English
Indeed. Question: The treatise says, 'When speaking of function, they are different; when speaking of stillness, they are the same.' I don't understand, within Prajna (Wisdom), are there differences between function and stillness? Answer: Function is stillness, and stillness is function. Function and stillness are one in essence, originating from the same source but with different names; there is no stillness without function that governs function. Therefore, the more obscured the wisdom, the brighter the illumination; the more tranquil the spirit, the more responsive the action. How can one speak of differences between brightness and obscurity, stillness and movement? Thus, the *Samadhi-nirdeśa Sutra* says, 'Not acting, yet accomplishing more than acting.' The *Ratnakuta Sutra* says, 'Without mind, without consciousness, there is nothing that is not known.' This is to exhaust the spirit and intelligence, reaching the ultimate discussion beyond phenomena. From these clear statements, the sage's mind can be understood. Treatise on Prajna's Non-Knowing (End) Attached: Letter from Liu Yimin Yimin bows in respect: I have long admired your esteemed reputation and have been longing to see you from afar. As the year is not yet severely cold, how is your health? Letters are difficult to send, increasing my feelings of longing. This disciple is ill and living in the countryside, often suffering from ailments. I am sending Huiming, a Daoist priest, on a journey north to convey my feelings. The ancients did not let physical distance lead to indifference; understanding brings closeness. Therefore, although the mountains and rivers are vast and we have not met in person for years, my admiration for your character and teachings, reflecting your image in my mind, and the diligence of my longing for joy are truly profound. Sadly, there is no opportunity to meet, and I can only sigh towards the clouds, offering my respect in accordance with the seasons. I hope to inquire about you through travelers. I sincerely wish that the community there is healthy and harmonious! May the foreign Dharma masters find peace! You, as a vessel of enlightened wisdom, have encountered such profound teachings. I imagine that the merit of your exploration is sufficient to resolve more than half of your thoughts. Therefore, I am deeply ashamed of our long separation. The monks on this mountain are pure and disciplined, diligently upholding the precepts, and spending their time in meditation and study. They are gentle and respectful, making this a joyful place. As I have fulfilled my long-held wish and witnessed your noble example, my feelings of gratitude are etched in my heart like the sun and moon. Dharma Master Yuan has always acted appropriately, diligently pursuing his studies day and night. If it were not for the subtle flow of the Dharma and the guidance of reason, who could maintain such diligence and tranquility in their declining years? Therefore, my comfort is deep, and my gratitude is beyond expression. Last summer, --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
