯誤的註釋。後人不辨真偽，就信以為真，就像把尹氏當作正卿，把隱母當作常理一樣。幾百年來，從未有人能夠辨明真相。現在，錢塘白巖和尚通過編年考證，根據情理進行推斷，真偽得以明辨，謬誤得以糾正，撥開重重迷霧，得見太陽，多麼明顯啊！雲門宗和法眼宗這兩宗的祖師，現在之後的人不敢再東拉西扯。對後學的幫助也太大了。現在特意單獨刊印公諸于天下，希望不僅能讓人們知道丘玄素是虛構的人物，而且還能讓人們知道張無盡絕對沒有見過金山穎公。一定要徹底駁倒二碑的說法，不留任何殘餘。我就不再多說一句了。 康熙八年己酉年（1669年）冬至前三日，雲門顯聖禪院住持自若深道人題于寶鏡。
【English Translation】 English version Zhonggong referred to bandits as 'gentlemen on the roof beams.' Who would have thought that our Buddhist community would harbor such traitors! With the publication of this work by Baiyan Fugong, those cunning and deceitful individuals will have nowhere to hide. Even if Yan Deng and Chan Deng and their ilk form cliques, they are no match for it. Therefore, no matter how magnificent the mirages may be, they will vanish under the bright sun. I previously wrote 'Five Schools' Differentiation' due to unavoidable responsibility, refuting their arguments. Although some points may seem far-fetched, the overall meaning is not different. I will set aside the ugliness of adding a dog's tail to a sable coat, and merely use the faint sound of a sword ring as a drumbeat to correct errors. In the spring of Genwu year of the Genroku era (1690), inscribed by Shramana Cunde Yan of Zanyang. Preface to 'Weeding Out the Deceitful in the Dharma Gate' During the Zhizheng era of the Yuan dynasty (1341-1368), Qinggong of Tianyi in Yue re-engraved the 'Lamp Records of Confusion' compiled by Dachuan. In his preface, Tingjun quoted false statements and made erroneous annotations under the chapter on Emperor Tianhuang. Later generations, failing to discern the truth, accepted them as fact, just as they would regard the Yin clan as the rightful ministers and hidden mothers as the norm. For hundreds of years, no one has been able to determine the truth. Now, the monk Baiyan of Qiantang has examined it through chronological research and reasoned analysis. The truth and falsehood are distinguished, and the errors are corrected. He dispels the heavy darkness and reveals the sun, how clear it is! The founders of the Yunmen and Fayan schools will no longer be subject to random interpretations. His help to later learners is immense. Now, it is specially printed and made public to the world, hoping not only to make people aware that Qiu Xuansu is a fictional character, but also to make them realize that Zhang Wujin never met Yinggong of Jinshan. The theory of the two steles must be thoroughly refuted, leaving no remnants. I will not add another word. Inscribed by Ziruo Shendao, abbot of Yunmen Xiansheng Chan Monastery, on the third day before the winter solstice of the Jiyou year of the Kangxi era (1669), at Baojing.
堂上
No. 1604
法門鋤宄卷一
古杭白巖偶道人 凈符 著
越州雲門大樗子 凈深 閱
南泉下有曇照禪師一人。與趙州長沙茱萸子湖諸老為同門昆季。住荊州白馬。道出常情。事蹟可愛。嘗云快活快活。及臨終乃叫苦苦。有院主致問推枕一篇。機語備載皇藏傳燈諸錄。而地藏恩寶峰照圓照本皆有頌。現刻頌古聯珠集中。此天下古今所共睹者。今人特殺好奇。向虛空里架樓閣。不循其實。乃于馬祖下幻出個天王悟來。將曇照機語栽為天王悟事。乃首尾不漏一言。不差一字。此異事也。噫。世豈有兩人同一州。同一機語。復同一事蹟。豈理也哉。乃又有翻刻燈錄者。竟將白馬曇照直削之。南泉下去了一嫡嗣。使白馬一代龍象寥寥無所聞。馬祖下添入一偽嗣。使一百三十七同門嘿嘿無所識。其何所為而然歟。吾不得而知之也。試以詢諸明眼。
僧寶傳第四卷玄沙章末云。石頭之宗至是遂中興之。夫玄沙與雲門為昆季。同嗣雪峰存。存嗣德山鑒。鑒嗣龍潭信。信嗣天皇悟。悟嗣石頭遷。覺范雲石頭之宗至是中興。豈泛泛無據而然者。雲門偃出香林遠。遠出智門祚。祚出雪竇顯。此又世系之所最為明著者。水有源。木有本。非可混者所從來矣。何今之無本。流乃硁硁然。妄
以顯為大寂九世孫。此何說耶。鳴呼。法門秋晚。不謂至是。
景德傳燈錄載馬祖之嗣一百三十八人。內七十五人見錄。六十三人無機緣語句不錄。與傳法正宗記所紀同。初未見有所謂天王悟者。五燈會元載馬祖之嗣七十六人見錄。指月錄載馬祖之嗣四十七人見錄。皆絕無所謂天王悟者。而所有者乃天皇悟。悟嗣石頭遷。青原第三葉也。記曰。大鑒之三世石頭希遷禪師。其所出法嗣凡二十一人。首曰荊州天皇道悟者此也。傳燈正宗皆歷朝所奉藏典。乃本宗嫡子親孫所自定之家譜。他如雪峰廣錄聯珠通集佛祖統記玄要廣集諸書。孰不曰龍潭一支為青原之所出。自唐抵清歷朝不知凡幾。經聖君賢臣所披閱不知凡幾。其腳下兒孫尊奉崇事不知凡幾。千餘年來從未聞有敢擅便移易之者。蓋水源木本非可從他處假借。佛國白曰。南嶽山頭見石頭。便歸古岸狎沙鷗。謾分胡餅為香餌。引得金龍直上鉤。讀之亦可以瞭然。無復疑矣。何今人不據其實。乃恣意變亂。甘墮妄庸。竟將龍潭一支改入馬祖會下。于馬祖下假捏一天王道悟。謂與天皇道悟同時以便相溷。既苦無所謂機緣語句。乃割取南泉之嗣白馬曇照常云快活臨終叫苦一段因緣。栽為天王悟事。且假海鹽黎眉居士名以掩其過。公然為書曰教外別傳。僭行於世。蔑視皇藏。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 以顯為大寂（馬祖道一）的九世孫。這是什麼說法呢？唉！佛法衰落到如此地步，真沒想到。
《景德傳燈錄》記載馬祖的後嗣一百三十八人，其中七十五人被收錄，六十三人因為沒有機緣語句而未被收錄，這與《傳法正宗記》所記載的相同。起初沒有看到有所謂天王道悟這個人。《五燈會元》記載馬祖的後嗣七十六人被收錄，《指月錄》記載馬祖的後嗣四十七人被收錄，都絕對沒有所謂天王道悟這個人。而有的是天皇道悟（748-807）。道悟是石頭希遷（700-790）的後嗣，是青原行思（？-740）的第三代弟子。《傳法正宗記》說：『大鑒慧能（638-713）的三世孫是石頭希遷禪師，他所出的法嗣共有二十一人，第一個就是荊州天皇道悟。』這就是這個人。《傳燈錄》、《傳法正宗記》都是歷朝所奉的經典，是本宗嫡系子孫自己確定的家譜。其他的如《雪峰廣錄》、《聯珠通集》、《佛祖統紀》、《玄要廣集》等書，哪一本不是說龍潭崇信（752-824）這一支是青原行思門下所出的？自唐朝到清朝，經歷了無數朝代，經過聖明的君主和賢能的臣子披閱了無數次，他們的子孫後代尊奉崇拜了無數次，一千多年來從未聽說有人敢擅自更改的。因為水源木本不是可以從別處假借的。《佛國白》說：『南嶽山頭見石頭，便歸古岸狎沙鷗。謾分胡餅為香餌，引得金龍直上鉤。』讀了這些，也可以清楚明白，不再有疑惑了。為什麼現在的人不根據事實，卻隨意變亂，甘願墮落為虛妄平庸之輩，竟然將龍潭崇信這一支改入馬祖道一門下，在馬祖道一門下假造一個天王道悟，說他和天皇道悟是同時代的人，以便互相混淆。既然苦於沒有所謂的機緣語句，就割取南泉普愿（748-835）的後嗣白馬曇照（生卒年不詳）常說『快活』臨終叫苦的一段因緣，栽贓為天王道悟的事蹟，並且假借海鹽黎眉居士的名義來掩蓋他們的過錯，公然寫書叫做《教外別傳》，僭越地在世上流傳，蔑視皇家的典藏。
English version: He claims to be the ninth-generation descendant of Da Ji (Mazu Daoyi). What is this claim based on? Alas! The Dharma has declined to such an extent; I never imagined it would come to this.
The Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp records one hundred and thirty-eight successors of Mazu, of whom seventy-five are included, and sixty-three are not included because they lack opportune words and phrases. This is consistent with what is recorded in the Zhengzongji. Initially, there was no mention of a so-called Tianwang Wudao. The Wudeng Huiyuan records seventy-six successors of Mazu, and the Zhiyuelu records forty-seven successors of Mazu, all of whom absolutely do not include the so-called Tianwang Wudao. What exists is Tianhuang Wudao (748-807). Wudao is a successor of Shitou Xiqian (700-790), and is the third-generation disciple of Qingyuan Xingsi (?-740). The Zhengzongji says: 'The third-generation descendant of Dajian Huineng (638-713) is Chan Master Shitou Xiqian, who produced twenty-one Dharma successors, the first of whom is Jingzhou Tianhuang Daowu.' This is the person. The Records of the Transmission of the Lamp and the Zhengzongji are classics revered by successive dynasties, and are the family genealogies determined by the direct descendants of this sect. Other books, such as the Extensive Records of Xuefeng, the Collected Pearls, the Comprehensive Collection of the Patriarchs, and the Extensive Collection of Profound Essentials, all state that the Longtan Chongxin (752-824) lineage originated from Qingyuan Xingsi. From the Tang Dynasty (618-907) to the Qing Dynasty (1644-1912), countless dynasties have passed, and countless wise rulers and virtuous ministers have perused them, and their descendants have revered and worshipped them countless times. For over a thousand years, no one has dared to alter them arbitrarily, because the source of the water and the root of the tree cannot be borrowed from elsewhere. Baiguo Bai says: 'At the head of Mount Nanyue, one sees Shitou, then returns to the ancient shore to play with the sand gulls. Vainly dividing sesame cakes as fragrant bait, one lures the golden dragon straight to the hook.' Reading these, one can understand clearly and have no more doubts. Why do people today not base their actions on the facts, but arbitrarily change things, willingly falling into falsehood and mediocrity, actually changing the Longtan Chongxin lineage to be under Mazu Daoyi, fabricating a Tianwang Daowu under Mazu Daoyi, saying that he and Tianhuang Daowu were contemporaries in order to confuse them. Since they suffer from a lack of so-called opportune words and phrases, they cut off the section of the karmic connection of Baima Tanzhao (dates unknown), a successor of Nanquan Puyuan (748-835), who often said 'happy' and cried out in pain at the end of his life, and falsely attribute it to the deeds of Tianwang Daowu, and falsely borrow the name of layman Li Mei of Haiyan to cover up their mistakes, openly writing a book called Special Transmission Outside the Teachings, presumptuously circulating it in the world, and disregarding the imperial collection.
【English Translation】 English translation line 1 English translation line 2
不懼天討。噫。出家兒爲了生死。所貴一切真實。如此妄意行事。究何所圖。夫集傳燈者為道原法眼二世孫。著正宗者為明教雲門四世孫。總龍潭七世孫也。其嫡子親孫所自定之家譜不信。外此可信乎。嗚呼。是真難掩。是偽不昌。茍偽而能昌。則吾將以斯言亦為妄矣。
澧州龍潭崇信禪師。渚宮人。家賣餅為業。少而英異。初悟和尚為靈鑒潛請居天皇寺。人莫之測。師居於寺巷。常日以十餅饋之(云云)。此燈錄會元諸書所載如此。夫為靈鑒潛請者。乃城東天皇道悟也。非假捏城西之道悟明矣。居於寺巷者。乃城東天皇寺巷也。今荊南城東有天皇巷。非可泯滅。而城西之巷既無所謂天皇之名。則龍潭非天王之嗣又明矣。今妄人于龍潭章雖槧去初悟和尚為靈鑒潛請居天皇寺人莫之測一十七字。其如居於寺巷饋餅事蹟。井井然之。不可掩滅。何是。則日以十餅饋者饋城東天皇道悟也。留餅反惠者乃天皇道悟。非天王道悟又明矣。何也。為靈鑒潛請。人既不測。故信日得以十餅饋。若丘碑所云。節使親臨迎衙供養者。則四事豐饒。貴顯求見且不得。而鋪家兒乃敢以十餅見瀆耶。今人不細審詳。一味鹵莽恣生滅心。妄行改易。變亂宗統。祇有徒取識者之笑耳。於他云法二宗復何損益。然則聞人之碑圭峰之狀。德輿之銘
。又何所據而然耶。前後推酌既無確據。則為好事者詭心妄捏。又奚待言。
夢覺堂重校五家宗派序云。張無盡疑洞山德山垂手不同。恐自天皇處或有差誤。後於達觀穎處得唐符載所撰天皇道悟塔記。又討得丘玄素所作天王道悟塔記(云云)。此訛言也。達觀穎寂於何時。張無盡卒於何時。而乃云無盡從穎處得兩道悟碑。夫達觀穎為谷隱聦嗣。寂于宋仁宗嘉祐四年己亥除夕。張無盡卒于宋徽宗宣和三年辛丑十一月。以辛丑上溯己亥。相去六十三載。使無盡壽年七十。當穎示寂之年僅七歲。即壽八十亦不過十六七歲。此正讀書習舉業時。孜孜于文章功名且未暇。而有暇于佛學乎。即有暇佛學。未必即能留心宗乘。能留心宗乘。未必即能討論門庭宗派中事。何以知之。按無盡傳云。年十九應舉人京道。由向氏家登第回。遂為向氏婿。初任主簿。見梵筴莊嚴。遽怫然欲作無佛論。后訪同列得維摩經。讀之始能信向佛乘。時年已二十有餘矣。以二十有餘之年且不耐見梵筴之莊嚴。則其于佛門尚未生信。尚未生信又詎有能注意宗乘。討論門庭宗派之事哉。此特姑就無盡壽年八十而言。若無盡壽止七十。則當穎未寂之前僅一六七歲孩童耳。顧乃云從穎處得符載碑。又討得丘玄素碑。然乎否乎。此不待辨而自知。其為妄誕明矣
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 又有什麼根據這樣說呢？前後推敲，既然沒有確鑿的證據，那就是好事者憑空捏造的，又有什麼好說的呢？
《夢覺堂重校五家宗派序》中說，張無盡懷疑洞山和德山的垂手說法不同，恐怕在天皇道悟那裡就有了差錯。後來在達觀穎（僧人名）那裡得到了唐符載所撰寫的天皇道悟塔記，又找到了丘玄素所作的天王道悟塔記（等等）。這是訛傳啊！達觀穎寂滅於何時？張無盡卒於何時？竟然說無盡從穎處得到了兩篇道悟碑文。達觀穎是谷隱聦的嗣法弟子，寂滅于宋仁宗嘉祐四年（1059）己亥除夕。張無盡卒于宋徽宗宣和三年（1121）辛丑十一月。從辛丑年向上推到己亥年，相差六十三年。即使無盡活到七十歲，當穎寂滅的時候也只有七歲。即使活到八十歲，也不過十六七歲。這正是讀書學習準備科舉的時候，專心於文章功名還來不及，哪裡有空閑研究佛學呢？即使有空閑研究佛學，未必就能留心宗乘，能留心宗乘，未必就能討論門庭宗派中的事情。怎麼知道的呢？按照《無盡傳》的記載，十九歲時到京城參加科舉考試，從向氏家考中進士回來，就做了向氏的女婿。最初擔任主簿，見到佛經的莊嚴，竟然勃然大怒，想要寫《無佛論》。後來拜訪同僚得到了《維摩經》，讀了之後才開始相信佛法。那時已經二十多歲了。以二十多歲的年紀尚且不能忍受見到佛經的莊嚴，那麼他對佛門還沒有產生信仰。還沒有產生信仰，又怎麼能注意宗乘，討論門庭宗派的事情呢？這僅僅是姑且按照無盡活到八十歲來說的。如果無盡只活到七十歲，那麼當穎未寂滅之前，僅僅是一個六七歲的孩童罷了。竟然說從穎處得到了符載的碑文，又找到了丘玄素的碑文。是真的嗎？不是真的嗎？這不用辯論自己就知道，那是荒謬的，很明顯啊！
【English Translation】 English version: What is the basis for saying that? After considering it back and forth, since there is no definite evidence, it is merely a fabrication by someone who likes to stir up trouble. What more is there to say?
