佛祖歷代通載 15.37

15.37

（二十八　己亥）　元和十四年。潮州刺史韓愈到郡之初。以表哀謝。勸帝東封太山。久而無報。因祀神海上。登靈山遇禪師大顛。而問愈曰。子之來官于南。聞以其言之直也。今子之貌欝然似有不懌何也。對曰。愈之用於朝而享祿厚矣。一旦以忠言不用。奪刑部侍郎竄逐八千里之海上。播越嶺海喪吾女孥。及至潮陽颶風鱷魚患禍不測。毒霧瘴氛日夕發作。愈少多病。髮白齒豁。今復憂前黜於無人之地。其生詎可保乎。愈之來也。道出廣陵廟而禱之。幸蒙其力而卒以無恙。以主上有中興之功。已奏章道之。使定樂章告神明東巡太山奏功皇天。儻其有意於此。則庶幾召愈述作功德歌詩。而薦之郊廟焉。愈早夜待之而未至。萬萬一於速歸。愈安能有懌乎。大顛曰。子直言於朝也。忠於君而不顧其身耶。抑尚顧其身而強言之以徇名耶。忠於君而不顧其身。言用則為君之榮。言不用而已有放逐。是其職耳。何介介於胸中哉。若尚顧其身而強言也。則言用而獲忠直之名。享報言之利。不用而逐。亦事之必至也。苟患乎逐。則盍勿言而已。且吾聞之。為人臣者不擇地而安。不重勢而行。今子遇逐而不懌。趨時而求徇。殆非人臣之善也。且子之死生禍福豈不懸諸天乎。子姑自內修而外任命可也。彼廣陵其能福汝耶。主上今繼天寶之後。姦臣負國而討之不暇。糧餽雲合殺人盈野僅能克乎而瘡痍未瘳。方此之際。而子又欲封禪告功以騷動天下。而屬意在乎己之欲歸。子奚忍於是耶。且夫以窮自亂而祭其鬼。是不知命也。動天下而不顧以便已。是不知仁也。強言以干忠遇困而抑欝。是不知義也。以亂為治而告皇天。是不知禮也。而子何以為之。且子之遭黜也。其所言者何事乎。愈曰。主上迎佛骨於鳳翔。而復舁入大內。愈以為佛者夷狄之一法耳。自後漢時流入中國。上古未嘗有也。昔者黃帝堯舜禹湯文武之際。天下無佛。是以年祚永久。晉宋梁魏事佛彌謹。而世莫不夭且亂。愈恐主上之惑於此。是以不顧其身而斥之。大顛曰。若是則子之言謬矣。且佛也者覆天人之大器也。其道則妙萬物而為言。其言則盡幽明性命之理。其教則捨惡而趍善。去偽而歸真。其親天下猶父之於子也。而子毀之。是猶子而刃父也。蓋吾聞之。善觀人者觀其道之所存。而不較其所居之地。桀紂之君。跖蹻之臣。皆中國人也。然不可法者。以其無道也。舜生於東夷。文王於西夷。由余生於戎。季札出於蠻。彼二聖二賢者。豈可謂之夷狄而不法乎。今子不觀佛之道而徒以為夷狄。何言之陋也。子必以為上古未有佛而不法耶。則孔子孟軻生於衰周。而蚩尤瞽叟生於上古矣。豈可捨衰周之聖賢。而法上古之凶頑哉。子以五帝三王之代為未有佛而長壽也。則外丙二年。仲壬四年。何其夭耶。以漢陳之間而人主夭且亂也。則漢明為一代之英主。梁武壽至八十有六。豈必皆夭且亂耶。愈攘袂厲色而言曰。爾之所謂佛者。口不道先王之法言。而妄倡乎輪回生死之說。身不踐仁義忠信之行。而詐造乎報應禍福之故。無君臣之義。無父子之親。使其徒不耕而食。不蠶而衣。以殘賊先王之道。愈安得默而不斥之乎。大顛曰。甚矣子之不達也。有人於此終日數十而不知二五。則人必以為狂矣。子之終日言仁義忠信。而不知佛之言常樂我淨。誠無以異也。得非數十而不知二五乎。且子計甞誦佛書矣。其疑與先王異者。可道之乎。曰愈何暇讀彼之書。大顛曰。子未甞讀彼之書。則安知不談先王之法言耶。且子無乃自以甞讀孔子之書而遂疑彼之非乎。抑聞人以為非而遂非之乎。苟自以甞讀孔子之書而遂疑彼之非。是舜犬也。聞人以為非而遂非之。是妾婦也。昔者舜館畜犬焉。犬之旦莫所見者唯舜。一日堯過而吠之。非愛舜而惡堯也。以所常見者唯舜。而未甞見堯也。今子常以孔子為學。而未甞讀佛之書。遂從而怪之。是舜犬之說也。吾聞之。女子嫁也。母送之曰。往之汝家必敬必戒。無違夫子。然則從人者妾婦之事。安可從人之非而不考其所以非之者乎。夫輪回生死非妄造也。此天地之至數。幽明之妙理也。以物理觀之。則凡有形於天地之間者。未甞不往復生死相與循環也。草木之根荄著於地。因陽之煦而生。則為枝為葉為花為實。氣之散則萎然而槁矣。及陽之復煦又生焉。性識根荄也。枝葉花實者人之體也。則其往復又何怪焉。孔子曰。原始要終。故知死生之說。夫終則復始天行也。況於人而不死而復生乎。莊周曰。萬物出於機入於機。賈誼曰。化為異類兮。又何足患。此皆輪回之說。不俟於佛而明也。焉得謂之妄乎。且子以禍福報應。為佛之詐造。此尤足以見子之非也。夫積善積惡隨作隨應。其主張皆氣焰熏蒸神理自然之應耳。易曰。積善之家必有餘慶。積不善之家必有餘殃。又曰。鬼神害盈而福謙。曾子曰。戒之戒之。出乎爾者反乎爾者也。此報應之說也。唯佛能隱惻乎天下之禍福。是以彰明較著。言其必至之理。使不自陷乎此耳。豈詐造哉。又言。佛無君臣之義。父子之親。此固非子之所及也。事固有在方之內者。有在方之外者。方之內者眾人所共守之。方之外者非天下之至神莫之能及也。故聖人之為言也。有與眾人共守而言之者。有盡天下之至神而言之者。彼各有所當也。孔子之言道也。極之則無思無為。寂然不動感而遂通。此非眾人所共守之言也。眾人而不思不為。則天下之理幾乎息矣。此不可不察也。佛之與人子言必依於孝。與人臣言必依於忠。此眾人所共守之言也。及其言之至。則有至於無心。非唯無心也。則有至於無我。非唯無我也。則又至於無生。非生矣則陰陽之序不能亂。而天地之數不能役也。則其於君臣父子。固有在矣。此豈可為單見淺聞者道哉。子又疑佛之徒不耕不蠶而衣食。且儒者亦不耕不蠶何也。愈曰。儒者之道。其君用之則安富尊榮。其子弟從之則孝悌忠信。是以不耕不蠶而不為素飡也。大顛曰。然則佛之徒亦有所益於人故也。今子徒見末世未有如佛者蠶食於人。而獨不思今之未能如孔孟者亦蠶食於人乎。今吾告汝以佛之理。蓋無方者也。無體者也。妙之又妙者也。其比則天也。有人於此終日譽天而天不加榮。終日詬天而天不加損。然則譽之詬之者皆過也。夫自漢至於今。歷年如此其久也。天下事物變革如此其多也。君臣士民如此其眾也。天地神明如此其不可誣也。而佛之說乃行於中。無敢議而去之者。此必有以蔽天地而不恥。關百聖而不慚。妙理存乎其間。然後至此也。子盍深思之乎。愈曰。吾非訾佛以立異。蓋吾所謂道者。博愛之謂仁。行而宜之之謂義。由是而之焉之謂道。足乎己無待於外之謂德。仁與義為定名。道與德為虛位。此孔子之道而皆不同也。大顛曰。子之不知佛者。為其不知孔子也。使子而知孔子。則佛之義亦明矣。子之所謂仁與義為定名。道與德為虛位者。皆孔子之所棄也。愈曰。何謂也。大顛曰。孔子不云。志於道據於德依於仁遊於藝。蓋道也者百行之首也。仁不足名之。周公之語六德。曰知仁信義中和。蓋德也者仁義之原。而仁義也者德之一偏也。豈以道德而為虛位哉。子貢以博施濟眾為仁。孔子變色曰。何事於仁。必也聖乎。是仁不足以為聖也。烏知孔子之所謂哉。今吾教汝以學者。必先考乎道之遠者焉。道之遠則吾之志不能測者矣。則必親夫人之賢於我者之所向而從之。彼之人賢於我者。以此為是矣。而我反見其非。則是我必有所未盡知者也。是故深思彼之所是而力求之。則庶幾乎有所發也。今子自恃通四海異方之學而文章旁礴。孰如姚秦之羅什乎。子之知來藏往。孰如晉之佛圖澄乎。子之盡萬物不動其心。孰如梁之寶誌乎。愈默然良久曰。不如也。大顛曰。子之才既不如彼矣。彼之所從事者。而子反以為非。然則豈有高才而不知子之所知者耶。今子屑屑於形器之內。奔走乎聲色利欲之間。少不如志則憤欝悲躁。若將不容其生。何以異於蚊虻爭穢壤於積[葶-丁+呆]之間哉。於是愈瞠目而不收。氣喪而不揚。反求其所答。忙然有若自失。逡巡謂大顛曰。言盡於此乎。大顛曰。吾之所以告子者。蓋就子之所能而為之言。非至乎至者也。曰愈也不肖。欲幸聞其至者可乎。大顛曰。去爾欲誠爾心寧爾神盡爾性。窮物之理極天之命。然後可聞也。爾去吾不復言矣。愈趨而出。秋八月己未。帝與宰臣語次。崔群以殘暑尚煩。目同列將退。帝曰。數日一見卿等。時雖餘熱朕不為勞。久之因語及愈有可怜者。而皇甫鎛素薄愈為人。即奏曰。愈終疎狂可且內移。帝納之。遂授袁州刺史。復造大顛之廬施衣二襲而請別曰。愈也將去師矣。幸聞一言。卒以相愈。大顛曰。吾聞易信人者。必其守易改。易譽人者。必其謗易發。子聞吾言而易信之矣。庸知復聞異端不復以我為非哉。遂不告。愈知其不可聞乃去。至袁州尚書孟簡知愈與大顛遊。以書抵愈嘉其改迷信向。愈答書稱。大顛頗聰明識道理實能外形骸以理自勝。不為事物浸亂。因與之往還也。近世黃山谷謂。愈見大顛之後。文章理勝而排佛之詞亦少沮云。