始见生上人示《无知论》。才运清俊，旨中沈允，推涉圣文，婉而有归。披味殷勤，不能释手。直可谓浴心方等之渊，而悟怀绝冥之肆者矣！若令此辨遂通，则般若众流，殆不言而会。可不欣乎！可不欣乎！夫理微者辞险，唱独者应希。苟非绝言象之表者，将以存象而致乖乎？意谓，答以缘求智之章，婉转穷尽，极为精巧，无所间然矣。但暗者难以顿晓，犹有余疑一两，今辄题之如别。想从容之暇，复能粗为释之。 论序云：“般若之体，非有非无。虚不失照，照不失虚。故曰不动等觉而建立诸法。”下章云：“异乎人者神明，故不可以事相求之耳。”又云：“用即寂、寂即用。神弥静，应逾动。”夫圣心冥寂，理极同无。不疾而疾，不徐而徐。是以知不废寂、寂不废知，未始不寂、未始不知。故其运物，成功化世之道。虽处有名之中，而远与无名同。斯理之玄，固常所弥昧者矣。但今谈者，所疑于高论之旨，欲求圣心之异：为谓穷灵极数妙尽冥符耶？为将心体自然灵怕独感耶？若穷灵极数妙尽冥符，则寂照之名，故是定慧之体耳。若心体自然灵怕独感，则群数之应，固以几乎息矣。夫心数既玄而孤运其照，神淳化表而慧明独存。当有深证，可试为辨之。疑者当以抚会应机睹变之知，不可谓之不有矣。而论旨云 现代汉语译本： 最初见到生上人展示《无知论》。他的文采清新俊逸，主旨深刻含蓄，推究涉及圣人的文章，委婉而有归宿。我殷勤地阅读品味，爱不释手。真可以说是用方等（Vipulya，广大的）经典的深渊来洗涤心灵，而领悟到超越冥昧的境界！如果能使这种辩论得以通行，那么般若（Prajna，智慧）的众多流派，大概不用言说就能融会贯通。这难道不令人欣喜吗！这难道不令人欣喜吗！理致精微的言辞必然险峻，独自倡导的人响应者稀少。如果不是超越了言语形象的表达，那么将以保存形象而导致乖谬吗？我的意思是，用缘起求智的文章来回答，委婉曲折地穷尽其理，极为精巧，无可挑剔。但愚昧的人难以立刻明白，仍然还有一两处疑惑，现在姑且题写下来作为告别。希望在您从容闲暇的时候，能够再次粗略地为我解释一下。 《无知论》的序言中说：‘般若的本体，非有非无。虚空不失去照用，照用不失去虚空。所以说不动的等觉而建立诸法。’下面的章节说：‘不同于一般人的是神明，所以不可以用事相来寻求它。’又说：‘用就是寂静，寂静就是用。精神越是安静，感应就越是灵动。’圣人的心境深远寂静，道理达到极致就是同于虚无。不快也不慢，不急也不缓。因此知道不废弃寂静，寂静不废弃知道，未曾不是寂静，未曾不是知道。所以他运用事物，成就教化世人的方法。虽然处于有名之中，而远远地与无名相同。这种道理的玄妙，本来就是我常常感到迷惑的。但现在谈论的人，所疑惑于您的高论的旨意，想要探求圣人内心的不同之处：是认为穷尽灵性、极尽数术，巧妙地达到与冥昧相符吗？还是认为心体的自然灵性独自感应呢？如果认为穷尽灵性、极尽数术，巧妙地达到与冥昧相符，那么寂照的名称，本来就是定慧的本体啊。如果认为心体的自然灵性独自感应，那么对于众多事物的感应，本来就已经几乎停止了。心数既然玄妙而独自运行其照用，精神纯粹而变化显现于外，而智慧光明独自存在。这其中应当有深刻的证悟，可以试着为我辨析一下。疑惑的人认为抚慰、会合、应机、观察变化的知，不可以认为它不存在啊。而论旨说
English
English version: I first saw Venerable Sheng showing his ‘Treatise on No-Knowing’. His talent was fresh and elegant, his main points profound and subtle, his investigation involved the writings of sages, gentle and with a destination. I read and savored it diligently, unable to put it down. It can truly be said that he used the depths of the Vipulya (extensive) sutras to cleanse his mind, and realized a state beyond darkness! If this debate could be made accessible, then the many streams of Prajna (wisdom) would probably converge without needing to be spoken of. Isn't this delightful! Isn't this delightful! Words that are subtle in principle are necessarily dangerous, and those who advocate alone have few respondents. If it is not an expression that transcends words and images, then will preserving the image lead to contradiction? My intention is to answer with a chapter on seeking wisdom through dependent origination, exhaustively and ingeniously, without any flaws. But the ignorant find it difficult to understand immediately, and there are still one or two doubts remaining, which I now write down as a farewell. I hope that in your leisure time, you can roughly explain them to me again. The preface to the ‘Treatise on No-Knowing’ says: ‘The essence of Prajna is neither existent nor non-existent. Emptiness does not lose its illumination, and illumination does not lose its emptiness. Therefore, it is said that the unmoving equanimity establishes all dharmas.’ The following chapter says: ‘What differs from ordinary people is spiritual intelligence, so it cannot be sought through phenomena.’ It also says: ‘Function is stillness, and stillness is function. The more tranquil the spirit, the more responsive it is.’ The mind of a sage is profound and still, and the principle reaches its limit in being the same as nothingness. Neither fast nor slow, neither hurried nor leisurely. Therefore, knowing does not abandon stillness, and stillness does not abandon knowing; it is never not still, and never not knowing. Therefore, he uses things to accomplish the way of teaching and transforming the world. Although he is in the midst of the named, he is far the same as the unnamed. The mystery of this principle is what I have always been confused about. But now, those who discuss it are doubtful of the meaning of your high discourse, wanting to explore the difference in the heart of a sage: Is it that he exhausts spirituality, exhausts numerology, and skillfully achieves conformity with darkness? Or is it that the natural spirituality of the mind-essence responds alone? If it is thought that he exhausts spirituality, exhausts numerology, and skillfully achieves conformity with darkness, then the names of stillness and illumination are originally the essence of Samadhi (concentration) and Prajna (wisdom). If it is thought that the natural spirituality of the mind-essence responds alone, then the response to numerous things has already almost ceased. Since the mind-numbers are mysterious and operate their illumination alone, and the spirit is pure and its transformations manifest outwardly, while the light of wisdom exists alone, there should be profound realization in this, which you can try to explain to me. Those who doubt believe that the knowledge of comforting, uniting, responding to opportunities, and observing changes cannot be said to not exist. And the treatise says --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
“本无惑取之知”，而未释所以不取之理。谓宜先定圣心所以应会之道，为当唯照无相耶？为当咸睹其变耶？若睹其变，则异乎无相；若唯照无相，则无会可抚。既无会可抚，而有抚会之功。意有未悟，幸复诲之。论云“无当，则物无不当；无是，则物无不是。物无不是，故是而无是；物无不当，故当而无当。”夫无当而物无不当，乃所以为至当；无是而物无不是，乃所以为真是。岂有真是而非是、至当而非当，而云当而无当、是而无是耶？若谓至当非常当，真是非常是，此盖悟、惑之言本异耳，固论旨所以不明也。愿复重喻，以祛其惑矣。 论至日，即与远法师详省之，法师亦好相领得意。但标位似各有本，或当不必理尽同矣。顷兼以班诸有怀，屡有击其节者，而恨不得与斯人同时也。 答刘遗民书 不面在昔，伫想用劳。慧明道人至，得去年十二月疏并问。披寻返覆，欣若暂对。凉风届节，顷常如何？贪道劳疾，多不住耳。信南返不悉。八月十五日。释僧肇疏答。 服像虽殊，妙期不二；江山虽缅，理契则邻。所以望途致想，虚襟有寄。君既遂嘉遁之志，标越俗之美，独恬事外，欢足方寸。每一言集，何尝不远喻林下之雅咏，高致悠然。清散未期，厚自保爱。每因行李，数有承问。愿彼 现代汉语译本： 您说‘本来没有迷惑而获取的知识’，却没有解释为什么不获取的道理。我认为应该先确定圣人的心应该领会的道，是应当只照见无相呢？还是应当全部看到它的变化呢？如果看到它的变化，那就不同于无相；如果只照见无相，那就没有可以依凭的领会。既然没有可以依凭的领会，却有依凭领会的作用。我理解上还有没领悟的地方，希望您再次教诲我。论中说：‘没有执着，那么万物没有不恰当的；没有肯定，那么万物没有不是的。万物没有不是的，所以肯定而无肯定；万物没有不恰当的，所以恰当而无恰当。’没有执着而万物没有不恰当的，这才是最恰当；没有肯定而万物没有不是的，这才是最真实。难道有真实却不是肯定，最恰当却不是恰当，而说恰当而无恰当、肯定而无肯定吗？如果说最恰当不是通常的恰当，最真实不是通常的肯定，这大概是领悟和迷惑的说法本来就不同，这正是论旨不明确的原因啊。希望您再次用比喻来说明，以消除我的疑惑。 到了那天，就和远法师（指慧远大师）详细地审查它，法师也很喜欢并且领会了其中的意思。但是标立的位次好像各有依据，或许应当不必在道理上完全相同。不久也把它分发给有心求道的人，屡次有人击节赞叹，只可惜不能和这些人同时见面啊。 答刘遗民书 过去没有见面，只能通过想象来表达我的思念。慧明道人到了，收到了去年十二月的来信和问题。打开反复阅读，高兴得好像暂时见面一样。凉风吹来的季节，您近来怎么样？我贪求佛道，身体多病，经常不在家。送信人南返，不多说了。八月十五日。释僧肇（指僧肇法师）回复。 服饰形象虽然不同，追求的妙理却是一样的；江山虽然遥远，道理相合就如同邻居。所以遥望远方表达我的思念，虚心有所寄托。您既然实现了隐居的志向，展现了超越世俗的美德，独自安于世外，内心的快乐就足够了。每当收到您的来信，总能联想到您在山林下的高雅吟唱，高尚的情致悠远绵长。清静闲散的日子还没有到来，请多多保重身体。每次遇到送信的人，都多次托他们向您问候。希望您...