佛祖統紀 44.55

44.55

The author remarks: Secular books call them prognostications (verifications); Buddhist scriptures call them advance prophecies, meaning being able to announce events prior to their occurrence. In Buddhism, this refers to śrāvakas becoming Buddhas, their lands, kalpas, and names (as seen in the Lotus Sūtra), as well as the fortunes, misfortunes, auspiciousness, and calamity of ordinary beings. In secular realms of old, things like the diagrams and writings, yarrow and turtle shells, astrological prognostications, and dream omens were all means to announce matters in advance. Huan Tan rejected prophecies, not because he did not know about prophecies, but simply out of fear that when Guangwu was facing the many troubles of the dynastic revival, he would decide everything by prophecy and fail to do justice to human affairs; hence he thought it was better not to speak of prophecies. Yet when sages rise, there has never been a lack of prophecies. The prophecies of the emperors and kings of high antiquity were truly numerous and need not be enumerated. In recent antiquity, such as the auspicious omen of the Hongchi stone's advance prophecy under Taizong of Tang, and the auspicious sign of the treasure bestowed by Heaven above to protect the state under Suzong, are all recorded in the Tang histories and verified in later times without error. Only in the reign of our Taizong were auspicious stones obtained twice, bearing the text of 'twenty-one emperors'; in the time of Zhenzong, Yisheng descended, uttering the words that the dynasty's span would surpass that of the Tang; and the Heavenly Book of the Sacred Ancestor contained the prophecy of 'seven hundred and ninety-nine'. Are these not announcements prior to the event? For people who lack learning to want to call prophecies erroneous is truly unacceptable. That the Buddhas and sages announce things prior to the event is indeed beyond the knowledge of the secular world. But as for the omens of yarrow, turtles, stars, and dreams, and the ability of sages and worthies of the classics and histories to foresee events—can one fail to speak of them? If the omens of yarrow, turtles, stars, and dreams, and the words of the sages and worthies of the classics and histories are credible, would one conversely refuse to believe the advance prophecies of the Buddhas and sages? Thus the stone records and heavenly books of our dynasty were not without reality at that time; it is merely that Confucian scholars do not believe in prophetic records, competing to label them erroneous, and meddlesome people chimed in with them. Even if the text on the stone could be forged, Master Zhi personally descended into the forbidden palace, and Taizong dispatched an envoy to express gratitude; can one say this was unreal? Even if the heavenly book might be doubted, the dynastic revival at Wuhui has obtained a prolonged span; can one say this was unreal? The Book of Changes says: 'Through the divine, they know what is to come.' This is the great purport of Confucius speaking of prophecy. How could one not believe it?