(Twenty-eight: Ji-hai) In the fourteenth year of Yuanhe, when Han Yu, the Prefect of Chaozhou, first arrived in the commandery, he submitted a memorial expressing sorrow and apology, and urged the Emperor to perform the feng sacrifice at Mount Tai. A long time passed without any response. While sacrificing to the gods at the sea, he climbed Mount Ling and met Chan Master Dadian, who asked Yu, “I have heard that you were sent to an official post here in the south because of your straightforward speech. Now your countenance is gloomy, appearing discontented—why is that?” He replied, “I was employed at court and enjoyed a generous salary. Suddenly, because my loyal words were not adopted, I was stripped of my post as Vice Minister of Justice and banished eight thousand li to the sea coast. Crossing the mountain ranges and seas, I lost my young daughter. Arriving in Chaoyang, typhoons and crocodiles brought unpredictable calamities, while poisonous mists and pestilential vapors arose day and night. Since youth I have been sickly, my hair is white, and my teeth are loose. Now I am further troubled by this demotion to an uninhabited land—how could my life be preserved? On my way here, passing Guangling Temple, I prayed there, and fortunately received its aid so that in the end I came to no harm. Considering that the Sovereign has achieved the merit of dynastic revival, I have already memorialized on this, that he should fix musical scores, report to the gods, make an imperial progress to Mount Tai, and report his merits to August Heaven. Should he be interested in this, he might summon me to compose hymns and poems of merit and virtue to offer them in the suburban sacrifices and the ancestral temple. I wait for this day and night, yet it has not arrived. If there is not one chance in ten thousand of a speedy return, how could I be content?” Dadian said, “When you spoke straightforwardly at court, was it out of loyalty to the sovereign without regard for yourself? Or did you still care for yourself, forcing yourself to speak in order to seek fame? If you were loyal to your ruler without regard for yourself, then if your words were adopted, it would bring honor to the ruler; if not adopted, being banished was simply part of your duty. Why hold resentment in your heart? If you still cared for yourself and forced yourself to speak, then if your words were adopted, you would reap the fame of loyalty and uprightness and enjoy the profit of having spoken; if not adopted and banished, this too was inevitable. If you dread banishment, why did you not simply refrain from speaking? Furthermore, I have heard that a minister does not choose where he is comfortable, nor does he act by relying on power. Now, meeting with banishment you are discontented, and you cater to the times seeking after personal aims—this is hardly the excellence of a minister. Moreover, are not your life and death, misfortune and fortune, suspended in Heaven? You should simply cultivate yourself inwardly and externally entrust yourself to destiny. How could that deity of Guangling bring you good fortune? The Sovereign now succeeds the post-Tianbao era; traitors have betrayed the state and he has had no respite from punishing them; provisions gather like clouds, killings fill the wilderness, and only barely has he achieved victory, while the wounds are not yet healed. At such a time, you wish to conduct the feng and shan