細問端的 We Never Asked You Properly
說不了，已至堂口。那刺史、知縣並府縣大小官員一見，都下來迎接道：「聖僧昨日來時，一則接上司忙迫，二則又見了所獲之贓，未及細問端的。」唐僧合掌躬身，又將前情細陳了一遍。眾官滿口認稱，都道：「錯了，錯了。莫怪，莫怪。」又問獄中可曾有甚疏失。说不了，已至堂口。那刺史、知县并府县大小官员一见，都下来迎接道：「圣僧昨日来时，一则接上司忙迫，二则又见了所获之赃，未及细问端的。」唐僧合掌躬身，又将前情细陈了一遍。众官满口认称，都道：「错了，错了。莫怪，莫怪。」又问狱中可曾有甚疏失。
逐句解 Line by line
Before he had finished they were at the door of the hall. The prefect, the county magistrate and the officers of prefecture and county, high and low, all came down at the sight of them to receive them, saying, "Holy monks, when you came yesterday, first there was a superior to be met and we were pressed for time, and second we saw the stolen goods that had been taken, and we never got as far as asking closely into the truth of it."
都下來迎接 — all came down to receive them. Monkey's briefing was exactly right: the prefect has come down off his own bench. And the first two characters there are the everyday word for all, running into the word for down — the very shape that a table rule built to fix the word for a capital city would wreck. Both shapes occur in this chapter, and only one of them is wrong. 端的 — the truth of it. The second character takes a reading of its own inside this old vernacular pair. This is its second and last appearance; the gaol warden used it last night when he set the case aside until morning. The apology is an excuse and a good one. They were busy and the evidence looked conclusive. Neither half is untrue.
The Tang monk pressed his palms together, bowed, and set out the whole business again in detail. The officers acknowledged it with one voice, all saying, "A mistake, a mistake. No offence, no offence."
又將前情細陳了一遍 — set out the whole business again in detail. The same account he gave in court yesterday and was told was fine words. Nothing about it has changed. 錯了，錯了。莫怪，莫怪 — a mistake, a mistake; no offence, no offence. Doubled, twice over. It is the standard shape of an apology in this book and it is a long way short of what has happened to them.
Then they asked whether anything had gone amiss in the gaol.
可曾 — whether anything had. The second character means ever and the chain mistakes it for the surname written the same way. The pattern holds right to the end of the chapter: this character appears seven times and the only two that come out wrong are the two inside this one frame. 疏失 — a lapse, something gone amiss. It is a careful, administrative word for did anybody rob you in there, and it is asked because the officers already suspect the answer.
The apology comes from every officer of both administrations at once, and it is not grovelling — it is an explanation. They were pressed for time by a senior visitor, and the stolen property was in front of them. Put like that, what they did was reasonable.
Tripitaka's response is to give exactly the same account he gave yesterday, when it was dismissed as glib talk. Not one word of it has changed and it is now accepted without question. The difference is not the evidence; it is that a god put a foot through the county roof at dawn.
And then the question about the gaol, which is a small masterpiece of official delicacy. They do not ask whether the prisoners were robbed. They ask whether there was any lapse — and they ask because they know perfectly well what happens to new arrivals, and they would rather hear it now than in a complaint.