The preface to the 'Mengjue Hall Re-edited Five Houses' Lineage' says that Zhang Wujin suspected that the 'hanging hands' teachings of Dongshan and Deshan were different, and feared that there might have been errors in the teachings of Tianhuang Daowu (Zen master). Later, he obtained the 'Tower Inscription of Tianhuang Daowu' written by Tang Fuzai from Daguan Ying (monk), and also found the 'Tower Inscription of Tianwang Daowu' written by Qiu Xuansu (etc.). This is a false statement! When did Daguan Ying pass away? When did Zhang Wujin die? How could it be said that Wujin obtained two Daowu inscriptions from Ying? Daguan Ying was a Dharma heir of Guyin Cong, and passed away on New Year's Eve in the fourth year of the Jiayou era (1059) of Emperor Renzong of the Song Dynasty. Zhang Wujin died in the eleventh month of the third year of the Xuanhe era (1121) of Emperor Huizong of the Song Dynasty. Counting back sixty-three years from the year Xinchou to the year Jihai. Even if Wujin lived to be seventy years old, he would have been only seven years old when Ying passed away. Even if he lived to be eighty years old, he would have been only sixteen or seventeen years old. This was the time when he was studying hard to prepare for the imperial examinations, and he was too busy with his literary achievements and fame to have time to study Buddhism. Even if he had time to study Buddhism, he might not have been able to pay attention to the Zen lineage. If he could pay attention to the Zen lineage, he might not have been able to discuss matters within the school's lineage. How do we know this? According to the biography of Wujin, at the age of nineteen, he went to the capital to take the imperial examinations, and after passing the examinations, he became the son-in-law of the Xiang family. He initially served as a registrar, and when he saw the solemnity of the Buddhist scriptures, he was furious and wanted to write 'On the Absence of Buddha'. Later, he visited a colleague and obtained the 'Vimalakirti Sutra', and after reading it, he began to believe in Buddhism. At that time, he was already over twenty years old. At the age of over twenty, he could not even bear to see the solemnity of the Buddhist scriptures, so he had not yet developed faith in Buddhism. If he had not yet developed faith, how could he have paid attention to the Zen lineage and discussed matters within the school's lineage? This is only based on the assumption that Wujin lived to be eighty years old. If Wujin only lived to be seventy years old, then he would have been only a six or seven-year-old child before Ying passed away. How could it be said that he obtained Fuzai's inscription from Ying, and also found Qiu Xuansu's inscription? Is it true? Is it not true? This is self-evident without debate. It is absurd, very obvious!
。且無盡留心宗乘在晚年事。按傳哲宗元祐六年辛未為江西漕。見兜率悅。于托缽話疑甚。夜半觸翻溺器乃得徹悟。年當五十矣。以元祐辛未逆數至嘉祐己亥。相去三十三年。始於宗乘有悟。詎未見兜率已前少年遽能持論洞山德山之垂手接物事耶。且此持論。據云今以丘符二記證之。方知吾擇法驗人之不謬。則此言必在得碑之前。豈十餘歲志學之書生遽能發此宗乘堂奧語言耶。此在已見兜率徹悟之後或可少信。若云在達觀未寂之前。則孩童拍盲斷乎不能有及於此。又其家住渚宮。渚宮在荊州。而城之東西天皇天王既有碑碣。則道悟之一人兩人朝夕在無盡眉睫間。固可了了然毫𩬊不昧。又何必致疑道悟似有兩人。又何必託辭曰後於達觀處討得丘苻二碑。始自信擇法驗人之不謬。且達觀居金山。去渚宮三千餘里。豈有眼前碑碣反不去看考。乃區區遠從數千裡外人討得。此語之偽又何待辨。此直後人假捏。正一無根虛妄之談耳。無根虛妄之談。強君子以必信。復何得哉。吾愿諸肩荷法門者秉公執正。無滋其惑可也。
明成弘間雪庭禪師。杭仁和桂氏子。開法昭慶。為臨濟下二十四世。西蜀直指堂休休翁。南峰之子。有幻寄錄行世。而續略繼燈誤列為未詳法嗣。此訛也。乃古南刻師拈古。又以古庭前堅名。是不考古庭雪
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 而且無盡禪師晚年特別留心宗門佛法。按照記載，哲宗元祐六年（1091年）辛未年，他擔任江西漕運使，拜見了兜率悅禪師，對於托缽化緣的事情產生了疑問。半夜裡不小心碰翻了尿壺，於是徹底覺悟。當時他已經五十歲了。從元祐辛未年往前推算到嘉祐己亥年，相差三十三年。他最初對宗門佛法有所領悟。難道在沒有見到兜率悅禪師之前，少年時期的他就能持有洞山良價禪師、德山宣鑒禪師垂手接物的見解嗎？而且這種見解，據說現在用丘、符二人的碑記來驗證，才知道自己選擇佛法、檢驗人的方法沒有錯。那麼這句話一定是在得到碑記之前說的。難道一個十幾歲立志求學的書生，就能發表這種宗門佛法精深奧妙的語言嗎？這如果在已經見過兜率悅禪師、徹底覺悟之後說，或許還能稍微相信。如果說在達觀禪師去世之前，那麼一個孩童胡亂猜測，斷然不可能達到這種程度。而且他家住在渚宮，渚宮在荊州。而城的東西兩邊，天皇寺、天王寺既然有碑碣，那麼道悟禪師的一舉一動，早晚都在無盡禪師的眼皮底下，本來可以清清楚楚、明明白白，又何必懷疑道悟禪師好像是兩個人？又何必託辭說後來在達觀禪師那裡找到了丘、符二人的碑記，才自信選擇佛法、檢驗人的方法沒有錯。而且達觀禪師住在金山，距離渚宮三千多里。難道眼前的碑碣反而不去看考證，卻偏偏遠從幾千裡外的人那裡討得？這種話的虛假又何必辨別？這簡直是後人假造的，完全是無根無據的虛妄之談。這種無根無據的虛妄之談，強迫君子一定要相信，又怎麼能行得通呢？我希望各位肩負佛法重任的人，秉持公正，堅持正義，不要助長這種迷惑人的說法。 明朝成弘年間，雪庭禪師，是杭州仁和縣桂氏的兒子，在昭慶寺開壇講法，是臨濟宗第二十四代傳人。西蜀直指堂的休休翁，是南峰禪師的兒子，有《幻寄錄》流傳於世。而《續略繼燈》錯誤地將他列為未詳法嗣。這是錯誤的。是古南刻書人拈古，又以古庭前堅為名。這是不考證古庭雪庭禪師。
【English Translation】 English version: Moreover, Chan Master Wujin paid special attention to the Zongmen (Zen school) Dharma in his later years. According to records, in the sixth year of the Yuanyou reign (1091 AD) of Emperor Zhezong, the Xinwei year, he served as the transport commissioner of Jiangxi, and met Chan Master Doushuai Yue, developing doubts about the practice of begging for alms. In the middle of the night, he accidentally overturned a chamber pot, and thus attained thorough enlightenment. At that time, he was already fifty years old. Counting back from the Yuanyou Xinwei year to the Jiayou Jihai year, there is a difference of thirty-three years. He initially had some understanding of the Zongmen Dharma. Could it be that before meeting Chan Master Doushuai Yue, he, as a young man, could hold the views of Chan Master Dongshan Liangjie and Chan Master Deshan Xuanjian on handling affairs with ease? Moreover, this view, it is said, is now verified by the inscriptions of Qiu and Fu, and only then did he know that his method of choosing the Dharma and examining people was not wrong. Then this statement must have been made before obtaining the inscriptions. Could a scholar in his teens, determined to study, be able to express such profound and mysterious language of the Zongmen Dharma? If this were said after having met Chan Master Doushuai Yue and attained thorough enlightenment, it might be slightly believable. If it is said that it was before Chan Master Daguan passed away, then a child's random guess could certainly not reach this level. Moreover, his family lived in Zhugong, which is in Jingzhou. And since there are steles in the east and west of the city, at the Tianhuang Temple and Tianwang Temple, then Chan Master Daowu's every move, morning and evening, was under Chan Master Wujin's nose, and could have been clearly and plainly understood. Why then suspect that Chan Master Daowu seemed to be two people? Why then make the excuse that he later found the inscriptions of Qiu and Fu at Chan Master Daguan's place, and only then was he confident that his method of choosing the Dharma and examining people was not wrong. Moreover, Chan Master Daguan lived in Jinshan, more than three thousand li away from Zhugong. Could it be that the steles in front of him were not examined, but instead he sought them from someone thousands of li away? How can the falsity of this statement not be distinguished? This is simply a fabrication by later generations, completely baseless and false talk. This baseless and false talk forces gentlemen to believe it, how can it be done? I hope that all those who bear the responsibility of the Dharma will uphold justice and adhere to righteousness, and not promote this misleading statement. During the Chenghong period of the Ming Dynasty, Chan Master Xueding, son of the Gui family of Renhe County, Hangzhou, opened a Dharma assembly at Zhaoqing Temple and was the twenty-fourth generation successor of the Linji school. Xiuxi Weng of the Zhizhi Hall in Western Shu was the son of Chan Master Nanfeng, and his 'Illusory Record' is circulated in the world. However, 'Supplementary Continuation of the Lamp' mistakenly listed him as an unknown Dharma successor. This is an error. It was Gu Nan's engraver Nian Gu, who also used Gu Tingqian Jian's name. This is not an examination of the ancient Ting Xueding.
