[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [佛祖統紀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035) › 50.31 # 佛祖統紀 50.31 佛祖統紀 50.31 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [50.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50.31) 浮圖之法非古也。其來於東漢乎。其為體也清淨。其為用也仁恕。由是七六家十九流焉。為利於上下救弊於孔老。其亦至矣。請揚搉而陳之。夫秦火六經漢興雜霸。民澆俗漓。爭奪方熾。禮讓寖微。則仲尼之仁義。伯陽之道德。或幾乎息矣。賴我浮圖之為訓也。既以三世報應制其事。復明一心空寂窮其理。民有聞報應之說者。雖貪殘鄙吝之夫。亦庶乎振乏周急矣。民有聞空寂之說者。雖矜功用壯之夫。亦庶乎守雌保弱矣。能周振則博濟之道行。善保守則朴素之風還。博濟行則禮讓著。朴素還則刑罰措（利於民則仲尼伯陽之道。不遠而復矣。故曰為利於上下救弊於孔老焉。洎乎時君好之失其旨方袍事之違其道）以斯而失其旨則節制不行。違其道則寂默不守。乃以彫峻輪奐而奢夸。乃以輕肥溫飽而煒燁。徒以多為貴。則壞其道者眾矣。言以怪為美。則惑其聽庶矣。遞相沿襲寖以成俗。使夫清淨仁恕之風無乃蕩盡於是。蠶食蠹耗之謗自茲而生。斯乃好之者事之者之不善耳。非教之罪也而往世君民不察其所由。視其徒之不肖。而遷怒於善人教法者有焉。往往造毀佛之律。行挾釋之誅。亦何異乎以丹朱而罪堯。因商均而咎舜。服藥過度而歸過於神農。縱火致焚而反怨於燧人也耶。 > The Dharma of the Buddha is not ancient; did it not arrive during the Eastern Han? Its essence is pure, and its function is benevolence and forbearance. Through it arose the seven \[schools\], six houses, and nineteen lineages. It benefits high and low alike and remedies the failings of Confucius and Laozi; its reach is indeed consummate! Allow me to weigh it and set it forth: When the Qin burned the Six Classics and the Han arose mixing in hegemonic rule, people became frivolous and customs grew corrupt; contention and grasping flared fiercely, while ritual decorum and deference steadily dwindled. Thus the benevolence and righteousness of Zhongni (Confucius) and the Dao and virtue of Boyang (Laozi) were nearly extinguished. Relying on the teachings of our Buddha, deeds were regulated through retribution across the three times, and principle was plumbed by illuminating the emptiness and stillness of the one mind. When the people heard the teaching of retribution, even greedy, cruel, base, and stingy men almost rose to relieve the impoverished and assist those in distress. When the people heard the teaching of emptiness and stillness, even those who boasted of their achievements and flaunted their strength almost came to preserve humility and maintain weakness. If they can broadly relieve \[others\], the path of universal succor will prevail; if they are good at preservation, the pristine simplicity of manners will return. When universal succor prevails, ritual decorum and deference become prominent; when pristine simplicity returns, punishments can be set aside. (When there is benefit for the people, the paths of Zhongni and Boyang return without straying far. Hence it is said that it benefits high and low alike and remedies the failings of Confucius and Laozi. Yet when contemporary rulers took delight in it they lost its central purport, and when the square-robed \[monks\] practiced it they transgressed its Way.) Losing its central purport through this, discipline ceased to operate; transgressing its Way, stillness and silence were no longer maintained. They then indulged in extravagance and boasting through ornate, lofty, and magnificent structures, and flaunted their splendor with fine clothing, plump horses, warmth, and repletion. Valuing only numerical abundance, those who ruined its Way were many; regarding the bizarre as beauty, they bewildered the common folk who listened. Transmitting this from one to another, it gradually hardened into a custom, causing the pure, benevolent, and forbearing ethos to be virtually wiped out. Calumnies accusing them of silkworm-like encroaching and vermin-like depredation arose from this. This was solely due to the unwholesomeness of those who delighted in it and practiced it; it was not the fault of the teaching! Yet past rulers and subjects failed to investigate its causes. Seeing the unworthiness of these followers, some shifted their anger onto good people and the holy teaching. They frequently drafted laws to destroy the Buddha\['s religion\] and executed punishments aimed at suppressing the Śākya clan. How is this different from blaming Yao because of Danzhu, censuring Shun on account of Shangjun, attributing blame to Shennong when one overdoses on medicine, or conversely resenting Suiren when an unchecked fire causes a conflagration? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 50.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50.30) - [Next: 50.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50.32) - [Up: 50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035~en-mt.50.31) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.50.31) · Pramāṇa