sacrifices to report merits, stirring up the realm, with your underlying aim merely being your own wish to return. How can you bear to do this? Moreover, to agitate oneself in adversity and sacrifice to ghosts is to not know destiny. To disturb the world without regard for others to benefit oneself is to not know humaneness. To force oneself to speak to seek a reputation for loyalty, and then to become depressed upon encountering hardship, is to not know righteousness. To treat chaos as good order and report it to August Heaven is to not know propriety. Why would you do this? Furthermore, what was the matter about which you spoke when you were demoted?” Yu said, “The Sovereign welcomed the Buddha's bone from Fengxiang and carried it into the inner palace. I thought that the Buddha is merely one teaching of the barbarians. It flowed into China from the time of the Later Han; in high antiquity it never existed. Formerly, during the eras of the Yellow Emperor, Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu, there was no Buddha in the world, and for that reason their dynastic fortunes lasted long. Under the Jin, Song, Liang, and Wei, the service to the Buddha grew ever more reverent, yet the generations were without exception short-lived and turbulent. Fearing that the Sovereign would be deluded by this, I spoke out against it without regard for myself.” Dadian said, “If so, then your words are mistaken. Now, the Buddha is a great vessel that covers heaven and humanity. His Way speaks subtly of the myriad things. His words exhaust the principles of the unseen and manifest, nature and destiny. His teachings abandon evil and strive toward good, casting away falsity and returning to truth. His love for the world is like a father’s for his son. Yet you revile him—this is like a son taking a blade to his father. I have heard that one who is good at evaluating people observes where their Way resides and does not judge them by the place where they lived. The rulers Jie and Zhou, and the robbers Zhi and Qiao, were all men of the Central Plains; yet they cannot be taken as models because they were devoid of the Way. Shun was born among the Eastern Yi, King Wen among the Western Yi, Youyu was born among the Rong, and Jizha came from the Man. Could those two sages and two worthies be called barbarians and therefore not be emulated? Now you do not observe the Buddha's Way, but merely dismiss him as a barbarian—how vulgar is such speech! If you insist that because the Buddha did not exist in high antiquity he should not be taken as a model, then Confucius and Mengzi were born during the decline of the Zhou, while Chiyou and Gusou were born in high antiquity. How could one abandon the sages and worthies of the declining Zhou to emulate the fierce and stubborn men of high antiquity? You take the longevity of the eras of the Five Thearchs and Three Kings to be because there was no Buddha; yet Wai Bing reigned for two years, and Zhong Ren for four years—why were they so short-lived? You take the rulers between the Han and Chen to have been short-lived and turbulent; yet Emperor Ming of the Han was an outstanding sovereign of his era, and Emperor Wu of the Liang lived to eighty-six—why must they all have been short-lived and turbulent?” Yu rolled up his sleeves, glared fiercely, and said, “What you call the Buddha did not utter the normative words of the former kings with his mouth, but