佛祖歷代通載 21.103

21.103

辯曰。夫麒麟鬪而日月虧。鯨鯢死而彗星現。銅山崩而洛鍾應。葭灰缺而月暈殘。蓋感應之道交。故機教之相扣。人心渴仰法雨芳菲。沃彼情塵開他蒙昧。故孔子曰。不憤不啟。不悱不發。此明待問而說也。況乎聖人設教權變多方。豈使他人起怒自授焚溺。全無㥏𭟓。強與他言。豈知虛往實歸之道哉剜刻字樣巧合經名。既坐火焰上說金光明經。坐蓮華上說蓮花經。則道德二篇坐於道路而說。洞玄三部元在水洞而談。此既不然。彼云何爾。且金光明性相通顯。法華經破權歸實。涅槃經明佛性真常。四十二章群經集出。不窮根蔕盜聽妄談。唯口起羞出何容易。難惑上智只誑下愚。又上經既是老子所陳。道士應宜依而學。佛何乃合氣為道。專諷靈寶。試問三經文明何義。道藏既不收攝。道士又不通明。偷大聖之至詮。為老君之極唱。正符涅槃盜牛之喻。又同瞽者誤入金穴。雖得其寶未知何用。又曰。懺悔三業至年月齋法。若如是者。道士應通。且問懺悔是何語言。今此懺悔。為事懺耶。為理懺耶。約功德門而滅罪邪。約逆生死心而滅罪耶能懺之心宜有幾種。所懺之罪何處安排。懺悔二字由尚罕知。則三業六根五逆十惡。戒善之軌年月齋名。決不曉達。若是老子所說。道士應合備。知既然一字不通。顯知偷佛妄說。此同竊賊人物被主認著。猶不招承。更生拒辯。焚經火板方乃慚惶。君子悔前不至如此。

Refutation: When qilin fight, the sun and moon suffer eclipse; when great whales die, comets appear. When the copper mountain crumbles, the Luoyang bell resonates; when reed ash diminishes, the moon's halo wanes. This is because the resonance between stimulus and response corresponds; thus capacity and teaching engage each other. When human minds thirst and yearn, the fragrant rain of the Dharma moistens the dust of their emotions and enlightens their ignorance. Therefore Confucius said: 'If one is not eager to learn, I do not open the way; if one is not struggling to express oneself, I do not guide.' This shows that one waits for a question before speaking. How much more so the skillful expedients and diverse methods with which the sages establish teachings! How could they cause others to become enraged and voluntarily submit themselves to burning and drowning, showing utter shamelessness and forcing speech upon others? How could they understand the way of 'going empty and returning full'? Chiseling out phrases to cleverly match the names of sūtras: if he sat on flames to preach the Golden Light Sūtra, and sat on a lotus flower to preach the Lotus Sūtra, then the two scrolls of the Daode[jing] must have been preached while sitting on a road (dao), and the three divisions of the Dongxuan must have originally been spoken in a water cavern (dong)! If this is not so, why should the former be? Furthermore, the Golden Light Sūtra penetrates and illuminates both nature and characteristics; the Lotus Sūtra demolishes expedients and returns to reality; the Nirvāṇa Sūtra illuminates the true eternity of Buddha-nature; and the Sūtra of Forty-Two Chapters was compiled from various sūtras. Without probing the roots, they stole what they heard and spoke recklessly; shame arises only from the mouth—how could it be uttered so lightly? This cannot deceive the highest wisdom, but only dupes the lowest fools. Moreover, if the above sūtras were stated by Laozi, the Daoists should rely on them and learn them; why instead do they merge qi to practice the Way and exclusively recite the Lingbao? Let us ask: what doctrines are clarified in the texts of these three sūtras? The Daoist Canon does not collect them, nor do the Daoists understand them. Stealing the supreme teachings of the Great Sage, they make them the ultimate pronouncements of the Old Lord; this exactly tallies with the parable of stealing a cow in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, and is like a blind man stumbling into a cave of gold: although he obtains the treasure, he does not know how to use it. Furthermore, it says: 'Repent the three karmic actions up to the fasting rules of months and days.' If so, the Daoists should understand them. Let us ask: what language is 'repentance' (chanhui)? In this repentance, is it repentance through phenomena or repentance through principle? Is guilt eradicated through the gate of merit, or through the mind that reverses birth and death? How many kinds of repentant minds should there be, and where are the repented transgressions disposed of? When they barely understand the two words 'repentance', they certainly do not comprehend the three karmic actions, the six sense organs, the five heinous deeds, the ten non-virtuous acts, the rules of precepts and virtues, or the names of the monthly and daily fasts. If these were spoken by Laozi, the Daoists ought to know them fully. Since they do not understand a single word, it is obvious that they stole from the Buddha and spoke falsely. This is like a thief being recognized by the owner of the stolen goods: still refusing to confess, he puts up further resistance and arguments; only when the woodblocks of the scriptures are burned does he become ashamed and dismayed. A gentleman regrets his past errors and would not go so far.