蔡希渊问：「文公《大学》新本，先『格致』而后『诚意』工夫，似与首章次第相合；若如先生从旧本之说，即『诚意』反在『格致』之前，于此尚未释然。」
先生曰：「《大学》工夫即是『明明德』，『明明德』只是个『诚意』，『诚意』的工夫只是『格物』、『致知』。若以『诚意』为主，去用『格物』、『致知』的工夫，即工夫始有下落，即为善、去恶无非是『诚意』的事。如新本先去穷格事物之理，即茫茫荡荡，都无著落处，须用添个『敬』字，方才牵扯得向身心上来。然终是没根源。若须用添个『敬』字，缘何孔门倒将一个最紧要的字落了，直待千余年后要人来补出？正谓以『诚意』为主，即不须添『敬』字，所以举出个『诚意』来说，正是学问的大头脑处。于此不察，真所谓『毫厘之差，千里之缪』。大抵《中庸》工夫只是『诚身』，『诚身』之极，便是『至诚』；《大学》工夫只是『诚意』，『诚意』之极，便是『至善』。工夫总是一般。今说这里补个『敬』字，那里补个『诚』字，未免画蛇添足。」
蔡希渊问：「朱文公的《大学》新本，先『格物致知』而后『诚意』的功夫，似乎与首章的次序相合；若按先生遵从旧本的说法，『诚意』反而在『格物致知』之前，这里还未想通。」
先生说：「《大学》的功夫就是『明明德』，『明明德』只是一个『诚意』，『诚意』的功夫只是『格物』『致知』。若以『诚意』为主，去用『格物』『致知』的功夫，功夫才有落点，则为善去恶无一不是『诚意』的事。如新本先去穷究事物之理，便茫茫荡荡都没有着落，必须添个『敬』字，才牵扯回到身心上来，但终究没有根源。若必须添个『敬』字，为什么孔门反倒把这个最紧要的字漏掉了，直等千余年后要人来补出？正因为以『诚意』为主，就不必添『敬』字，所以专门举出个『诚意』来讲，这正是学问的大头脑处。在这里不察觉，真是所谓『毫厘之差，千里之谬』。大抵《中庸》的功夫只是『诚身』，诚身到极处便是『至诚』；《大学》的功夫只是『诚意』，诚意到极处便是『至善』。功夫总是一样的。如今说这里补个『敬』字、那里补个『诚』字，未免画蛇添足。」
Cai Xiyuan asked: 'Master Zhu's new text of the Great Learning puts investigation of things and extension of knowledge before sincerity of intention, matching the first chapter's sequence. On your old-text reading, sincerity comes first — I am not yet at ease.'
The Master said: 'The Great Learning's work is brightening bright virtue; brightening bright virtue is only sincerity of intention; and that work is only investigating things and extending knowledge. With sincerity as master and investigation and extension as the work applied, the work has its landing place, and every doing of good and removing of evil is the business of sincerity. The new text, first exhausting the principles of outward things, drifts boundless with nowhere to land: a reverence must be added to drag it back to body and mind — yet still without root. If reverence must be added, why did the school of Confucius drop the single most vital word, only for someone to patch it in a thousand years later? Precisely because sincerity as master needs no added reverence, sincerity alone is set out — this is the great guiding head of learning. Miss this and it is truly a hair's difference, a thousand miles of error. Broadly, the Doctrine of the Mean's work is only making the self sincere — at its utmost, utmost sincerity; the Great Learning's work is only sincerity of intention — at its utmost, the highest good. The work is all one. To patch a reverence here and a sincerity there is painting legs on the serpent.'