recklessly promoted the theory of saṃsāra, transmigration through birth and death; in his person he did not practice the conduct of humaneness, righteousness, loyalty, and trustworthiness, but deceitfully fabricated the causes of retribution, misfortune, and fortune. He was devoid of the righteousness between ruler and minister, and the affection between father and son. He caused his disciples not to till the soil yet eat, not to raise silkworms yet be clothed, thereby harming and destroying the Way of the former kings. How could I remain silent and not denounce him?” Dadian said, “Extreme indeed is your lack of understanding! If someone here counted up to ten all day long but did not know two and five, people would surely consider him mad. You speak of humaneness, righteousness, loyalty, and trustworthiness all day long, yet do not know the Buddha's words on permanence, bliss, self, and purity—truly this is no different! Is it not counting to ten without knowing two and five? Moreover, I reckon you have chanted Buddhist texts. Could you state those points where you suspect they differ from the former kings?” Yu replied, “What leisure do I have to read his texts?” Dadian said, “If you have never read his texts, how do you know he did not speak the normative words of the former kings? Furthermore, is it not that you yourself, having read Confucius's books, therefore suspect the other to be wrong? Or is it that you heard others say it was wrong, and so considered it wrong? If, merely because you have read Confucius's books, you suspect the other to be wrong, this is like Shun's dog. If you heard others say it was wrong and so considered it wrong, this is like a concubine. In ancient times, Shun kept a dog at his residence. What the dog saw morning and evening was only Shun. One day, Yao passed by and the dog barked at him—not because it loved Shun and hated Yao, but because what it customarily saw was only Shun, having never seen Yao. Now you constantly study Confucius and have never read Buddhist scriptures, yet consequently find them strange—this is the parable of Shun's dog. I have heard that when a woman marries, her mother sees her off saying, ‘Go to your home, be respectful and cautious, and do not disobey your husband.’ Thus following others is the business of concubines; how can you follow others' censure without examining the reasons why they censure it? Now, saṃsāra and birth-and-death were not recklessly fabricated. This is the ultimate order of Heaven and Earth, the profound principle of the unseen and manifest. Viewed from the nature of things, whatever takes form between Heaven and Earth has never failed to cycle through coming and going, life and death. The roots and tubers of plants attach to the ground; generated by the warmth of yang, they become branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits; when the qi disperses, they wither and dry up. When the warmth of yang returns, they grow again. Consciousness-nature is the roots and tubers; branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits are the human body. Then what is strange about this cycling back and forth? Confucius said, ‘Tracing things back to their origins and pursuing them to their ends, one thereby understands the teachings on life and death.’ That reaching the end returns to the beginning is the movement of Heaven; how much more so for humans, not dying and being born again? Zhuang Zhou said, ‘The myriad things come forth from the mechanism and enter into the mechanism.’ Jia Yi said, ‘To transform into a different species—why should that be a cause for worry?’ These are all explanations of saṃsāra, clear even without awaiting the Buddha. How can they be called reckless? Furthermore, you take misfortune and fortune, karmic retribution, to be the Buddha's deceitful fabrications; this even more suffices to show your error. The accumulation of good and accumulation of evil bring responses following whatever is done; their direction is merely the steaming of vapor and flame, the natural response of spiritual principle. The Book of Changes says: ‘A family that accumulates good will surely have an excess of blessings; a family that accumulates evil will surely have an excess of calamity.’ It also says: ‘Ghosts and spirits harm the full and bless the humble.’ Zengzi said: ‘Be cautious, be cautious! What goes out from you returns to you.’ These are statements of karmic retribution. Only the Buddha could feel compassion for the misfortune and fortune of the world, and therefore made it brilliantly clear, speaking of its inevitable principles so that people would not fall into them of their own accord. How could they be deceitful fabrications? You also say that the Buddha lacks the righteousness between ruler and minister, and the affection between father and son; this is truly beyond your reach. Matters inherently have those that are within the norm and those that are beyond the norm. What is within the norm is maintained in common by the multitude; what is beyond the norm cannot be reached except by the most spiritual under Heaven. Therefore, when the sages spoke, they sometimes spoke of what was maintained in common with the multitude, and sometimes spoke of what exhausted the most spiritual under Heaven; each had its proper application. When Confucius spoke of the Way, at its ultimate it was ‘without thought and without action, silent and unmoved, yet when stimulated penetrating everywhere.’ This was not a statement maintained in common by the multitude. If the multitude were without thought and without action, then the principles of the realm would almost cease. This must be examined. When the Buddha spoke to sons, he consistently based it on filial piety; when he spoke to ministers, he consistently based it on loyalty—these are statements maintained in common by the multitude. When it came to his ultimate speech, it reached no-mind; not only no-mind, but it reached no-self; not only no-self, but it reached no-birth. When there is no birth, the order of yin and yang cannot disrupt it, and the numerical fate of Heaven and Earth cannot compel it. Thus, regarding ruler and minister, father and son, these are inherently contained therein. How could this be explained to one of narrow views and shallow hearing? You also suspect that the Buddha's disciples do not till the soil or raise silkworms yet eat and wear clothes; yet Confucians also do not till or raise silkworms—why is that?” Yu said, “As for the Way of Confucians, if their ruler uses it, he enjoys peace, wealth, honor, and glory; if young disciples follow it, they have filial piety, fraternal respect, loyalty, and trustworthiness. Therefore, not tilling or raising silkworms is not eating the bread of idleness.” Dadian said, “If so, then the Buddha's disciples also benefit others for that