佛祖統紀 41.54

41.54

The Narrator says: Tuizhi did not understand the Buddha; that was why he denounced the Buddha. When later scholars read Han's *Origins of the Way* and his letter responding to Meng, they immediately equated him to one who could repel Yang Zhu and Mozi. The eccentricity of Yang and Mo was indeed worthy of being repelled. But as for the vastness of the Buddha's Way, all nine currents of the worldly realm are accommodated by it; not a single dharma lies outside the Buddha's Way. How could he be compared to Yang and Mo? Someone may ask: 'Liu Zihou said that the words of the Buddha accord with the *Changes* and the *Analects*. The *Changes* and *Analects* are worldly verbal teachings; how could they suffice to know the ultimate limits of the Buddha's Way?' I say: Because Zihou was a Confucian scholar, Haochu could not yet speak to him of the profound and subtle, and so he compared it to the essential principles of the *Changes* and *Analects* so that he might easily grasp it. Once Liu Zihou was enlightened to something, he wished in turn to use this to alert Tuizhi to what he fell short in; had he not spoken from within the *Changes* and *Analects*, Confucians would not have grasped it easily. However, Zihou thereafter was ultimately able to enter this lineage with excellence. Therefore, his 'Preface on Seeing Off Yuanju' says: 'The Buddha's Way is vast and encompasses much.' His Stele for Wuxing says: 'Inheriting the original lineage so as to accord with the Middle Way.' His 'Preface on Seeing Off Master Chongxun' says: 'I have studied Buddhism since youth, seeking its Way for thirty years, and I alone have attained something.' This cannot be judged solely by the *Changes* and *Analects*. Alas! For Tuizhi's denunciation of the Buddha, none but Liu could suffice to reproach him. Now I have used the sentences of the 'Preface for Haochu' to interpret it, with the intention of amplifying what Master Liu was able to express.