庭之有別。況古庭堅即無際悟嗣。雪庭去悟尚有雪峰休休翁兩世之隔。則古庭與雪峰乃昆季。雪庭又古庭之孫行矣。何竟混同為一人。嗟嗟以明至清僅二百年。編錄之誤尚如。此況自唐迄今垂千載。又當何如。寂音以天皇疑為兩人。近日竟以天皇天王別而為兩人。宜乎不足辨。偽碑奚足恃。
法門鋤究(有序)
鋤究篇既出。或者曰。犯過招尤莫甚於好盡言。法門甲乙之變。已有正訛熄邪據實諸書之行。真既不得而掩矣。則偽又奚得而昌之。即有指鹿為馬證龜成鱉。流一二亦不過泄憤排怒而已。而堂堂大國明眼正人大君子居多。是又奚能盡為其所扇惑哉。隻手洵不足掩太陽。宜置之可也。抑何必傷德費辭之甚。余曰然也。吾豈好盡言哉。亦有不得已而然者。夫世之倡言為害是亂真之端者。其禍在一人可弗辨。禍及天下後世。則其辨可緩乎。茍區區于潔己存厚。避箭畏刀。忍千古不易之道。一旦矇昧于昏昏不曉之鄉。則亦將遺譏于天下。後世荷法堂前得無有愧。斯吾所以有萬不得已而然者。此耳。然則吾豈好盡言。故為傷德費辭之甚哉。抑聞之云惟善人能受盡言。則吾于晦公也又豈敢以不善人待即盡言之可也。況未即盡言兼之在衛道哉。丁未九月白巖偶道人凈符書。
自有天地以來。是非辨論何代無
之。第一經公府明眼。以大公心發至公論。是還其是。非還其非。是非既白則辨論泯息。吾人自可相忘于無懷氏之天而各安其生也。後世設有一人焉。曰向之是者可非。非者可是。是非倒置。公論毀公心滅。從無是非中妄生是非。昏蔽日月紊亂綱常。則公府具在。明眼具在。而至公辨論斯不得而忘之矣。吾宗在唐有天皇道悟禪師一人。住楚江陵。為石頭遷子。其下出雲門法眼二宗。載皇藏傳燈諸錄及正宗記最詳。集傳燈者為道原。法眼二世孫。著正宗記者為明教嵩。雲門四世孫。其所派列世系井井有條。所從來舊矣。而會元雖有小字闕疑。人皆知為非。是故刻者不敢大書。乃後人不本所自。妄意引據。翻改成言變亂祖系。先年經大君子至公剖柝疑誤冰釋。二宗得各安其祖又有年矣。今水鑑之妄突作。晦山更從而附會之。污瀆法門更亂宗祖。則辨論又烏得而免。然小字添入為疑案。以驗後世智愚業。海清公之用心或亦可嘉。吾儕自不必究可也。特後進不諳。遞以為實。禍吾宗不小。則吾儕不得不白之。請且以近事況。如臨濟下。近日所傳正派有海舟慈一人。崇禎丙子姑蘇查氏所突出之佛祖源流稿。謂慈先嗣萬峰蔚。後嗣東明旵。是以兩人之嗣為一人。三峰據沈貫所撰塔銘及印記頌。則以慈為萬峰嫡嗣。與寶藏持為伯仲。
而東明乃為慈之法侄。潭吉據無聞聰客牕夜話。則以慈為萬峰蔚之子。寶峰瑄之師。略不及寶藏東明。且以寶藏東明為疊出。又據古溪祭文。疑東明下別有一人與慈同名號者。如荊南兩道悟故事。寶華據靜庵素聯芳圖中所敘及年代遠近。則以慈為東明之子。寶峰之師。而萬峰下是別有一人同名號如慈者。山茨際公自敘住東明時。從廢紙中得旵塔銘。銘中並無海舟慈名。如上五說各不相侔。雖本支兒孫無從考定。嗟嗟去今僅二百餘年中事。且罕有能白之者。況遠隔十朝七十餘帝千有餘年外兩道悟事。而今人獨能白之乎。然一道悟以之為兩人為一人。事無不可。特考諸史籍稽諸年代。則真偽自不容其無擇矣。如當時好事者為逢迎張無盡輩所假捏之碑。謂為唐正議大夫戶部侍郎平章事荊南節度使丘玄素撰。無眼者相傳以為真。及考之史鑒編年。唐宰相年表。與荊州郡乘。則丘玄素既為烏有。而碑文之偽白日青天可無疑矣。所謂皮既不存毛自無容其所附。疑誤既辨復何所云。年來濟洞兩家幸安和好。實法門福。不謂今又突有僧水鑑者。于荊州城南御路口買孔蔚然文學宅基。構庵而居。乃平白鑿空。額名古天王寺。誑惑愚癡亂真害是。此怪誕事人詎忍聞。夫荊州城南固有天王土地堂。居民凡於事神。具鄉貫則莫不曰城南天王土地
{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：", "而東明是慈的法侄。潭吉根據《無聞聰客牕夜話》記載，則認為慈是萬峰蔚的兒子，寶峰瑄的老師，幾乎沒有提及寶藏東明，並且認為寶藏東明是重疊出現的名字。又根據古溪的祭文，懷疑東明之下另有一個人與慈同名同號，就像荊南兩道悟的故事一樣。寶華根據靜庵《素聯芳圖》中所敘述的年代遠近，則認為慈是東明的兒子，寶峰的老師，而萬峰之下另有一個人與慈同名號。山茨際公在自述居住在東明時，從廢紙中得到旵塔銘，銘文中並沒有海舟慈的名字。如上五種說法各不相同，即使是本支兒孫也無法考證確定。唉，距離現在僅僅二百多年的事情，尚且很少有人能夠弄清楚，更何況是遠隔十朝七十多位皇帝一千多年外的兩道悟的事情，而現在的人竟然能夠弄清楚嗎？然而，將一道悟看作兩個人或一個人，事情並非不可能。只要考證各種史籍，稽查各個年代，那麼真偽自然不容許沒有選擇。例如當時好事者爲了逢迎張無盡等人所假造的碑，說是唐（公元618年-907年）朝正議大夫戶部侍郎平章事荊南節度使丘玄素撰寫。沒有眼力的人互相傳說是真的。等到考證史鑒編年、《唐宰相年表》以及《荊州郡乘》，那麼丘玄素本來就是烏有之人，而碑文的虛假在光天化日之下是毫無疑問的。所謂皮都不存在了，毛自然沒有容身之處可以依附。疑慮錯誤既然已經辨明，又有什麼可說的呢？近年來濟宗和洞宗兩家幸好安寧和睦，實在是佛門的福氣。沒想到現在又突然有個僧人水鑑，在荊州城南御路口買下孔蔚然文學的宅基地，建造庵居住，竟然憑空捏造，題名為古天王寺，欺騙迷惑愚蠢的人，擾亂真理危害正道。這種怪誕的事情怎麼能忍心聽聞。荊州城南本來就有天王土地堂，居民凡是祭祀神靈，寫上籍貫，沒有不說城南天王土地的。", "english_translations": [ "English version:", "And Dongming was Ci's Dharma nephew. Tanji, according to 'Wu Wencong's Night Talks at the Guest Window,' considered Ci to be the son of Wanfeng Wei and the teacher of Baofeng Xuan, hardly mentioning Baozang Dongming, and regarded Baozang Dongming as a duplicated name. Furthermore, according to Gu Xi's memorial address, it was suspected that there was another person under Dongming with the same name and title as Ci, like the story of the two Daowus of Jingnan. Baohua, based on the distance of the years narrated in Jing'an's 'Su Lianfang Picture,' considered Ci to be the son of Dongming and the teacher of Baofeng, while there was another person under Wanfeng with the same name and title as Ci. Shanci Jigong, in his autobiography, mentioned that when he lived in Dongming, he obtained the inscription of the Chan Pagoda from waste paper, and there was no name of Haizhou Ci in the inscription. As the above five statements differ from each other, even the direct descendants cannot verify them. Alas, it is only a matter of more than two hundred years from now, and few people can clarify it, let alone the matter of the two Daowus more than a thousand years away, separated by seventy emperors of ten dynasties. Yet, can people today clarify it? However, it is not impossible to regard Daowu as two people or one person. As long as we examine various historical records and investigate the ages, the truth and falsehood will naturally not allow for no choice. For example, the stele forged by those who were fond of pleasing Zhang Wujin and others at that time was said to be written by Qiu Xuansu, the Tang (618-907 AD) Dynasty's Zheng Yi Daifu, Vice Minister of the Ministry of Revenue, Vice President of the Chancellery, and Jiedushi of Jingnan. Those without discernment passed it on as true. When we examine the historical records, chronicles, 'Table of Tang Dynasty Chancellors,' and 'Jingzhou Prefecture Records,' Qiu Xuansu was originally a non-existent person, and the falsity of the stele inscription is undoubtedly clear in broad daylight. As the skin does not exist, the hair naturally has no place to attach itself. Since the doubts and errors have been clarified, what else is there to say? In recent years, the Ji and Dong sects have fortunately been peaceful and harmonious, which is truly a blessing for Buddhism. Unexpectedly, now there is suddenly a monk named Shui Jian who bought the residence base of Kong Weiran Wenxue at the Yulukou south of Jingzhou City and built a nunnery to live in. He fabricated out of thin air and named it Ancient Heavenly King Temple, deceiving and confusing foolish people, disrupting the truth and harming the right path. How can one bear to hear such a bizarre thing? There is originally a Heavenly King Land Hall south of Jingzhou City. Whenever residents worship gods, they write their place of origin, and no one does not say Heavenly King Land south of the city." ] }
堂祠下云云。若天王寺則從未聞也。即業海清公重刻會元時所添入小注闕疑。亦只曰同時有二道悟。一住荊南城西天王寺。一住荊南城東天皇寺。曾未聞城南有天王寺。況城西天王者。以唐宋郡乘考之。並未有也。而有之者。但曰城東天皇寺。稱荊南首剎。重興為道悟禪師。乃龍潭信饋餅得法之地。湖廣全省志第七十四卷載之甚詳。與龍藏傳燈諸書所紀無異。世所共聞。今草市大殿巋然。巷名事實種種可稽。固不與鑿空假捏之城西天王可同日語。嗟嗟水鑑構庵供佛亦好事也。抑何必借名古蹟始為得計。即借名亦須借之有名。即有名矣更須考郡乘寺觀䫫中之有無。有然後借之乃為得。今借之於脫空無根。豈不仍成虛捏。水鑑之愚一何至是。已可嘆也。乃又有作復古天王寺碑記者。于德山碑記明宗正訛熄邪摘欺救蛾紾譏據實闢謬平心諸書。似不曾聞較彼水鑑之愚得不尤為倍甚。鳴呼。世有清白之士如明山賓者。決不妄言。一妄言則於心為有愧。不得謂為清白士。而僧中稱善知識為傳佛心印者。較清白之士高出萬萬。尊重不待言。今晦山居然一知識。不以真語實語誠諦語取信方來。乃于舉事孟浪之水鑑者反從而文其過飭其非。以歷朝所奉藏典傳燈諸錄為訛書。將偽人偽碑偽機緣諛言疑書反指為定典。紀事不稽。發言無本。是
豈所謂見道之知識哉。吾聞晦山亦法門正人。于圓戒羯磨時嘗有寧斷吾舌毋毀法門如違此誓甘墮苦坑之語。刻之梨棗。意在息諍。乃今遽作此文。以非為是。指空言有。于所立之誓迥爾相違。將為可以蒙惑戒子。聾[(壴*皮)/耳]方來。噫。欺誑佛祖。害理瞞心。越法違條。莫此為甚。晦公晦公。請以自所制立誓息諍文。向清夜無人處洗心凈慮細讀一過。問之自己以為何如。又會元天皇章后小注云。城西天王悟有碑。為丘玄素所撰者。乃越州開元業海清公于元至正甲辰重刻會元時始添入也。大川原本從無是注。此蓋因廷俊序中有云壑心燈錄未行為惜之語。後人遂附會其說假捏耳。清公不考真偽。妄為添入。其惑世誤人之甚。可謂業海矣。又那堪有承其虛而接其曏者。抑其害可甚言哉。本 朝甲午乙未間法門變亂。南都各省諸大護法大君子及諸方住持。以大公至論力為抵正。而天皇天王及種種不白之案涇渭始分。自是凡屬有識皆備知丘玄素之為烏有耳。
康熙七年秋初金陵天界法弟 大寧 謹書
法門鋤宄(終)
(附)禪通劍叟是禪師與晦山顯和尚書(是原姓官諱撫辰)
吳頭楚尾分野相聯而來往參差。艱逢晤教世出世間聲氣相若。以平生鄉慕往往幾得而失之。是恒有嘆其緣之慳也。茲
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這難道能稱作見道的知識嗎？我聽說晦山（指晦山顯，具體含義需要根據上下文確定）也是佛門中的正人。在圓戒羯磨時，他曾說過『寧願斷掉我的舌頭，也不毀壞佛門，如果違背此誓言，甘願墮入苦難的深淵』這樣的話。並把這些話刻在木板上，意在平息爭端。但現在竟然寫出這樣的文章，把不對的說成對的，指空為有，與他所立下的誓言完全背道而馳。難道是想以此來矇蔽戒子，迷惑那些剛入門的人嗎？唉！欺騙佛祖，違背道理，隱瞞自己的內心，違反戒律，沒有比這更嚴重的了。晦公啊晦公，請你用自己制定的平息爭端的誓言，在清靜的夜晚，無人之處，洗滌心靈，仔細閱讀一遍，問問自己覺得怎麼樣？還有，《會元天皇章》後面的小注說，城西天王悟有碑，是丘玄素所撰寫的。這是越州開元寺的業海清公在元至正甲辰年（1364年）重刻《會元》時才新增進去的。大川的原本中根本沒有這個註釋。這大概是因為廷俊的序言中說《壑心燈錄》沒有刊行，令人惋惜。後人就附會這個說法，憑空捏造的。清公不考證真偽，胡亂新增進去，他迷惑世人，誤導別人的行為，可以說是罪孽深重啊。又怎麼能容忍有繼承他的虛假，迎合他的人呢？這種危害難道可以用言語來形容嗎？本朝甲午年（具體年份需要根據上下文確定）乙未年（具體年份需要根據上下文確定）間，佛門發生變亂，南都各省的各位大護法、大君子以及各方住持，以公正的言論極力匡正，天皇、天王以及種種不白的案件才開始涇渭分明。從此以後，凡是有見識的人都知道丘玄素是烏有的事情。 康熙七年（1668年）秋初，金陵天界寺法弟大寧 謹書 《法門鋤宄》(終) (附)禪通劍叟是禪師與晦山顯和尚書(是原姓官諱撫辰) 吳頭楚尾，地域相連，來往不一。很難遇到能教導我世間和出世間道理，並且聲氣相投的人。因為我平生仰慕，常常幾次得到又失去，所以常常嘆息緣分太淺薄。現在
【English Translation】 English version: Can this be called the knowledge of seeing the Tao? I heard that Huishan (referring to Huishan Xian, the specific meaning needs to be determined according to the context) is also a righteous person in Buddhism. During the complete precepts karma, he once said, 'I would rather cut off my tongue than destroy the Buddhist Dharma. If I violate this oath, I am willing to fall into the abyss of suffering.' And he had these words engraved on wooden boards, intending to quell disputes. But now he has written such an article, calling what is wrong right, pointing to emptiness as existence, completely contrary to the oath he made. Could it be that he wants to deceive the precept takers and confuse those who are just entering the door? Alas! Deceiving the Buddha, violating the principles, concealing one's own heart, violating the precepts, nothing is more serious than this. Huigong, ah, Huigong, please use the oath you made to quell disputes, in the quiet night, in a place where no one is around, wash your mind, read it carefully, and ask yourself what you think? Also, the small note after the 'Huiyuan Heavenly Emperor Chapter' says that the Tianwang Wu You Stele in the west of the city was written by Qiu Xuansu. This was added by Ye Haiqing, the abbot of Kaiyuan Temple in Yuezhou, when he re-engraved 'Huiyuan' in the Jia Chen year of the Yuan Zhizheng period (1364 AD). There is no such note in the original version of Dachuan. This is probably because Tingjun's preface said that the 'He Xin Deng Lu' was not published, which is a pity. Later generations then fabricated this statement out of thin air. Qinggong did not verify the authenticity and added it indiscriminately. His behavior of confusing the world and misleading others can be said to be extremely sinful. How can we tolerate those who inherit his falsehood and cater to him? Can this harm be described in words? During the Jiawu year (specific year needs to be determined according to the context) and Yiwei year (specific year needs to be determined according to the context) of this dynasty, there was a turmoil in Buddhism. The great Dharma protectors and gentlemen of various provinces in Nandou and the abbots of various places tried their best to correct it with fair arguments. Only then did the cases of the Heavenly Emperor, the Heavenly King, and all kinds of unclear cases begin to be clearly distinguished. From then on, everyone with knowledge knew that Qiu Xuansu was a non-existent person. Written respectfully by Daning, a disciple of the Jinling Tianjie Temple, in the early autumn of the seventh year of Kangxi (1668 AD) Exterminating the Traitors of the Dharma (End) (Attached) Chan Tong Jiansou is a letter from the Zen master to the monk Huishan Xian (whose original surname was Guan, and whose official name was Fuchen) The head of Wu and the tail of Chu are connected, and the comings and goings are uneven. It is difficult to meet someone who can teach me the principles of the world and beyond, and whose voices are similar. Because I have admired it all my life, I have often gained and lost it several times, so I often sigh that the fate is too shallow. Now
