歷代三寶紀 11.235

11.235

右二卷。新州願果寺沙門釋僧𪟢撰。𪟢以像代邪正相參。季俗澆情易為趍競。未辯真偽更遞譽毀。今以十八條難撿三科遣釋。則聖賢皎然凡俗見矣。其序略云。𪟢以老子與尹喜西渡化胡。出家老子為說經戒。尹喜作佛教化。又稱是鬼谷先生。撰南山四皓注。未善尋者莫不信從以為口實。異哉。此傳君子尚不可罔。況貶大聖乎。今誠尋此說非直。人世差錯假託名字。亦乃言不及義翻。辱老子意者。勝人君子不出此言。將是無識異道誇競佛法。假託鬼谷四皓之名。附尹喜傳。後作此異論用迷凡俗。傳而不習。夫子不許妄。作者凶老子所誡。此之巨患增長三塗。宜應糺正救其此失。然教有內外用生疑似。人有聖賢多迷本迹。今考校年月究尋人世。依內經外典。採群達誠言。區別真假。使一覽便見。

The above two fascicles were compiled by the śramaṇa Shi Sengyou of Yuanguo Monastery in Xinzhou. Sengyou considered that in the semblance age the heterodox and orthodox were intermingled, and the frivolous inclinations of the decadent era easily led to contention; before discerning the true from the false, people reciprocally praised and slandered them. Now, using eighteen refutations to examine the three categories and dispel errors, the sages and worthies will become clearly distinct from the common multitude. His preface states in brief: 'Sengyou holds that with Laozi crossing to the west with Yin Xi to convert the barbarians, [Yin Xi] leaving the household, Laozi preaching sūtras and precepts for him, and Yin Xi acting as the Buddha to convert people, and further claiming that [the author] was Master Guigu, composing a commentary on the Four Whiteheads of South Mountain—those who have not investigated it well all believe and follow it, using it as conversational evidence. How strange! If an exemplary gentleman cannot even be deceived in this biography, how much less should the Great Sage be disparaged? Now, earnestly investigating this account, not only are the historical eras in error and the names falsely appropriated, but the words fail to reach proper principles and instead bring disgrace upon Laozi's intention. Exalted persons and exemplary gentlemen would never utter such words; it must be that ignorant heterodox paths, boasting and competing with the Buddhadharma, falsely appropriated the names of Guigu and the Four Whiteheads and appended them to the biography of Yin Xi, afterwards creating these bizarre treatises to delude ordinary folk. To transmit without mastering was not permitted by the Master [Confucius], and rashly creating brings misfortune, as Laozi warned. This enormous hazard augments the three evil paths; it is right to investigate and rectify it to remedy this error. Yet teachings are divided into internal and external, which gives rise to doubts and suspicion; people include the sagely and ordinary, many of whom are confused about roots and traces. Now I examine the years and months, exhaustively investigate the human eras, rely upon internal scriptures and external classics, gather the sincere words of various accomplished figures, and distinguish the true from the false, so that it may be seen at a single glance.'