来书云：「前日精一之论，即作圣之功否？」[1]
「精一」之「精」以理言，「精神」之「精」以气言。理者，气之条理；气者，理之运用。无条理则不能运用，无运用则亦无以见其所谓条理者矣。精则精，精则明，精则一[2]，精则神，精则诚；一则精，一则明，一则神，一则诚，原非有二事也。但后世儒者之说与养生之说各滞于一偏，是以不相为用。前日「精一」之论，虽为原静爱养精神而发，然而作圣之功，实亦不外是矣。
来信说：「前日『精一』之论，就是作圣的功夫吗？」
「精一」的精是从理上说的，「精神」的精是从气上说的。理是气的条理，气是理的运用。没有条理便不能运用，没有运用也就无从见到所谓条理。精则精、精则明、精则一、精则神、精则诚；一则精、一则明、一则神、一则诚，本来不是两件事。但后世儒者之说与养生之说各滞于一偏，所以不能互相为用。前日「精一」之论，虽是为原静爱养精神而发，然而作圣的功夫，实在也不外于此。
Your letter says: 'Is your late discourse on refinement-unity the work of sage-making?'
The refine of refinement-unity is said of principle; the refine of vitality is said of breath. Principle is breath's ordered pattern; breath is principle's employment. Without pattern no employment; without employment no seeing the pattern. Refined: fine, bright, one, numinous, sincere. One: fine, bright, numinous, sincere — originally not two things. But later Confucians' talk and the life-nourishers' talk each froze on one side, so neither served the other. The late discourse on refinement-unity, though raised for your love of nourishing vitality, is indeed nothing other than the work of sage-making.
- 「来书云」等十五字，诸本并脱，据王本补。
- 「精则一」三字疑为衍文。