reason. Now you merely see that in the degenerate age none are equal to the Buddha, feeding upon people like silkworms, but do you not consider that those of today who are unable to be like Confucius and Mengzi also feed upon people like silkworms? Now I tell you the principle of the Buddha: it is without location, without physical form, subtle beyond subtle. In comparison, it is like Heaven. If someone here praised Heaven all day long, Heaven would add no glory; if one reviled Heaven all day long, Heaven would suffer no loss. Thus, both those who praise it and those who revile it are in error. From the Han until now, the years have lasted this long; the changes in worldly affairs have been so many; rulers, ministers, scholars, and commoners have been so numerous; Heaven, Earth, ghosts, and spirits are so impossible to deceive; yet the Buddha's teachings have circulated among them, and none have dared criticize and discard them. This must possess that which covers Heaven and Earth without shame, and is presented to a hundred sages without embarrassment; a marvelous principle resides therein, and only then could it reach this point. Why do you not reflect deeply upon this?” Yu said, “I am not criticizing the Buddha to establish eccentricity. What I call the Way is: universal love is called humaneness; acting appropriately is called righteousness; proceeding from this is called the Way; being sufficient in oneself without relying on the external is called virtue. Humaneness and righteousness are fixed terms; the Way and virtue are empty positions. This is the Way of Confucius, yet [Buddhism] is completely different.” Dadian said, “Your ignorance of the Buddha is because of your ignorance of Confucius. If you understood Confucius, then the meaning of the Buddha would also be clear. What you call ‘humaneness and righteousness are fixed terms, the Way and virtue are empty positions’ are all things rejected by Confucius.” Yu said, “What do you mean?” Dadian said, “Did Confucius not say: ‘Set your heart on the Way, base yourself on virtue, lean upon humaneness, and wander in the arts’? The Way is the head of the hundred conducts; humaneness does not suffice to designate it. The Duke of Zhou spoke of the six virtues as knowledge, humaneness, trustworthiness, righteousness, centrality, and harmony. Virtue is the source of humaneness and righteousness, while humaneness and righteousness are one aspect of virtue. How could the Way and virtue be treated as empty positions? Zigong considered giving widely and aiding the multitude to be humaneness; Confucius changed countenance and said: ‘How is this merely a matter of humaneness? Must it not be sageliness!’ Thus humaneness does not suffice to constitute sageliness. How do you know what Confucius meant? Now, what I teach you regarding learning is: one must first examine what is far-reaching in the Way. If the Way is far-reaching, one's own intention cannot measure it; then one must stay close to those worthier than oneself and follow their direction. Those worthier than me considered this to be correct, but I on the contrary see it as wrong; then there must be something I do not fully know. For this reason, reflect deeply on what they held to be right and vigorously seek it; then there may almost be an awakening. Now, you rely on your command of the learning of the four seas and distant lands, and your sweeping literary style. How