Notes Beside the Bamboo Window — Third Collection, Part 23
Continuing the Third Collection (三筆). A protest against the canon's own hasty, uneven editorial process, which excluded two genuinely valuable masters' recorded sayings while admitting lesser works — followed by a meditation on the striking humility of two great Tiantai patriarchs about their own spiritual attainment, held up against Confucius's own comparable modesty.
91. 續入藏諸賢著述 — On Continuing to Canonize Worthy Authors' Writings
A pointed protest against the canon's own uneven editorial history: two genuinely valuable masters' recorded sayings remain excluded from the Buddhist canon despite deserving inclusion, while lesser works were admitted through hasty, poorly considered decisions — a problem Zhuhong notes even befell Tiantai Zhiyi's own major writings, canonized only a century after his death.
古來此方著述入藏者，皆依經論入藏成式，梵僧若干員，漢僧若干員，通佛法宰官若干員，群聚而共議之。有當入而未入者，則元之天目《高峰禪師語錄》，國初之《琦楚石禪師語錄》，皆寶所之遺珍也。近歲又入藏四十餘函，而二師語錄，依然見遺。有不須入者反入焉；則一二時僧與一二中貴草草自定，而高明者或不與其事故也。嗟乎！天台師種種著述，及百年然後得入藏，豈亦時節因緣使之然歟？後更有入藏者，二師之語錄其最急矣！特闡而明之。
Since ancient times, when writings composed in this land have been admitted into the canon, this has always followed the established procedure for admitting sutras and treatises: a certain number of foreign monks, a certain number of Chinese monks, and a certain number of court officials versed in the Dharma would all gather together to deliberate jointly on the matter. And yet there are works that deserved admission but were never admitted — the Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Gaofeng of Mount Tianmu from the Yuan dynasty, and the Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Chushi from the early years of the present dynasty, are both genuine treasures left out of the storehouse. In recent years, over forty more cases of texts have been newly admitted to the canon, and yet the recorded sayings of these two masters remain overlooked still.
There are, meanwhile, works that had no real need to be admitted, which were admitted regardless — because the decision was made hastily by one or two monks of the moment together with one or two court officials, without the participation of anyone of real discernment. Alas! Even Tiantai Master Zhiyi's own various writings were not admitted to the canon until a full century after his death — was this too simply a matter of circumstance and timing beyond anyone's control? Should there be any further opportunity to admit new works to the canon, the recorded sayings of these two masters ought to be given the very highest priority. I set this down here specifically to make the matter clear.
Gaofeng Yuanmiao's own dramatic breakthrough was already recounted in detail in this collection's previous entry; Chushi Fanqi (楚石梵琦, 1296–1370) was a genuine and historically significant early Ming Chan master, a dharma-heir of Yuansou Xingduan, whose extensive recorded sayings in twenty scrolls are independently documented as circulating widely without ever gaining formal canonical status in Zhuhong's own lifetime — both works were in fact eventually included in the later Jiaxing Canon and its successors, a historical resolution Zhuhong himself did not live to see, though his advocacy here is consistent with his broader concern, voiced throughout this collection, for preserving and properly transmitting the genuine records of enlightened teachers.
92. 南嶽天台自言 — Nanyue and Tiantai on Their Own Attainment
A meditation on the striking humility of two of Chinese Buddhism's greatest patriarchs, each of whom, near the end of his own life, attributed his relatively modest attainment to the burden of leading others — a humility Zhuhong holds up as a rebuke to boastful contemporaries, and compares directly to Confucius's own comparable self-effacement.
嶽、台二師俱言，吾以領眾，損己利人，一則止證鐵輪，一則僅登五品。權辭歟？抑實語歟？愚謂權實非後學所能測，但在今人，且莫問權，姑以實論。聖師尚爾，況凡夫乎？則轉增精進矣！不特二師為然，古人之自處也，有曰：「某離師太早，未能盡其妙。」或曰：「某早住院，未克臻此。」其慎重類如是。況台師所處尚不及信位，今人即大悟，問其造位？若果入住，應便能八相成道否？則寧可自招妄言證聖之大罪耶？孔子曰：「我非生而知之者。」又曰：「若聖與仁，則吾豈敢！」又曰：「吾有知乎哉？無知也。」即二師意也。彼嘐嘐然，高據師位，大言不慚者，將超越於二師之上乎？可懼也已。
Both Master Nanyue and Master Tiantai said of themselves that, because they had taken on the burden of leading their own communities, sacrificing their own progress for the benefit of others, one of them attained only the Iron Wheel stage, and the other reached only the Fifth Rank of disciple. Were these merely words of expedient modesty, or were they genuinely true? In my own foolish view, whether such words are expedient or literally true is not something a later student could ever presume to judge — but for people today, let us set aside the question of expedience for now, and simply take their words at face value. If even such sagely teachers spoke of themselves this way, how much more should we, mere ordinary people, feel spurred on to greater diligence!
Nor were these two masters alone in this. The ancients commonly spoke of themselves in the same cautious spirit — some would say, "I left my teacher too early, and was never able to fully grasp his subtle teaching"; others would say, "I took charge of a monastery too soon, and so never managed to reach that level myself." Such was the caution with which they characteristically regarded their own attainment. And consider further: Master Tiantai's own stated attainment did not even reach the stage of the Ten Faiths — so if someone today claims great awakening, one might well ask what stage they have actually reached. If they had truly entered the stage of Abiding, should they not then be able to manifest the eight aspects of a Buddha's life in the world? If not, would they not be bringing upon themselves the grave offense of falsely claiming sagely attainment?
Confucius himself said: "I am not one who was born already knowing." He also said: "As for being a sage or a person of true benevolence — how would I dare claim either!" And he said as well: "Do I really have knowledge? I have none." This is precisely the same spirit as these two masters' own words. As for those who boast with grandiose confidence, seating themselves high in the teacher's chair and speaking without a trace of shame — have they truly surpassed even these two great masters? This is truly something to be feared.
Huisi's account of reaching only the "Iron Wheel" (the Tiantai school's own stage-scheme for the ten stages of faith) and Zhiyi's account of reaching only the "Fifth Rank of disciple" are both genuinely recorded in the historical Buddhist chronicle Fozu Tongji, already cited elsewhere in this collection, and represent one of the most striking instances of self-effacement by major patriarchs anywhere in the tradition; Zhuhong's citation of Confucius's own parallel humility, drawn directly from the Analects, extends an approach already used earlier in this collection's entry 78, which likewise treated the most genuine Confucian scholars as worthy of real respect precisely because of comparable intellectual honesty about the limits of their own attainment.