不得已冒為未同之言。法門關係不敢引避以獲戾佛祖。惟臺翁垂聽焉。正法眼藏之布在方䇿也。自景德傳燈錄始。五燈宗之傳法正宗記祖之。莫不載六祖首出青原。青原出石頭。石頭出天皇悟。悟出龍潭信。信家世于荊州天皇寺巷。是以楚產習知楚事。今其故里與子孫具存。而天皇碑記載之甚詳。何所容旁參異議。矧前賢刊有正訛熄邪據實諸書行世既久。近在本朝 章皇帝甲午乙未間經朝野巨儒大公至論力為抵正。 天子聖神洞知法門錮疾。特將五燈纘續入藏。直頂傳燈正宗千百年之宗統。 聖朝已大定。萬世永無弊矣。臺翁為法門砥柱。豈不習聞之熟了然於前后費公之詭譎乎。一聞有妄人水鑑者不避上違古今 皇藏之大嫌。不畏近犯照提未出之大罪。僭將土地堂妄建為天王。僭稱祖剎以偽亂真。以烏有先生篡奪空王之嫡派。在臺翁宜何如持公秉直嚴訶斥以正之。無使滋蔓傳誤後學可也。胡乃為之文勒之石。佐助妄人狂騁。春秋責備賢者恐適以寬妄人之過也。聞在癸卯天然湘大師與臺翁邂逅生生林。語之故而告之。悔乃復走荊。訪其故老。考其遺蹤。拜其祖塋。驗其銘狀。果實實與傳燈正宗所志者的切著明。歸舟遽取原稿守江漢焚撒之。因咬齒自誓曰。顯實為水鑑所賣。敢昭告于青原石頭天皇龍潭諸大祖師。我若不廢
此藁斷此葛藤。禍如白水。臺翁言猶在耳。江漢之間一時傳頌。莫不心服子路改過之勇。不惟青原諸祖鑒其至誠無偽。即江漢間天龍鬼神必且默志其言而望日月之更也。今妄人以尼告發。而太守公差鎖拏㬥其過惡于道路。百丑傳播賄乃脫逃。向非天皇威靈顯應果報無差。當不敗露若是之甚也。所恨太守不知法門大事。不能一奮蕭斧直碎其碑以掩日月之蝕。或者曰非臺翁自碎之不足以了白水之誓。故留之以有待也。是衰朽無似。雖未識韓顧荒山龍脈發於黃梅四祖。禪通距安國又僅五六十里之近。聲息相通。卒無一言以效一得之愚。則同時大德未必不以責備之辭相波及也。倘蒙俯鑒愚忱。或轉託知交。以廢石改額之權仍屬之太守。或臺翁自命一價之使直自為之。以了結白水誓願。從此夢寐安無愧怍。則臺翁芳名不惟從此遠播千古。而是老死深山亦可無憾也。偶托缽蘄春。適逢白門僧。便藉之為郵。披肝瀝膽以盡私衷。伏惟鑒宥。戊申八月杪禪通弟空是和南奏記時年七十有五。
靈隱晦山顯禪師復劍叟是和尚書
久跂法音。恨以緣慳無由接教。近歲又以業風鼓動。返笠靈山。一入膠盆遂騎虎背。相見因緣亦欲參商矣。承諭天王碑文。原非弟本意。弟與洞上諸知識多水乳交好。豈肯存生滅心懷人我見作此不中心行
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 斬斷這些枝蔓，禍患就像白水一樣（氾濫）。臺翁（指書寫碑文的人）的話語還在耳邊。江漢一帶一時都在傳頌，無不心服子路（孔子的學生，以勇於改過聞名）改過自新的勇氣。不僅青原一系的各位祖師鑑察到他的至誠無偽，就連江漢一帶的天龍鬼神也必定默默記住他的話，期待他改過自新。如今，一個狂妄之徒以尼姑的身份告發，太守派公差鎖拿，在道路上暴露他的罪惡。各種醜事傳播開來，賄賂后才得以脫逃。如果不是天皇的威靈顯應，果報沒有差錯，怎會敗露到如此地步呢？所遺憾的是太守不瞭解佛門的大事，不能奮起蕭斧，直接砸碎那塊碑，以掩蓋日食（比喻醜事）。或者有人說，不是臺翁親自砸碎它，不足以了結白水的誓願，所以留下它以待時機。我這衰朽之人，雖然不認識韓顧荒山的龍脈發源于黃梅四祖（道信，580-651），禪通寺距離安國寺又僅有五六十里之近，聲息相通，最終沒有一句話來獻上我這淺薄的見解，那麼同時代的大德們未必不會以責備的言辭相互指責。如果蒙您俯察我的愚誠，或者轉託給相知的友人，將廢石改額的權力仍然歸屬於太守，或者臺翁自己出資，直接親自來做這件事，以了結白水的誓願，從此夢寐安穩，沒有愧疚，那麼臺翁的芳名不僅從此遠播千古，而且我老死深山也可以沒有遺憾了。我偶然托缽來到蘄春，恰好遇到白門寺的僧人，便借他作為郵差，披肝瀝膽地傾訴我的私衷，伏請您鑑諒。戊申年（具體年份需要根據上下文推斷）八月末，禪通寺弟子空是和南（佛教用語，表示敬禮）奏記，時年七十五歲。
靈隱晦山顯禪師回覆劍叟是和尚的書信
久仰您的法音，遺憾的是因為緣分淺薄，沒有機會接受教誨。近些年又因為業風鼓動，返回靈隱寺。一旦進入膠盆（比喻困境），就騎上了虎背（比喻難以擺脫）。相見的因緣恐怕也要錯過了。承蒙您告知天王碑文的事情，原本不是我的本意。我與洞上的各位知識（指有學識的僧人）大多喜歡水邊林下的生活，怎肯存著生滅之心，懷著人我之見，做出這種不忠心的行為呢？
【English Translation】 English version Cutting off these creepers and vines, misfortune is like overflowing White Water. Master Tai's (referring to the person who wrote the inscription) words are still ringing in my ears. The area between the Yangtze and Han Rivers is filled with praise, and everyone admires Zi Lu's (a student of Confucius, known for his courage to correct his mistakes) courage to correct his faults. Not only do the ancestors of the Qingyuan lineage discern his utmost sincerity and genuineness, but even the dragons, gods, and spirits between the Yangtze and Han Rivers must silently remember his words and look forward to his repentance. Now, a reckless person denounces him under the guise of a nun, and the prefect sends officials to arrest him, exposing his sins on the road. All kinds of scandals spread, and he escapes by bribery. If it were not for the manifestation of the Heavenly Emperor's power and the unerring retribution, how could it have been exposed to such an extent? What is regrettable is that the prefect does not understand the great affairs of Buddhism and cannot wield the Xiao axe to directly smash the stele, so as to cover up the solar eclipse (a metaphor for scandals). Or some say that it is not enough for Master Tai to smash it himself to end the vow of White Water, so it is left to await the opportunity. I, this decaying old man, although I do not know that the dragon vein of the desolate mountain of Han Gu originated from the Fourth Patriarch of Huangmei (Daoxin, 580-651), and Chantong Temple is only fifty or sixty miles away from Anguo Temple, with mutual communication, ultimately there is not a single word to offer my shallow opinion, then the great virtues of the same era may not blame each other with words of reproach. If you would condescend to examine my foolish sincerity, or entrust it to a knowledgeable friend, the power to change the inscription on the abandoned stone still belongs to the prefect, or Master Tai himself should pay for it and do it himself, so as to end the vow of White Water, and from then on, sleep peacefully without shame, then Master Tai's fame will not only spread far and wide for thousands of years, but I can also die in the deep mountains without regret. I happened to beg for alms in Qichun and met a monk from Baimen Temple, so I borrowed him as a postman, pouring out my heart and soul to express my private feelings. I humbly ask for your understanding. At the end of August in the year of Wushen (the specific year needs to be inferred from the context), Kong Shi, a disciple of Chantong Temple, respectfully reports, at the age of seventy-five.
Zen Master Huishan Xian of Lingyin Temple replies to the letter of Monk Jiansou Shi
I have long admired your Dharma voice, but regrettably, due to shallow affinity, I have no opportunity to receive your teachings. In recent years, I have been stirred by the winds of karma and returned to Lingyin Temple. Once I enter the glue pot (a metaphor for a predicament), I ride on the back of a tiger (a metaphor for being difficult to get rid of). The opportunity to meet may also be missed. Thank you for informing me about the Heavenly King's inscription, which was not originally my intention. I and the knowledgeable monks on the cave mostly like the life by the water and under the forest, how could I harbor the mind of birth and death, and hold the view of self and others, to do such a disloyal thing?
。壬寅偶閱藏漢上。因水鑑兄勤懇求文。孟浪屬筆。然亦實未到荊州時作也。是秋因護國請。遂親履其地。一到新創天王。心疑非天王遺址。何故。諸家記載皆云城西。而此在城南故也。急欲索回原藁。水鑑已往儀真矣。豈意水鑑多事刊板傳送。且弟署款不過曰水鑑海兄而已。乃自更沙翁大禪師。妄自標榜𡘆張過分。豈不取笑識者耶。幸近日水鑑兄傳得刻本到山。䂐作止刊。木板未曾上石。其現勒石天王者乃一榷關使李護法文也。閤府官僚及勒石名字皆載碑尾。現冊可證。辱老法翁見教自愧。一時妄作以涉爭端。道聽塗說實非信史。弟在青原拈香。何嘗不曰三宗鼻祖且親到天皇。其城西城南豈肯妄為曲說。雖水鑑兄興復古寺亦屬好事。然欲以城南而混城西。顯則不敢復附會矣。䂐作倖未刻石。不必慮其傳遠。前文偶爾孟浪。自知懺悔。倘有校正理論等事。老法翁自為主張。顯斷不怙過也。䂐刻三種。附塵法覽。
己酉七月初六日靈隱法教弟戒顯再拜謹復
(附)五家辨正
贊陽沙門 養存 述
濟北集五家辨曰。達磨西來迄於三祖。宗渾而不分矣。四祖派牛頭。五祖派北秀。六祖派青原。爾來宗派興焉。纂傳燈者不精討論。以南嶽青原為兩宗。岳下出二宗。原下出三家者非也。據唐伸撰藥山
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：壬寅年（1662年）偶然翻閱藏漢典籍，因為水鑑兄懇切求文，我便草率地寫了這篇文章。但實際上，這是我還沒到荊州時寫的。那年秋天，因為護國寺的請求，我親自去了那裡。一到新建的天王寺，我心裡就懷疑這裡不是天王寺的遺址。為什麼呢？因為各家的記載都說在城西，而這裡卻在城南。我急著想把原來的草稿要回來，但水鑑已經去了儀真。沒想到水鑑多事，竟然把文章刊印傳送。而且我署名不過是『水鑑海兄』而已，他卻擅自改成了沙翁大禪師，妄自標榜，太過分了，豈不讓人笑話嗎？幸好近日水鑑兄把刻本傳到了山上，我趕緊阻止刊印。木板還沒上石，現在勒石天王寺的是榷關使李護法的文章，所有府里的官僚以及勒石的名字都記載在碑尾，現在的冊子可以證明。老法翁您教導我，我感到慚愧。一時妄作，以至於引起爭端，道聽途說，實在不是可信的歷史。我在青原拈香時，何嘗不說三宗鼻祖，而且親自到了天皇寺，對於城西城南，豈肯妄加曲說？雖然水鑑兄興復古寺也是好事，但想用城南來混淆城西，這顯然是不敢再附會了。幸好文章還沒刻石，不必擔心它流傳很遠。前文偶爾孟浪，我自己知道懺悔。如果有校正理論等事，老法翁您自己做主張，我絕對不會堅持錯誤。這次刻了三種，附在《塵法覽》中。
己酉年（1669年）七月初六日，靈隱法教弟子戒顯再拜謹復
（附）五家辨正
贊陽沙門 養存 述
濟北集五家辨曰：達磨（Bodhidharma，禪宗初祖）西來直到三祖（僧璨），禪宗渾然一體，沒有分化。四祖（道信）分出牛頭宗，五祖（弘忍）分出北宗（神秀），六祖（慧能）分出青原宗（行思）。從此宗派開始興盛。編纂《傳燈錄》的人沒有仔細討論，把南嶽（懷讓）和青原（行思）當作兩個宗派。南嶽門下出了二宗，青原門下出了三家，這是不對的。根據唐伸撰寫的《藥山
【English Translation】 English version: In the year Renyin (1662), I happened to read through the Tibetan and Han scriptures. Because Brother Shuijian earnestly requested an article, I hastily wrote this piece. But in reality, this was written before I had even been to Jingzhou. That autumn, due to the request of Huguo Temple, I personally went there. Upon arriving at the newly built Tianwang Temple (Heavenly King Temple), I suspected that this was not the site of the original Tianwang Temple. Why? Because all records stated that it was located west of the city, while this was south of the city. I urgently wanted to retrieve the original draft, but Shuijian had already gone to Yizhen. Unexpectedly, Shuijian was meddlesome and had the article printed and circulated. Moreover, my signature was merely 'Brother Shuijian Hai,' but he presumptuously changed it to 'Great Zen Master Sha Weng,' boasting excessively, which would surely invite ridicule from those in the know. Fortunately, recently Brother Shuijian sent the printed version to the mountain, and I quickly stopped the printing. The wooden blocks had not yet been set in stone. The current inscription of Tianwang Temple is actually an article by Li Hufa, the customs commissioner, with all the officials of the prefecture and the names of those who inscribed the stone recorded at the end of the stele, as current records can prove. I am ashamed for the teachings of the old Dharma Master. My rash writing caused disputes, and hearsay is not reliable history. When I burned incense at Qingyuan, I always spoke of the three ancestral founders and personally visited Tianhuang Temple (Heavenly Emperor Temple). Regarding the west and south of the city, how could I make false statements? Although Brother Shuijian's restoration of the ancient temple is a good thing, trying to confuse the south of the city with the west is clearly something I dare not condone. Fortunately, the article has not yet been carved in stone, so there is no need to worry about it spreading far. I am aware of my own recklessness in the previous article and repent. If there are any matters of correction or theory, Old Dharma Master, please take charge yourself; I will certainly not cling to my errors. This time, three types were engraved and attached to 'Chen Fa Lan'.
On the sixth day of the seventh month of the year Jiyou (1669), the disciple Jiexian of Lingyin Dharma Teaching respectfully replies with bows.
