As for the two specific idioms—one of which is “To sift through superego is simply for tracing the whereabouts of Buddha-nature”, and the other is “To gain Buddhahood by way of suddenly acquired enlightenment is definitely feasible”—specified above, either is worded—if taken literally—clearly and tersely and pretty expressive. But as a matter of fact, its clarity, terseness and expressiveness are achieved at the cost of depriving the Chinese language of its innate function as an efficient tool for administering mass education. And such a cost should be rated as virtually whopping. I am always of the opinion that most Chan Buddhists in China are unable to get the meaning of another Chan idiom right which reads: “The Order of Buddhist Chan rejects any form of written discourse as a means of perpetuating its own system of tenets”. The authentic purport of the idiom in question is this: “No written language in the world can be equal to the task of perfectly bringing out the entire meaning of the truth revealed by Siddhartha Gautama”. Therefore the idiom in question does not at all signify or connote that a written language or a piece of written discourse cannot be employed as an instrument for shedding light on the main purport of the truth revealed by him. The postulate of “sudden enlightenment” established by Hui Neng, the Sixth Patriarch, is verily the only correct approach (the dharma gate of convenience) to gaining access to the truth uncovered by Siddhartha Gautama. Anyway, like all the other Buddhist orders, the Order of Buddhist Chan always wants to know the bottom of every concern which relates to it. And a proper way for every follower of the order to adhere to in his or her pursuit of a fruition which is to be led to by the path of cultivation or self-cultivation is seeking to know the bottom of everything which is within the compass of a Buddhist order’s regular concern. The circumstances leading to the popular misconstruction of the idiom in question was occasioned primarily by the malpractice resorted to in ancient China by generation of frolicsome or even flippant intelligentsia who had an obsession with “word jugglery” when they set about amusing themselves either by dabbling in Chan doctrines or by writing discourses for intentionally or unintentionally misconstruing Chan tenets. And their preference for “word jugglery” succeeded in bequeathing to us the aforesaid confusing aftermath. (From My Heart My Buddha)