do you compare with Kumārajīva of the Yao Qin? In knowing what is to come and storing what has passed, how do you compare with Fotudeng of the Jin? In exhausting the myriad things without moving your mind, how do you compare with Baozhi of the Liang?” Yu remained silent for a long time, then said, “I am not their equal.” Dadian said, “Since your talent is not equal to theirs, yet you, on the contrary, consider what they practiced to be wrong—could it be that they had lofty talent yet did not know what you know? Now you are petty within the realm of physical forms and vessels, running about between sights, sounds, profits, and desires, and at the slightest dissatisfaction you become indignant, gloomy, sorrowful, and agitated, as if life were unbearable. How is this different from mosquitoes and gnats fighting over foul soil among heaps of withered weeds?” At this, Yu stared wide-eyed without blinking, his spirit deflated and unassertive; reflecting on how to respond, he was bewildered as if he had lost himself. Hesitating, he said to Dadian, “Is your speech finished here?” Dadian said, “What I told you was spoken merely by accommodating what you are capable of; it is not the ultimate of the ultimate.” [Yu] said, “Unworthy as I am, may I be fortunate enough to hear the ultimate?” Dadian said, “Rid yourself of desires, make your mind sincere, tranquilize your spirit, exhaust your nature; plumb the principles of things and fathom the destiny of Heaven—only then may it be heard. Leave! I will speak no more.” Yu scurried out. In autumn, the eighth month, on the day jiwei, the Emperor was conversing with the prime ministers. Cui Qun, feeling that the remaining summer heat was still oppressive, gave a look to his colleagues to withdraw. The Emperor said, “I only see you gentlemen once every few days. Though there is lingering heat, I do not find it tiresome.” After a while, he spoke of Yu, saying there was pity for him. Huangfu Bo, who had always despised Yu's character, immediately memorialized, saying, “Yu is after all careless and reckless; he may temporarily be transferred inward.” The Emperor accepted this, and thereupon appointed him Prefect of Yuanzhou. Yu went again to Dadian's hut, offered two sets of robes, and bade farewell, saying, “I am about to leave you, Master. May I be fortunate enough to hear one word that will ultimately assist me.” Dadian said, “I have heard that for one who readily believes people, his adherence will surely be easily changed; for one who readily praises people, his slander will surely be easily uttered. You heard my words and readily believed them; how do I know that, hearing divergent theories again, you will not once more consider me wrong?” He then did not instruct him. Yu knew that it could not be heard, and so departed. When he arrived in Yuanzhou, Minister Meng Jian, knowing that Yu had associated with Dadian, sent a letter to Yu praising his turning away from delusion and having faith. Yu replied in a letter stating: “Dadian is quite intelligent and understands the principles of truth; he is truly able to transcend physical embodiment, master himself through principle, and remain uncorrupted and undisturbed by external affairs. It was for this reason that I interacted with him.” In recent times, Huang Shangu remarked: “After Yu met Dadian, his writings had superior principle, and his words rejecting Buddhism also subsided somewhat.”