(Attached) Distinguishing the Five Houses
Written by Yangcun, a Shramana (Buddhist monk) of Zanyang
Jibei's Collection Distinguishing the Five Houses states: From Bodhidharma's (達磨，Zen Buddhism's first patriarch) arrival from the West up to the Third Patriarch (Sengcan, 僧璨), Zen was a unified whole, without divisions. The Fourth Patriarch (Daoxin, 道信) branched out to the Niutou School, the Fifth Patriarch (Hongren, 弘忍) branched out to the Northern School (Shenxiu, 神秀), and the Sixth Patriarch (Huineng, 慧能) branched out to the Qingyuan School (Xingsi, 行思). From then on, the schools began to flourish. Those who compiled the 'Transmission of the Lamp' did not discuss carefully, treating Nanyue (Huairang, 懷讓) and Qingyuan (Xingsi, 行思) as two separate schools. Nanyue produced two schools, and Qingyuan produced three houses, which is incorrect. According to the 'Yaoshan' written by Tang Shen,
碑。系儼于大寂。又丘玄素撰天王道悟碑。系悟于大寂。又呂夏卿撰雪竇碑。為竇于大寂九世之孫。以五家共出大寂下。為合馬駒一踏之讖矣。 余辨之曰。煉公以為六祖宗南嶽派青原。不知此為證何義何據。言不幹典事不師古。黃吻禪皺猶羞。況于辨宗趣者耶。夫據禪有五燈。例儒基六經。乃嵩明教力探大藏。或經或傳。校驗其謂禪宗者。推正其謂佛祖者。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。校之修之命曰傳法正宗記。其記曰。正宗至第六祖其法益廣。已詳傳燈廣燈。其傳起自大鑒而終智達。凡千三百有四人也。 (正宗首唱)
大鑒二世曰青原行思禪師。初于大鑒之眾最為首冠。大鑒嘗謂之曰。從上以衣與法偕傳。蓋取信於後世耳。今吾得人。何患乎不信。我受衣來。常恐不免於難。今復傳之。慮起其諍衣缽。宜留鎮山門。汝則以法化一方。無使其絕。思歸其鄉居青原山靜居寺。最為學者所歸。其法嗣一人曰南嶽石頭希遷。
大鑒二世南嶽懷讓禪師。往參六祖。祖曰什麼處來。曰嵩山來。祖曰什麼物恁么來。曰說似一物即不中。祖曰還可修證否。曰修證即不無。污染即不得。祖曰祇此不污染。諸佛之所護念。汝既如是。吾亦如是。昔般若多羅所讖。蓋於汝足下出一馬駒
。蹋殺天下人。事祖歷十五載。尋往南嶽居般若。四方學者歸之。所出法嗣凡九人。一曰江西道一云云。
旁出略傳。其傳起于末田底而止神會。凡二百有五人云云。乃仲溫瑩公(大慧法嗣)贊之曰。嵩之高文至論足以寄宣大化。既經進獻獲收附於大藏。則維持法門之功日月不能老矣(贊見羅湖文集)。蓋嵩公者。道行藹然。乘大愿輪不測人也。故舉世稱北斗以南一人而已。豈又謂之不精討論者耶。
又長沙侯延慶僧寶傳引曰。自達磨之來。六傳至大鑒。鑒之後折為二宗。其一為石頭。雲門曹洞法眼宗之。其一為馬祖。臨濟溈仰宗之。是為五家宗派。
夫傳燈廣燈及正宗記者。天子各以敕與大藏偕行世。是為皇藏。今古不刊之典也。昔者圭峰欲立荷澤為正傳的付。正抑讓公為旁出派徒。大為諸師被毀笑。今與煉公一狀領過。子動呵𠁗傳燈以為不精。夫佛祖之道於今可見者。獨賴此書之存。功深微禹。且翰林學士楊大年見地超曠。時奉敕裁定此書。大年之力勛參微管矣。爾來燈燈續焰。祖祖聯芳。然則原師編輯 聖宋外護。大年較正。其昭昭而高煥。大明孰得而逾之。煉公進則上犯皇詔。退則內違五燈。以至一掃李遵勖李詠陸游等諸賢各所其證。別囮唐碑一謬。妄欲誘天下後學。乃是望天憂杞國。捧
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『蹋殺天下人』，侍奉事祖禪師經歷了十五年。之後前往南嶽居住在般若寺。四方學者都歸附於他。他所傳的法嗣共有九人，其中一位是江西道一禪師等等。
旁出略傳。其傳記從末田底開始，到神會為止，共有二百零五人等等。大慧法嗣仲溫瑩公讚揚道：『嵩禪師的高深文章和精闢理論足以用來宣揚偉大的教化。既然已經進獻給朝廷並被收入大藏經，那麼他維護佛法的大功，即使日月也無法使其衰老。』（讚語見《羅湖文集》）。嵩禪師的德行令人敬仰，他乘坐著大愿之輪，深不可測。所以世人都稱他為北斗以南第一人。怎麼又能說他不精於討論呢？
長沙侯延慶《僧寶傳》引用說：『自從達磨（菩提達摩）祖師東來，傳了六代到大鑒慧能（六祖慧能）。慧能之後分為兩宗，其中一宗為石頭希遷，雲門文偃、曹洞宗、法眼文益宗都出自這一宗；另一宗為馬祖道一，臨濟義玄、溈山靈佑、仰山慧寂宗都出自這一宗。這就是五家宗派。』
《景德傳燈錄》、《廣燈錄》以及《正宗記》等書，天子都下敕令與大藏經一起流傳於世，這被稱為皇藏，是自古以來不可更改的經典。從前圭峰宗密想要立荷澤神會為正傳，貶抑讓禪師為旁出支派，這受到了很多禪師的批評和嘲笑。現在煉公也犯了同樣的錯誤。子動呵斥《傳燈錄》認為它不夠精詳。佛祖的教義在今天還能被我們看到，完全依賴於此書的存在，它的功勞深遠如同大禹治水。而且翰林學士楊大年見地超凡，當時奉敕裁定此書，楊大年的功勞可以與召公、伯夷相比了。自此以後，燈燈相續，祖祖聯芳。既然原師編輯，宋朝（960年-1279年）皇帝外護，楊大年校正，它的光明照耀如此高遠，誰又能超過它呢？煉公如果這樣做，往上是冒犯皇上的詔令，往後是違背五燈的記載，以至於一概掃除李遵勖、李詠、陸游等諸位賢士各自的證悟，另外用唐碑的一個謬誤，妄想誘導天下後學，這真是杞人憂天，如同用手捧土去堵塞河流一樣。
【English Translation】 English version 'Trampling and killing all people under heaven,' he served Zen Master Shishi for fifteen years. Afterward, he went to Nan Yue (衡山) to reside at the Prajna Temple (般若寺). Scholars from all directions came to him. He had a total of nine Dharma heirs, one of whom was Jiangxi Dao Yi (江西道一) and so on.
A brief side transmission. Its record starts from Madhyantika (末田底) and ends with Shenhui (神會), totaling two hundred and five people and so on. Zhongwen Yinggong (仲溫瑩公), a Dharma heir of Dahui (大慧), praised: 'Zen Master Song's (嵩禪師) profound writings and insightful theories are sufficient to propagate the great teachings. Since they have been presented to the court and included in the Tripitaka (大藏經), his great contribution to upholding the Dharma will not diminish even with the passage of time.' (The praise is found in the 'Luohu Wenji' (羅湖文集)). Zen Master Song's virtue is admirable; he rides the wheel of great vows, unfathomable. Therefore, the world calls him the foremost person south of the Big Dipper. How can it be said that he is not skilled in discussion?
The 'Biography of Monks' (僧寶傳) by Marquis Yanqing of Changsha (長沙侯延慶) quotes: 'Since the arrival of Bodhidharma (達磨) from the east, it was transmitted for six generations to Dajian Huineng (大鑒慧能) (the Sixth Patriarch Huineng). After Huineng, it split into two schools, one of which was Shitou Xiqian (石頭希遷), from which the Yunmen (雲門), Caodong (曹洞), and Fayan (法眼) schools originated; the other was Mazu Daoyi (馬祖道一), from which the Linji (臨濟), Weiyang (溈仰), and Yangshan (仰山) schools originated. These are the five houses of Zen.'
The 'Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp' (景德傳燈錄), 'Guangdeng Records' (廣燈錄), and 'Zhengzong Records' (正宗記) and other books, the emperors all issued edicts to circulate them together with the Tripitaka (大藏經), which is called the Imperial Collection (皇藏), an unchangeable classic since ancient times. In the past, Guifeng Zongmi (圭峰宗密) wanted to establish Heze Shenhui (荷澤神會) as the legitimate transmission and denigrate Zen Master Rang (讓禪師) as a side branch, which was criticized and ridiculed by many Zen masters. Now, Lian Gong (煉公) has made the same mistake. Zi Dong (子動) criticized the 'Records of the Transmission of the Lamp' (傳燈錄), thinking it was not detailed enough. The Buddha's teachings that we can see today rely entirely on the existence of this book, its contribution is as profound as Yu the Great's (大禹) flood control. Moreover, the Hanlin Academician Yang Danian (楊大年) had extraordinary insight and was ordered to revise this book at that time. Yang Danian's contribution can be compared to Duke Zhao (召公) and Boyi (伯夷). Since then, lamps have been passed on one after another, and ancestors have been linked together. Since the original master edited it, the Song Dynasty (聖宋) (960-1279) emperor protected it, and Yang Danian corrected it, its brilliance shines so high, who can surpass it? If Lian Gong does this, he is offending the emperor's edict above and violating the records of the Five Lamps below, to the point of sweeping away the enlightenment of Li Zunxu (李遵勖), Li Yong (李詠), Lu You (陸游), and other virtuous scholars, and using a fallacy from a Tang stele to falsely mislead future generations, which is like the man of Qi worrying about the sky, or trying to block a river with handfuls of soil.
土塞孟津矣。若知其私慾取信於人。則自欺也。雖童蒙誰敢肯之。若懷其私誤為之公。則不明也。昏己欲牖人。可笑不自量。子之此舉乃聚扶桑六十州鐵。鑄此一個錯可不成也。吁。攫金不見人。洗垢至折脛謂乎。
唐伸碑記出之通載。常稱大儒。煉號聞人。若然。漏唐書儒學才藝等而無傳者何哉。又普考史籍。望出太原。氏唐者若干。未閱伸之有名。況于令聞乎。即知無名位可稱。唯是操眊臊漢也。今考其記。疑兕不泰。其言曰。門人狀先師之行。求師之耿光垂於不朽。余議道。吾云巖船子椑樹百巖高沙彌等。皆藥山之子也。盍稱門人。某和欺之妄。尾巴已露。其非一也。師本傳曰。師侍奉馬祖三年。辭祖返石頭。伸言曰居寂之室垂二十年矣。因按師大曆八年納戒于衡岳希操律師。博通經論。嚴持戒律。而後遊方參請事了。至貞元初憩住藥山。其間年數僅十霜也。伸之躗言如之。誰不絕倒。其非二也。儼之於遷蓋垕于寂。令終有俶。然伸也片言不及。茲知彼是舜犬也。詎怪吠堯。常煉從而不紏是妾婦之事也。吁。其非三也。傳燈及稽古略等曰。藥山首至石頭。頭指之見馬祖。復還石頭領悟心要。一日師坐次。頭問汝在這裡作什麼。曰聖諦亦不為。頭曰恁么即閑坐也。曰若閑坐即為也。頭曰汝道不為且不為個什
么。曰千聖亦不識。頭以偈贊曰。從來共住不知名。任運相將只么行。自古上賢猶不識。造次凡流豈敢明。據此則明藥山機緣終歸石頭。伸言無之。其非四也。大光明藏曰。青原仁父祖也。子石頭外而氣分感。而為諸孫。藥山云巖殆聖諦不為處發生矣。伸謾系之寂。是為瞽說。言不中道。其非五也。朗州刺史李翱向師玄化。入山謁之。欣愜而呈偈曰。煉得身形似鶴影。千株松下兩函經。我來問道無餘事。云在青天水在瓶。翱時年三十九。參藥山而退。著復性書三篇。韓愈柳宗元覽之嘆曰吾道萎遲。翱且逃矣。相國崔群(與韓愈同榜)常侍溫造(大雅五世孫刺朗州)相繼問道。師能開發道意矣。我道及儒也陶煉難化。護法之力㧞山扛鼎。故宋僧傳系之護法。此可紀之一節也。伸何疏脫。其非六也。師一夜登山頂。月下大嘯。應澧陽九十許里。因名之為嘯峰。稱其異也。僧傳贊曰。儼公一笑。聲徹遐鄉。雖未勞目連遠尋。道感如然。此師不測神用。伸何漏之。其非七也。太和年中。
文宗敕謚弘道大師。 所謂天子休命嘉師德美者也。大戴禮曰武王踐阼。曰謚者行之跡。是以大行受大名。小行受小名。行出乎己。名出乎人。詳唐類函九十四。凡指事稱德。蓋紀行實之法也。何況謚號之敕最其大節也。伸又漏焉。其非
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 什麼。說（藥山惟儼）即使是千聖（許多聖人）也無法認識（真理）。（石頭希遷）於是用偈語讚頌說：『（我們）一直共同生活在一起卻不知道（你的）名字，任憑自然規律引導，只是這樣行走。（你）自古以來就是賢人卻不被認識，普通凡人怎麼敢明白（你）呢？』根據這些，（藥山惟儼的）機緣最終歸於石頭（希遷）是很明顯的。說（藥山惟儼的機緣）沒有歸於石頭（希遷），這是第四個錯誤。 《大光明藏》說：『青原行思是仁父（石頭希遷）的祖師。您（藥山惟儼）從石頭希遷之外而氣分感應，成為他的後代。藥山（惟儼）和云巖（曇晟）大概是在聖諦不為之處發生的吧。』說（藥山惟儼的機緣）是寂（無），這是盲人瞎說，言語不中正，這是第五個錯誤。 朗州刺史李翱仰慕（藥山惟儼）的玄妙教化，入山拜見他，非常高興並呈上偈語說：『煉得身形像鶴影，千株松下兩函經。我來問道無餘事，云在青天水在瓶。』李翱當時三十九歲，參拜藥山後退隱，寫了《復性書》三篇。韓愈、柳宗元看了後感嘆說：『我們的道義衰落遲緩，李翱將要逃離了。』宰相崔群（與韓愈同年考中進士）、常侍溫造（大雅的五世孫，任朗州刺史）相繼來問道。藥山（惟儼）能夠啓發他們的道意。我認為道和儒也難以教化，（藥山惟儼）護法的力量像拔山扛鼎一樣。所以《宋僧傳》將他歸為護法之列，這可以作為一節來記載。說（你）有什麼疏漏？這是第六個錯誤。 （藥山惟儼）一夜登上山頂，在月光下大聲長嘯，（聲音）傳到澧陽九十多里，因此將那座山命名為嘯峰，稱讚他的奇異之處。《僧傳》讚頌說：『儼公一笑，聲徹遐鄉，雖未勞目連遠尋，道感如然。』這是（藥山惟儼）不可測度的神通妙用，說（你）為什麼遺漏了？這是第七個錯誤。 太和年間（827-835）。 文宗皇帝追諡（藥山惟儼）為弘道大師。這正是天子用美好的謚號來嘉獎大師的德行。《大戴禮記》說武王即位，說謚號是用來記載（死者）生前的行為的。因此大的行為接受大的名號，小的行為接受小的名號。行為出自自己，名號出自他人。詳細記載在《唐類函》第九十四卷，凡是指事稱德，都是記載行為實事的法則。何況謚號的敕令是最重要的環節。說（你）又遺漏了，這是第八個錯誤。
【English Translation】 English version: What. (Yaoshan Weiyan) said that even the thousand sages (many saints) could not recognize (the truth). (Shitou Xiqian) then praised with a verse: 'We have lived together all along but do not know (your) name, letting the natural laws guide us, just walking like this. (You) have been a virtuous person since ancient times but are not recognized, how dare ordinary mortals understand (you)?' According to these, it is obvious that (Yaoshan Weiyan's) opportunity ultimately belongs to Shitou (Xiqian). Saying that (Yaoshan Weiyan's opportunity) does not belong to Shitou (Xiqian) is the fourth mistake. The 'Great Treasury of Light' says: 'Qingyuan Xingsi is the ancestor of Renfu (Shitou Xiqian). You (Yaoshan Weiyan) are inspired by the spirit outside of Shitou Xiqian and become his descendant. Yaoshan (Weiyan) and Yunyan (Tansheng) probably arose in a place where the holy truth does not occur.' Saying that (Yaoshan Weiyan's opportunity) is silence (nothingness) is like a blind person talking nonsense, and the words are not correct. This is the fifth mistake. Li Ao, the prefect of Langzhou, admired (Yaoshan Weiyan's) profound teachings, went into the mountains to visit him, was very happy, and presented a verse saying: 'Refined the body like a crane's shadow, two cases of scriptures under a thousand pine trees. I come to ask about the Dao without any other matters, the clouds are in the blue sky and the water is in the bottle.' Li Ao was thirty-nine years old at the time, retired after visiting Yaoshan, and wrote three chapters of 'Book of Returning to Nature'. Han Yu and Liu Zongyuan sighed after reading it: 'Our Dao is declining slowly, Li Ao is about to escape.' Prime Minister Cui Qun (passed the imperial examination in the same year as Han Yu) and Changshi Wen Zao (the fifth-generation grandson of Daya, serving as the prefect of Langzhou) successively came to ask about the Dao. Yaoshan (Weiyan) was able to enlighten their understanding of the Dao. I think the Dao and Confucianism are also difficult to teach, (Yaoshan Weiyan's) power of protecting the Dharma is like uprooting mountains and carrying tripods. Therefore, the 'Song Dynasty Biographies of Monks' classifies him as a protector of the Dharma, which can be recorded as a section. What omissions do you have? This is the sixth mistake. (Yaoshan Weiyan) climbed to the top of the mountain one night and howled loudly under the moonlight, (the sound) reaching more than ninety miles to Liyang, so the mountain was named Xiaofeng (Howling Peak) to praise his strangeness. The 'Biographies of Monks' praised: 'Master Yan's smile, the sound reaches distant villages, although it does not require Maudgalyayana to search far, the Dao is felt as such.' This is (Yaoshan Weiyan's) unfathomable spiritual power, why did (you) omit it? This is the seventh mistake. During the Taihe period (827-835). Emperor Wenzong posthumously honored (Yaoshan Weiyan) as the Grand Master of Hongdao. This is precisely the emperor using a beautiful posthumous title to commend the master's virtue. The 'Book of Rites of the Elder Dai' says that when King Wu ascended the throne, the posthumous title was used to record (the deceased's) actions during his lifetime. Therefore, great actions receive great names, and small actions receive small names. Actions come from oneself, and names come from others. It is recorded in detail in Volume 94 of the 'Tang Leihan', and all references to events and virtues are the rules for recording factual events. Moreover, the imperial edict of the posthumous title is the most important link. (You) omitted it again, this is the eighth mistake.
