[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) › [佛祖歷代通載](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036) › 5.50 # 佛祖歷代通載 5.50 佛祖歷代通載 5.50 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5.50) 問曰。佛道至尊至大。堯舜周孔曷不修之乎。七經之中不見其辭。子既耽詩書悅禮樂。奚為復好佛道喜異術。豈能踰經傳美聖業哉。竊為吾子不取也。牟子曰。書不必孔丘之言。藥不必扁鵲之方。合義者從。愈病者良。君子博取眾善以輔其身。子貢云。夫子何常師之有乎。堯事尹壽。舜事務成。旦學呂望。丘學老聃。亦俱不見於七經也。四師雖聖。比之於佛。猶白鹿之與麒麟。燕鳥之與鳳凰也。堯舜周孔。且猶與之。況佛身相好變化神力無方。焉能舍而不學乎。五經事義或有所闕。佛不見記何足怪疑哉。 > The questioner asked: "The Buddhist Way is supremely venerable and supremely great; why did Yao, Shun, the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius not cultivate it? Its words are not seen anywhere in the Seven Classics. Since you are devoted to the Shijing and Shujing and delight in the rites and music, why do you turn around to take fondness in the Buddhist Way and rejoice in strange arts? How could they surpass the classics and commentaries or enhance the sage undertakings? I venture to think that you, sir, ought not to take it." Master Mou said: "Books need not be the words of Kong Qiu; medicine need not be the prescription of Bian Que. What accords with righteousness should be followed; what cures illness is good. The gentleman broadly gathers all virtues to assist his person. Zigong said: 'What constant master did the Master have?' Yao served Yin Shou; Shun served Wucheng; Dan learned from Lü Wang; Qiu learned from Lao Dan. None of these are seen in the Seven Classics either. Although these four masters were sages, comparing them to the Buddha is like a white deer compared to a qilin, or a swallow compared to a fenghuang. If even Yao, Shun, Zhou, and Kong did so, how much more so for the Buddha, whose physical marks and signs, transformations, and supernatural powers are boundless! How could one cast it aside and not study it? The affairs and principles of the Five Classics have omissions; why should it be an object of wonder or suspicion that the Buddha is not recorded there?" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.49](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5.49) - [Next: 5.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5.51) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036~en-mt.5.50) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [弘明集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.1.12) — 僧祐, Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.5.50) · Pramāṇa