八也。李翱百官行狀奏曰。紀其行狀宜出門生。賴此翱與群造德位兼備。頡頏唐朝冠冕儒林。且沐其化也久。如撰師碑除此三學士而更為誰。如伸無聞可齒。又非知師者。誰媚于爾自炫自媒。固鉆穴隙之類乎。其非九也。抑伸所銘之碑不知立何處。將藥嶠之塢乎。將華亭之步乎。將無何有之鄉乎。吾知是好事者所以建之何樓備欺妄。豈為紀德碑。其非十也。來哲請效李安民之風好佩玦矣。虛堂徑山語錄舉馬大師問藥山子近日見處如何。山云面板脫落盡唯有一真實。祖雲子之所得可謂協於心體佈於四肢。何不將三條篾束取肚皮隨處住山去。山云某是何人。敢言住山。祖云未有長行而不住。宜作舟航。勿久住此。師云馬大師藉手行拳咒詛他家兒女。且道藥山因甚不肯承嗣馬祖。出來下一轉語看。常也煉也。舍恁援證。取彼妄說。真贗公私于意何如。正好自判何須地辨。
妄天王之辨。詳永覺龍潭考。白巖鋤宄(略如下出)。
煉公又以為悉束五家歸一馬踶而正符祖讖。 余辨孟軻所謂盡信書則不如無書。于武成取二三䇿而已。何其血之流杵也。詩曰周余黎民靡有孑遺。史曰項羽攻襄城襄城無噍。類此一例之語也。煉公盍參子輿氏解聖讖矣。
又證呂碑系竇于大寂九世孫。 余辨雪峰對閩王自稱得先石頭
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 八、李翱在《百官行狀奏》中說，記錄官員的品行應該由他的學生來做。憑藉這一點，李翱與眾多有德行、有地位的人一起，與唐朝（618-907）的官員和儒林人士並駕齊驅。而且我接受他的教化已經很久了。如果撰寫老師的碑文，不找我們這些學士，還能找誰呢？如果為默默無聞的人伸張正義，又不是真正瞭解老師的人，那誰會諂媚於你，自我炫耀、自我吹噓，像那些鉆營取巧的人呢？這難道不是第九個疑點嗎？或者說，要伸張正義所銘刻的碑文，不知道要立在什麼地方？是藥嶠的山塢嗎？是華亭的郊野嗎？還是虛無縹緲的地方呢？我知道這是好事者用來建造樓閣，用來欺騙世人的，哪裡是爲了記錄德行的碑文呢？這難道不是第十個疑點嗎？後來的賢哲請傚法李安民的風範，喜歡佩戴玉玦了。虛堂徑山的語錄中記載，馬祖（709-788）問藥山（751-834）近日的見解如何，藥山說：『面板脫落殆盡，唯有一真實。』馬祖說：『你的所得，可以說是與心體相合，佈於四肢。為何不將三條竹篾束住肚皮，隨處住山去呢？』藥山說：『某是什麼人，敢說住山？』馬祖說：『沒有長久的修行而不住山，應該作為舟船，不要久留在此。』虛堂禪師說：『馬祖借用手腳來施展拳腳，咒罵他人的兒女。且說藥山為什麼不肯繼承馬祖的衣缽？出來下一轉語看看。』常常修習，常常磨練。捨棄那些引經據典，採取那些虛妄的說法，真假公私，你覺得怎麼樣？最好自己判斷，何須多此一舉？
妄天王的辨析，詳細記載在永覺龍潭的考證中。白巖鋤奸（內容略去，如下文）。
煉公又認為全部歸束五家，歸於一馬，馬蹄而正符合祖師的讖語。我辨析孟軻所說的『盡信書，則不如無書』。對於《武成》篇，只取二三條策略而已，何至於血流成河呢？《詩經》說：『周朝遺留的百姓，沒有一個倖存。』《史記》說：『項羽攻打襄城，襄城沒有活人。』類似這樣的話，都是一樣的例子。煉公為何不參考孟子的解釋聖人讖語呢？
又考證呂碑是竇大寂的九世孫。我辨析雪峰對閩王自稱得先石頭。
【English Translation】 English version: Eight. Li Ao said in his 'Memorial on the Conduct of Officials' that the conduct of officials should be recorded by their students. Because of this, Li Ao, along with many virtuous and high-ranking people, rivaled the officials and Confucian scholars of the Tang Dynasty (618-907). Moreover, I have been receiving his teachings for a long time. If we are to write the inscription for the teacher's stele, who else can we turn to if not us scholars? If we are to vindicate the unknown, and it is not someone who truly understands the teacher, then who would flatter you, show off, and boast, like those who are opportunistic? Isn't this the ninth point of doubt? Or rather, where should the stele inscribed to uphold justice be erected? Is it in the mountain stronghold of Yaoqiao? Is it in the wilderness of Huating? Or is it in a land of nothingness? I know that this is a pavilion built by those who like to create trouble, used to deceive the world, how could it be a stele to record virtue? Isn't this the tenth point of doubt? Later sages, please follow the example of Li Anmin and like to wear jade pendants. The recorded sayings of Xutang Jingshan state that Mazu (709-788) asked Yaoshan (751-834) about his recent insights, and Yaoshan said: 'The skin has fallen off completely, only one truth remains.' Mazu said: 'What you have gained can be said to be in harmony with the essence of the mind, spread throughout the limbs. Why not tie up your belly with three bamboo strips and live in the mountains everywhere?' Yaoshan said: 'Who am I to dare to say I live in the mountains?' Mazu said: 'Without long practice, do not live in the mountains, you should use it as a boat, do not stay here for long.' Chan Master Xutang said: 'Mazu used his hands and feet to perform martial arts, cursing other people's children. And why didn't Yaoshan inherit Mazu's mantle? Come out and give a turning word and see.' Often practice, often refine. Abandon those citations and adopt those false statements, what do you think of the truth, falsehood, public and private? It is best to judge for yourself, why bother to argue?
The analysis of the False Heavenly King is recorded in detail in the research of Yongjue Longtan. Baiyan's extermination of traitors (content omitted, as below).
Lian Gong also believes that all five schools are bound together, returning to one horse, and the horse's hoof is in line with the ancestral prophecy. I analyze Mencius's saying 'It is better to have no book than to believe everything in it.' For the 'Wu Cheng' chapter, only two or three strategies are taken, why should blood flow into a river? The Book of Songs says: 'The remaining people of the Zhou Dynasty, none survived.' The Historical Records says: 'Xiang Yu attacked Xiangcheng, and there were no living people in Xiangcheng.' Similar words are all the same examples. Why doesn't Lian Gong refer to Mencius's interpretation of the sage's prophecy?
It is also verified that the Lu stele is the ninth generation descendant of Dou Daji. I analyze that Xuefeng claimed to have obtained the first stone to the Min King.
之道。即見雪峰語錄。又僧寶傳玄沙傳曰。閩帥王審知為師外護。眾盈七百。石頭之宗至是遂中興矣。又秀州資聖勤禪師撰原宗集。嵩明教序之曰繇釋迦如來而下。至於雲門。取其言尤至者。不失其宗。得之故曰原宗。勤師證法于德山遠。遠即雲門之法孫也。雲門秉雪峰。峰承德山鑒。鑒續龍潭信。信嗣天皇悟。悟繼石頭。頭紹廬陵思。思受法于大鑒。廣達磨所傳之道。故天下學佛者尊其德如孔子。承周公而振堯舜之道矣。然雲門玄沙同嗣雪峰宗石頭。門出香林。林出智門。門出雪竇。沙出羅漢琛。琛出法眼益。二派世系明著如示掌矣。乃知竇與嵩遠皆為雲門孫行矣。煉公胡為謾棄我入室之真印。卻拾他流俗之咳唾。先自失了一隻眼。且呂碑雲師將示滅或曰師獨無頌辭世。師曰吾平生患語之多矣。遂亡。然睦庵曰。雪竇拾遺錄師示寂偈曰。白雲本無羈。明月照寰宇。吾今七十三。天地誰為侶。此偈會稽思一禪者出示然。呂之說非。故錄之云。 余又謂雪竇垂滅師資取訣正是切要之時也。呂說言或曰疏謬也甚矣。豈又以欠末後一句為救平日之饒舌耶。事苑所糾尤為切當。況彼不諳宗脈不足怪耳。
煉公屈眴辨曰。今證禪事。引他氏通書。是證之貞者也。余亦效顰且引通書。按大明一統志曰。舒州皖山名三祖山。黃
庭堅題詩曰。司命無心播物。祖師有記傳衣。白雲橫而不度。高鳥倦而獨飛。黃州破頭山名四祖山。黃州馮茂山名五祖山。韶州曹溪六祖傳衣缽處也。吉安府青原山七祖思公道場。緇林嚮慕多往從之。黃魯直嘗賦青原詩。至今其名與北斗垂。又名勝志第九宋文天祥題江西青原山詩。空庭橫螮蝀。斷碣偃龍蛇。活火參禪筍。清泉透佛茶。晚鐘何處雨。春水滿城華。夜影燈前客。江西七祖家。韻府傳衣全同此志矣。煉公若許取此二三通書者所言。派原宗岳之禍今將嫁誰。若為方誌不足證祖位者。唐碑宜作鎮石。呂說盍覆醬瓿。進退維谷義虎何踞。通載亦稱思公為七祖。爾內從訛說。吾於此惜常公無定古今之舌。然今吾引此說者。我之不平破汝不平之謂也。伸呂臆裁寔不足。非常煉賡倡惑甚盜鐘。自破內法。嘆及獅蟲。不敬師長。罪類梟鏡。二公者既撰于通載。纂于釋書。垂訓來世之人。而尚自愛鳥于屋上。惡蟹於水中。亥豕不辨。金根妄改。終至誤累後學。戒之哉戒之哉。余雖末學。不顧危亡觸忤先輩。所以為法不為己。謀道不謀身也。 或難曰孔丘所謂人遺弓人得之。何必楚也。況今思讓同。不出大鑒一彀里。吾子齷齪勞勃磎者何耶。曰哿哉言乎辭氣不迫可以味焉。然其義未也弢弓服矢則止。若云彀張則射法不能無矣。
射之於彀。左右相待。車之於行。只輪那轉。大鑒始遭屯蹇幾二十年。后正旺其化。思也讓也可謂射之兩臂。車之雙輪也。吾此辨效爭于君子所以椎鍛夷不平。榜檠矯不直。以公是公非為萬世規也。明教大師評唐高僧。神清不喜禪者自尊其宗乃著書(北山錄)曰。雖能編連萬世事亦何益乎。書曰記問之學不足為人師。清之謂也歟。吾於二公而亦云。
幸有炯戒。各好革轍矣。山翁忞禪師上堂曰。昨夜南嶽匡廬兩山爭論佛法。一山道南嶽乃曹溪嫡子。磚鏡磨穿古佛心。一山道青原實寶林正宗。廬陵米價傳千古。羅浮山出來曰莫爭莫爭。天臺道不妨快也。山僧遂與一喝。於是四山各各懡㦬而退。拈起袈裟角曰還見么。自從盧老收歸后。須信人人總有之(會元續略)。永覺晚錄示參禪正軌。其略曰。一禁偏護門風。門風之別所宗有五。其實皆一道也。如汾陽昭雖善三玄。兼談五位。浮山遠學洞山之道于大陽。雲門雖承雪峰。歷參洞下諸師。是知大道為公。法無偏黨。後世妄生人我。割截虛空。嗣臨濟者謗曹洞。嗣曹洞者謗臨濟。如唐之牛李(牛僧儒李德裕各立朋黨)宋之蜀洛(蜀黨首于蘇軾洛黨首于程頤)。卒之至於家喪國亡而不悟。豈不深可痛哉。今愿諸人廓無外之觀。體無私之照。而斯道幸甚矣。
五家綱
要
宗派孔殷分不分 曹溪口實熟知聞 雷霆高吼濟河浪 舒捲無心洞上云 會去蚌胎含漢月 爭來蝸角戰秦軍 一華五葉同春色 兄弟鬩墻勿競芬
五家辨正(畢)
(附)五派一滴圖
虎關和尚五家辨曰。趙宋時。達觀穎覺范洪夢堂覺之諸老。有志於質五家。不能既焉。
達觀所集五家宗派。引丘玄素所撰碑曰。道悟嗣馬祖也。後來評之曰。達觀穎以丘玄素碑證之。疑信相半。蓋獨見丘玄素碑。而未見載符碑耳。覺范林間考傳燈天皇章。泊丘玄素所撰天王碑而疑之曰。道悟者正似兩人。又似南嶽碑圭峰狀為證焉。然則覺范亦未見符載所撰天皇碑耶。夢堂嘗作重校五家宗派序。按其大意馬大師八十四人內。有天王道悟。悟得龍潭信。信得德山鑒。鑒得雪峰存。存下出雲門宗。今傳燈卻收雲門法眼兩宗。歸石頭下誤矣。緣同時道悟有兩人。一曰天王道悟。嗣馬祖。丘玄素撰塔銘。一曰天皇道悟。嗣石頭。符載撰塔銘。自景德至今。天下四海。雖據位立宗者。不能略加究辨。由是觀之。惟夢堂能既彼達觀覺范之所不既。然而夢堂亦有所不既。曰石頭遷得藥山儼。不獨自云爾。亦引張無盡呂夏卿二君子之言曰。石頭得藥山。山得曹洞一宗。是皆據傳燈而已。所謂將錯就錯者乎
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 宗派的孔殷（指佛教各宗派興盛）之分是否應該區分？曹溪（指六祖慧能）的教義是否已經熟知？ 如同雷霆般高聲宣揚佛法，渡過濟河（比喻度過生死苦海），雲朵在山洞上方舒捲，無心而為。 領會佛法如同蚌胎孕育漢月（比喻開悟），爭鬥名利如同蝸牛角上爭戰的秦軍（比喻爭鬥的渺小）。 一花開五葉（比喻禪宗一脈相承），同享春色，兄弟之間不要因為爭奪芬芳而發生爭執。
《五家辨正》（完）
（附）五派一滴圖
虎關和尚評論五家宗派說：趙宋（960年-1279年）時期，達觀穎覺、范洪、夢堂覺之等諸位老禪師，有志於考證五家宗派，但未能完成。
達觀所收集的五家宗派資料，引用丘玄素所撰寫的碑文說：道悟禪師是馬祖道一的繼承人。後人評論說：達觀穎覺以丘玄素的碑文為證，半信半疑。大概是因為只看到了丘玄素的碑文，而沒有看到符載的碑文。覺范在林間考證《傳燈錄》中關於天皇道悟的章節，根據丘玄素所撰寫的天王碑而懷疑說：道悟這個人好像是兩個人。又引用南嶽碑和圭峰的記載作為證據。然而，覺范也沒有看到符載所撰寫的天皇碑啊。夢堂曾經作《重校五家宗派序》，按照他的大意，馬祖道一的八十四個弟子中，有天王道悟，道悟從龍潭崇信那裡得到傳承，崇信從德山宣鑒那裡得到傳承，宣鑒從雪峰義存那裡得到傳承，義存下面出了雲門宗。現在《傳燈錄》卻把雲門宗和法眼宗都歸到石頭希遷門下，這是錯誤的。因為同時有兩個道悟，一個叫天王道悟，繼承馬祖道一，丘玄素撰寫了他的塔銘；一個叫天皇道悟，繼承石頭希遷，符載撰寫了他的塔銘。從景德（1004年-1007年）年間到現在，天下四海，即使是據位立宗的人，也不能稍微加以考證辨別。由此看來，只有夢堂能夠完成達觀穎覺和覺范未能完成的事。然而，夢堂也有未能完成的事，他說石頭希遷傳給了藥山惟儼，不只是自己這樣說，還引用張無盡和呂夏卿兩位君子的話說：石頭希遷傳給了藥山惟儼，藥山惟儼傳出了曹洞宗。這些都是根據《傳燈錄》說的。這大概就是所謂將錯就錯吧？
【English Translation】 English version Should the divisions of the various Kong Yin (referring to the flourishing of various Buddhist sects) be distinguished? Is the doctrine of Caoxi (referring to the Sixth Patriarch Huineng) well known? Like thunder, loudly proclaim the Dharma, crossing the Ji River (a metaphor for crossing the sea of birth and death), the clouds roll above the cave, unintentionally. Understanding the Dharma is like a clam containing the Han moon (a metaphor for enlightenment), fighting for fame and fortune is like the Qin army fighting on the horns of snails (a metaphor for the insignificance of the fight). One flower blooms five leaves (a metaphor for the continuous lineage of Zen), sharing the spring scenery, brothers should not quarrel over the fragrance.
《Bianzheng of the Five Houses》 (End)
(Attached) Diagram of One Drop from Five Schools
The monk Huguan commented on the five schools, saying: During the Zhao Song Dynasty (960-1279), the old Zen masters Daguan Yingjue, Fan Hong, and Mengtang Juezhi were determined to examine the five schools, but failed to complete it.
Daguan collected the five schools' information, quoting the inscription written by Qiu Xuansu, saying: Zen Master Daowu was the successor of Mazu Daoyi. Later generations commented: Daguan Yingjue used Qiu Xuansu's inscription as evidence, half believing and half doubting. Probably because he only saw Qiu Xuansu's inscription, but did not see Fu Zai's inscription. Juefan examined the chapter on Emperor Daowu in the Transmission of the Lamp in the forest, and suspected it based on the Heavenly King Stele written by Qiu Xuansu, saying: Daowu seems to be two people. He also cited the records of Nanyue Stele and Guifeng as evidence. However, Juefan did not see the Heavenly Emperor Stele written by Fu Zai. Mengtang once wrote the Preface to the Re-edited Lineages of the Five Houses. According to his general idea, among the eighty-four disciples of Master Mazu Daoyi, there was Heavenly King Daowu, Daowu received the transmission from Longtan Chongxin, Chongxin received the transmission from Deshan Xuanjian, and Xuanjian received the transmission from Xuefeng Yicun, and the Yunmen School came out from Yicun. Now the Transmission of the Lamp includes both the Yunmen School and the Fayan School under Shitou Xiqian, which is wrong. Because there were two Daowus at the same time, one was called Heavenly King Daowu, who inherited Mazu Daoyi, and Qiu Xuansu wrote his epitaph; one was called Heavenly Emperor Daowu, who inherited Shitou Xiqian, and Fu Zai wrote his epitaph. From the Jingde period (1004-1007) to the present, even those who hold positions and establish sects cannot examine and distinguish them slightly. From this point of view, only Mengtang can accomplish what Daguan Yingjue and Juefan failed to accomplish. However, Mengtang also has things that he failed to accomplish. He said that Shitou Xiqian passed it on to Yaoshan Weiyan, not only did he say so himself, but he also quoted the words of Zhang Wujin and Lu Xiaqing, saying: Shitou Xiqian passed it on to Yaoshan Weiyan, and Yaoshan Weiyan passed on the Caodong School. These are all based on the Transmission of the Lamp. This is probably what is called making the best of a mistake?
。惜乎。夢堂等諸老。只解雲門法眼之被傳燈誤。而不解曹洞一宗。亦被傳燈誤。故云。有質於五家。不能既焉。
又曰諸公之不既者。因不見藥山碑。唐聞人唐伸撰。其略曰。師居大寂之室。垂二十年。寂曰。爾之所得可謂浹心術云云。貞元初。憩藥山。
虎關乃日域人也。而出於趙宋諸老之上矣。以藥山為馬祖資。取證伸碑者明矣。從是曹洞一宗亦馬祖下。向之系藥山于石頭下者。堪一笑耳。
又曰。復雪豆碑朝奉郎呂夏卿撰曰。天王龍潭德山雪峰雲門香林智門。其世次也。師諱重顯。字隱之。大寂九世之孫。智門之法嗣也。
虎關復引呂文。而副于夢堂所引之丘符二文。然則呂文亦是雲門法眼。為馬祖下之證也。何必局符丘乎。又曰。昔般若祖記南嶽曰。足下出一馬駒。蹈殺天下人。五家出大寂下。為合讖焉。若如傳燈不抵馬踶者多矣。虎關若不為此辨。則祖讖亦成空言矣。於戲般若祖千有餘歲之下。虎關獨鞭其後。𨃃出五家於一馬蹄。不亦偉乎。予每讀五家辨。其文繁多而勞難解。故竊舉大綱以志焉。
道原傳燈錄南嶽馬祖百丈黃檗臨濟宗大溈大仰溈仰宗青原石頭天皇龍潭德山雪峰雲門宗玄沙羅漢法眼宗藥山云巖洞山曹山曹洞宗傳燈載而誤者二其一載龍潭于天皇下其二載藥山
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：可惜啊，夢堂等各位前輩，只理解雲門宗（Yunmen School）、法眼宗（Fayan School）被《景德傳燈錄》（Jingde Chuandeng Lu）所誤導，卻不理解曹洞宗（Caodong School）也被《景德傳燈錄》所誤導。所以說，『有質於五家，不能既焉』。
又說諸位前輩不能完成的原因，是因為沒有見到藥山（Yaoshan）的碑文。唐朝聞人唐伸撰寫，其中大略說：『藥山禪師居住在大寂禪師（Daji，即馬祖道一）的禪室，將近二十年。大寂禪師說：你的所得可以說是深入心髓』等等。貞元（785-805）初年，藥山禪師在藥山居住。
虎關禪師是日本國人，卻超越了趙宋（960-1279）的各位前輩。因為他以藥山禪師為馬祖道一（Mazu Daoyi）的弟子，並引用唐伸的碑文作為證據，這很明顯。從此，曹洞宗也出自馬祖道一門下。之前將藥山禪師歸於石頭希遷（Shitou Xiqian）門下的人，真是可笑啊。
又說，復雪竇碑由朝奉郎呂夏卿撰寫，其中說：『天王（Tianwang）、龍潭（Longtan）、德山（Deshan）、雪峰（Xuefeng）、雲門（Yunmen）、香林（Xianglin）、智門（Zhimen），是他們的世系。藥山禪師名重顯，字隱之，是大寂禪師的九世孫，智門禪師的法嗣。』
虎關禪師又引用呂夏卿的文章，來輔助夢堂所引用的丘符二人的文章。既然如此，呂夏卿的文章也是雲門宗為馬祖道一門下的證據啊，何必侷限於丘符二人呢？又說，昔日般若祖師（Prajnatara）預言南嶽懷讓（Nanyue Huairang）說：『你門下會出一匹馬駒，將踩殺天下人。』五家宗派出自大寂禪師門下，正應驗了這個預言。如果像《景德傳燈錄》那樣，不能抵擋馬蹄的就太多了。虎關禪師如果不為此辨明，那麼祖師的預言也將成為空話了。唉！般若祖師一千多年之後，虎關禪師獨自鞭策其後，將五家宗派歸於一馬蹄下，不是很偉大嗎？我每次讀五家辨，其文章繁多而難以理解，所以略舉大綱來記述。
道原《景德傳燈錄》記載南嶽懷讓（Nanyue Huairang）、馬祖道一（Mazu Daoyi）、百丈懷海（Baizhang Huaihai）、黃檗希運（Huangbo Xiyun）、臨濟義玄（Linji Yixuan）的臨濟宗（Linji School），大溈（Dawei）、大仰（Dayang）的溈仰宗（Weiyang School），青原行思（Qingyuan Xingsi）、石頭希遷（Shitou Xiqian）、天皇道悟（Tianhuang Daowu）、龍潭崇信（Longtan Chongxin）、德山宣鑒（Deshan Xuanjian）、雪峰義存（Xuefeng Yicun）的雲門宗（Yunmen School），玄沙師備（Xuansha Shibei）、羅漢桂琛（Luohan Guichen）的法眼宗（Fayan School），藥山惟儼（Yaoshan Weiyan）、云巖曇晟（Yunyan Tansheng）、洞山良價（Dongshan Liangjie）、曹山（本寂）（Caoshan Benji）的曹洞宗（Caodong School）。《景德傳燈錄》記載有誤的有兩處：一是將龍潭崇信記載在天皇道悟門下，二是記載藥山惟儼
【English Translation】 English version: Alas, the venerable elders such as Mengtang only understood that the Yunmen School and Fayan School were misled by the 'Jingde Chuandeng Lu' (Record of the Transmission of the Lamp), but they did not understand that the Caodong School was also misled by the 'Jingde Chuandeng Lu'. Therefore, it is said, 'Having evidence from the Five Houses, it cannot be completed'.
Furthermore, the reason why the venerable elders could not complete it was because they had not seen the inscription of Yaoshan (Yaoshan Weiyan). Tang Shen, a famous person of the Tang Dynasty, wrote it, which roughly says: 'The master resided in the chamber of Daji (Mazu Daoyi) for nearly twenty years. Daji said: What you have attained can be said to have penetrated the heart and mind,' and so on. In the early years of Zhenyuan (785-805), he resided in Yaoshan.
Huguan was a Japanese, yet he surpassed the elders of the Song Dynasty (960-1279). Because he regarded Yaoshan as a disciple of Mazu Daoyi, and used Tang Shen's inscription as evidence, this is clear. From then on, the Caodong School also came from the lineage of Mazu Daoyi. Those who previously attributed Yaoshan to Shitou Xiqian are laughable.
It is also said that the 'Fu Xuedou Stele' was written by Lü Xiaqing, who said: 'Tianwang, Longtan, Deshan, Xuefeng, Yunmen, Xianglin, and Zhimeng are their generations. The master's name was Chongxian, his style name was Yinzi, he was the ninth-generation descendant of Daji, and the Dharma heir of Zhimeng.'
Huguan also quoted Lü Xiaqing's article to supplement the articles of Qiu and Fu quoted by Mengtang. Since this is the case, Lü Xiaqing's article is also evidence that the Yunmen School is from the lineage of Mazu Daoyi. Why be limited to Qiu and Fu? It is also said that the Patriarch Prajnatara of old prophesied to Nanyue Huairang: 'From your feet will come a colt that will trample all people under heaven.' The Five Houses came from the lineage of Daji, which fulfilled this prophecy. If it were like the 'Record of the Transmission of the Lamp', there would be too many who could not resist the horse's hoof. If Huguan did not clarify this, then the Patriarch's prophecy would become empty words. Alas! More than a thousand years after Patriarch Prajnatara, Huguan alone spurred them on, attributing the Five Houses to one horse's hoof. Is this not great? Every time I read the 'Five Houses Differentiation', its articles are numerous and difficult to understand, so I will briefly record the outline.
Daoyuan's 'Jingde Chuandeng Lu' records the Linji School of Nanyue Huairang, Mazu Daoyi, Baizhang Huaihai, Huangbo Xiyun, and Linji Yixuan; the Weiyang School of Dawei and Dayang; the Yunmen School of Qingyuan Xingsi, Shitou Xiqian, Tianhuang Daowu, Longtan Chongxin, Deshan Xuanjian, and Xuefeng Yicun; the Fayan School of Xuansha Shibei and Luohan Guichen; and the Caodong School of Yaoshan Weiyan, Yunyan Tansheng, Dongshan Liangjie, and Caoshan Benji. There are two errors in the 'Jingde Chuandeng Lu': one is that Longtan Chongxin is recorded under Tianhuang Daowu, and the other is that Yaoshan Weiyan
于石頭下傳燈不載而誤者四其一不載天皇于馬祖下其二不載龍潭于天王下其三不載惠真于天皇下其四不載藥山于馬祖下
夢堂宗派序南嶽馬祖百丈黃檗臨濟宗大溈大仰溈仰宗天王龍潭德山雪峰雲門宗玄沙羅漢法眼宗青原石頭天皇惠真文賁幽閑藥山云巖洞山曹山曹洞宗
夢堂本于丘碑。而馬祖下增入天王。以龍潭為其法嗣。又本于符碑。而天皇下增入惠真。且有言曰。天皇得惠真。真得文賁。賁得幽閑便絕矣。復會元七引符碑云。天皇法嗣三人。曰惠真。曰文賁。曰幽閑。夢堂所引。則天皇至於三世。會元所引。則一世三人。故圖而存焉。
虎關五家辨初祖二祖三祖四祖牛頭五祖北宗六祖南嶽馬祖百丈黃檗臨濟宗溈山仰山溈仰宗天皇龍潭德山雪峰雲門宗玄沙羅漢法眼宗藥山云巖洞山曹山曹洞宗青原石頭天皇文賁惠真幽閑
傳燈藥山章不敢言馬祖事。如會元第五。則云藥山首造石頭。頭曰。子因緣不在此。且往馬祖大師處去。山稟命恭禮馬祖。侍奉三年。祖曰。宜作舟航。無久住此。山乃辭祖。返石頭云云。與彼伸碑大同小異。雖然編會元者。猶以藥山為石頭資。是亦不見伸碑之謂乎。惟如五家辨。能引伸碑。而馬祖下增入藥山也。
五派一滴圖(後序)
五派之出江西也。自來久
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 在《石頭下傳燈》中，有四處記載錯誤或遺漏：第一，沒有記載天皇道悟（748-807）在馬祖道一（709-788）門下；第二，沒有記載龍潭崇信在天王道悟門下；第三，沒有記載惠真（生卒年不詳）在天皇道悟門下；第四，沒有記載藥山惟儼（751-834）在馬祖道一門下。
《夢堂宗派序》中記載：南嶽懷讓-馬祖道一-百丈懷海-黃檗希運-臨濟義玄，為臨濟宗；溈山靈祐-仰山慧寂，為溈仰宗。青原行思-石頭希遷-天皇道悟-惠真-文賁-幽閑-藥山惟儼-云巖曇晟-洞山良價-曹山（本寂），為曹洞宗。
夢堂的說法基於丘碑。他在馬祖道一門下增加了天王道悟，並認為龍潭崇信是天王道悟的法嗣。他又基於符碑，在天皇道悟門下增加了惠真，並且說：『天皇道悟得到了惠真，惠真得到了文賁，文賁得到了幽閑，之後就斷絕了。』《續傳燈錄》第七卷引用符碑說：『天皇道悟有三個法嗣，分別是惠真、文賁和幽閑。』夢堂所引用的，天皇道悟之後有三世；《續傳燈錄》所引用的，一世有三人。所以作圖來儲存這些資訊。
虎關《五家辨》中記載：初祖菩提達摩，二祖慧可，三祖僧璨，四祖道信，牛頭法融，五祖弘忍，北宗神秀，南嶽懷讓-馬祖道一-百丈懷海-黃檗希運-臨濟義玄，為臨濟宗；溈山靈祐-仰山慧寂，為溈仰宗。青原行思-石頭希遷-天皇道悟-文賁-惠真-幽閑-藥山惟儼-云巖曇晟-洞山良價-曹山（本寂），為曹洞宗。
《傳燈錄》中關於藥山惟儼的章節，不敢提及藥山惟儼在馬祖道一門下的事蹟。例如《續傳燈錄》第五卷中說：『藥山惟儼最初拜訪石頭希遷，石頭希遷說：『你的因緣不在這裡，你應該去馬祖道一禪師那裡。』藥山惟儼聽從命令，恭敬地拜見馬祖道一，侍奉了三年。馬祖道一說：『你應該像舟船一樣利益眾生，不要在這裡久留。』於是藥山惟儼告別馬祖道一，返回石頭希遷處。』這與伸碑的記載大同小異。雖然編纂《續傳燈錄》的人，仍然認為藥山惟儼是石頭希遷的弟子，但他們並沒有看到伸碑的記載。只有像《五家辨》這樣的著作，能夠引用伸碑，並在馬祖道一門下增加藥山惟儼。
《五派一滴圖》（後序）
五派從江西傳出，由來已久。
【English Translation】 English version: In 'Deng Lu Under the Stone,' there are four errors or omissions: First, it does not record Tianhuang Daowu (748-807) under Mazu Daoyi (709-788); second, it does not record Longtan Chongxin under Tianhuang Daowu; third, it does not record Huizhen (birth and death year unknown) under Tianhuang Daowu; fourth, it does not record Yaoshan Weiyan (751-834) under Mazu Daoyi.
The 'Mengtang Lineage Preface' records: Nanyue Huairang - Mazu Daoyi - Baizhang Huaihai - Huangbo Xiyun - Linji Yixuan, forming the Linji school; Weishan Lingyou - Yangshan Huiji, forming the Weiyang school. Qingyuan Xingsi - Shitou Xiqian - Tianhuang Daowu - Huizhen - Wenben - Youxian - Yaoshan Weiyan - Yunyan Tansheng - Dongshan Liangjie - Caoshan Benji, forming the Caodong school.
Mengtang's statement is based on the Qiu Stele. He added Tianhuang Daowu under Mazu Daoyi and considered Longtan Chongxin to be Tianhuang Daowu's Dharma heir. He also based it on the Fu Stele, adding Huizhen under Tianhuang Daowu, and saying: 'Tianhuang Daowu obtained Huizhen, Huizhen obtained Wenben, Wenben obtained Youxian, and then it ended.' The seventh volume of 'Xu Chuandeng Lu' quotes the Fu Stele saying: 'Tianhuang Daowu has three Dharma heirs, namely Huizhen, Wenben, and Youxian.' What Mengtang quoted is that there are three generations after Tianhuang Daowu; what 'Xu Chuandeng Lu' quoted is that there are three people in one generation. Therefore, a diagram is made to preserve this information.
Huguang's 'Five Schools Differentiation' records: First Ancestor Bodhidharma, Second Ancestor Huike, Third Ancestor Sengcan, Fourth Ancestor Daoxin, Niutou Farong, Fifth Ancestor Hongren, Northern School Shenxiu, Nanyue Huairang - Mazu Daoyi - Baizhang Huaihai - Huangbo Xiyun - Linji Yixuan, forming the Linji school; Weishan Lingyou - Yangshan Huiji, forming the Weiyang school. Qingyuan Xingsi - Shitou Xiqian - Tianhuang Daowu - Wenben - Huizhen - Youxian - Yaoshan Weiyan - Yunyan Tansheng - Dongshan Liangjie - Caoshan Benji, forming the Caodong school.
The chapter on Yaoshan Weiyan in the 'Deng Lu' does not dare to mention Yaoshan Weiyan's deeds under Mazu Daoyi. For example, the fifth volume of 'Xu Chuandeng Lu' says: 'Yaoshan Weiyan initially visited Shitou Xiqian, and Shitou Xiqian said: 'Your affinity is not here, you should go to Zen Master Mazu Daoyi.' Yaoshan Weiyan obeyed the order, respectfully visited Mazu Daoyi, and served for three years. Mazu Daoyi said: 'You should benefit sentient beings like a boat, do not stay here for long.' So Yaoshan Weiyan bid farewell to Mazu Daoyi and returned to Shitou Xiqian.' This is largely the same as the record on the Shen Stele. Although the compilers of 'Xu Chuandeng Lu' still consider Yaoshan Weiyan to be a disciple of Shitou Xiqian, they did not see the record on the Shen Stele. Only works like 'Five Schools Differentiation' can quote the Shen Stele and add Yaoshan Weiyan under Mazu Daoyi.
'Five Schools One Drop Diagram' (Postscript)
The five schools originated from Jiangxi and have a long history.
矣。而道原編傳燈而多誤焉。夢堂序宗派而不足焉。學者憂之。吾海藏師作五家辨而正之。考故實究宗趣。無餘蘊矣。學者喜之。龍山日庵一東書記。學識不群。有補宗教者也。暇日取道原夢堂及海藏所為者。分成三段。圖之一紙。又略書梗概圖。圖之下。以便觀覽。就予求名其圖。書五派一滴四字。塞來命耳。吁此一滴也。起自江西十八灘頭。震旦日域分支別派。而不迷其源者。獨有日庵哉。予嘗閱大惠法語。有爬著癢處者。一滴之外。更添一滴。以為談助云。
文明乙巳小春吉辰 小補橫川叟
按大惠示中證居士法語曰。藥山和尚初發心。求善知識時。到南嶽石頭和尚處。遂問。三乘十二分教。某甲粗亦研窮。承聞南方有直指人心見性成佛。實未明瞭。乞師指示石頭云。恁么也不得。不恁么也不得。恁么不恁么總不得。藥山聞而不領。良久無言。石頭云。會么。藥山云。不會。石頭云。恐子緣不在此。往江西問取馬大師去。藥山依教。直至江西。見馬師以問石頭話端。依前問之。馬師曰。我有時教伊揚眉瞬目。有時不教伊揚眉瞬目。有時教伊揚眉瞬目者是。有時教伊揚眉瞬目者不是。藥山聞馬師話。便獲金剛心。中更無奇特玄妙可通訊息。但作禮而已。馬師知其已證入。亦無別道理傳授。只向他
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 唉！道原編撰《傳燈錄》卻多有錯誤，夢堂為宗派作序卻有所不足，學者們為此擔憂。我的海藏師父撰寫《五家辨》來匡正這些錯誤，考證史實，探究宗趣，毫無遺漏，學者們為此感到高興。龍山日庵一東法師，學識出衆，是對宗教有所補益的人。他閑暇時取道原、夢堂以及海藏所作的文獻，分成三段，繪製在一張紙上，又略書梗概于圖下，以便觀覽。他向我請求為這幅圖命名，我便寫下『五派一滴』四個字來應命。唉，這『一滴』，起自江西十八灘頭，在震旦（古代中國的稱謂）和日域（日本）分支別派，而不迷失其源頭的，唯有日庵啊！我曾經閱讀大慧（Dahui）法師的法語，有搔到癢處的感覺，在一滴之外，更添一滴，作為談助。
文明乙巳小春吉辰 小補橫川叟
按：大慧（Dahui）示中證居士法語說：藥山（Yaoshan）和尚最初發心，尋求善知識時，到南嶽石頭（Shitou）和尚處，於是問道：『三乘十二分教，我大致也研究窮盡了，聽說南方有直指人心，見性成佛的法門，實在還不明白，乞求師父指示。』石頭（Shitou）說：『這樣也不行，那樣也不行，這樣那樣都不行。』藥山（Yaoshan）聽了不領會，良久無言。石頭（Shitou）說：『會了嗎？』藥山（Yaoshan）說：『不會。』石頭（Shitou）說：『恐怕你與此無緣，往江西問取馬大師去。』藥山（Yaoshan）依教，直至江西，見到馬祖（Mazu），以石頭（Shitou）的話頭，依前問之。馬祖（Mazu）說：『我有時教他揚眉瞬目，有時不教他揚眉瞬目，有時教他揚眉瞬目者是，有時教他揚眉瞬目者不是。』藥山（Yaoshan）聽了馬祖（Mazu）的話，便獲得金剛心，中間更沒有奇特玄妙可以通訊息，只是作禮而已。馬祖（Mazu）知道他已經證入，也沒有別的道理傳授，只是向他...
【English Translation】 English version: Alas! Dao Yuan's compilation of the 'Transmission of the Lamp' contains many errors, and Meng Tang's preface to the sects is insufficient, causing scholars to worry. My teacher Hai Zang wrote 'A Differentiation of the Five Houses' to correct these errors, examining historical facts and exploring the tenets of the sects without any omissions, which pleased the scholars. Longshan Rian Ichito, with his exceptional knowledge, is one who benefits the religion. In his spare time, he took the works of Dao Yuan, Meng Tang, and Hai Zang, divided them into three sections, and drew them on a single sheet of paper, also briefly writing an outline below the diagram for easy viewing. He asked me to name the diagram, so I wrote the four characters 'Five Schools, One Drop' to fulfill his request. Alas, this 'one drop' originated from the eighteen shoals of Jiangxi, branching into separate schools in Zhendan (ancient name for China) and Japan, yet not losing its source, only Rian! I once read the Dharma words of Dahui (Dahui), which felt like scratching an itch, adding another drop to the one drop as an aid to discussion.
Auspicious Day in the Small Spring of Bunmei (1472) Xiaobu Hengchuan Sou
Note: Dahui (Dahui)'s Dharma words to Layman Zhengzhong say: When Yaoshan (Yaoshan) initiated his mind, seeking a good teacher, he went to Nanyue Shitou (Shitou). He then asked, 'The Three Vehicles and Twelve Divisions of the Teachings, I have roughly studied them all. I have heard that the South has a direct pointing to the human mind, seeing one's nature and becoming a Buddha, but I do not truly understand it. I beg the teacher to instruct me.' Shitou (Shitou) said, 'That is not acceptable, that is not acceptable, neither that nor that is acceptable.' Yaoshan (Yaoshan) did not understand and remained silent for a long time. Shitou (Shitou) said, 'Do you understand?' Yaoshan (Yaoshan) said, 'I do not understand.' Shitou (Shitou) said, 'I fear that your affinity is not here. Go to Jiangxi and ask Master Ma.' Yaoshan (Yaoshan) followed the instruction and went to Jiangxi, where he met Mazu (Mazu) and asked him the same question, using Shitou (Shitou)'s words. Mazu (Mazu) said, 'Sometimes I teach him to raise his eyebrows and blink, sometimes I do not teach him to raise his eyebrows and blink, sometimes teaching him to raise his eyebrows and blink is right, sometimes teaching him to raise his eyebrows and blink is not right.' When Yaoshan (Yaoshan) heard Mazu (Mazu)'s words, he attained the Vajra mind, and there was nothing more peculiar or mysterious to communicate. He simply bowed. Mazu (Mazu) knew that he had already entered, and there was no other principle to transmit, only to him...
道。汝見個甚麼便禮拜。藥山亦無道理可以呈似馬師。但云。某在石頭。如蚊子上鐵牛相似。馬師亦無言語與之印可。一日忽見便問。子近日見處如何。山曰。面板脫落盡。唯有一真實。馬師曰。子之所得。可謂協於心體。佈於四肢。既然如是。將三條蔑束取肚皮隨處住山去。藥山云。某甲又是何人。敢言住山。馬師云。未有長行而不住。未有長住而不行。欲益無所益。欲為無所為。宜作舟航。無久住此。遂辭馬師去住山。此亦獲金剛心中之效驗者云云。