佛祖歷代通載 5.52

5.52

問曰。孝經言。身體髮膚受之父母。不敢毀傷。曾子臨沒。啟予手啟予足。今沙門剃頭。何其違聖人之語。不合孝子之道也。吾子常好論是非平曲直。而反善之乎。牟子曰。夫訕聖賢不仁。平不中不智也。不仁不智何以樹德。德將不樹頑嚚之儔也。論何容易乎。昔齊人乘船渡江。其父墮水。其子攘臂捽頭顛倒。使水從口出。而父命得甦。夫捽頭顛倒不孝莫大。然以全父之身。若拱手修孝子之常。父命絕於水矣。孔子曰。可與適道。未可與權。所謂時宜施者也。且孝經曰。先王有至德要道。而泰伯斷髮文身。自從吳越之俗。違於身體髮膚之義。然孔子稱之。其可謂至德矣。仲尼不以其斷髮毀之也。由是而觀。苟有大德不拘於少。沙門捐家財棄妻子不聽音視色。可謂讓之至也。何違聖語不合孝乎。豫讓吞炭漆身。聶政皮面自刑。伯姬蹈火。高行截容。君子為勇而死義。不聞譏其毀沒也。沙門剃除鬚髮。而比之於四人。不已遠乎。

The questioner asked: "The Xiaojing states: 'Body, hair, and skin are received from our parents; we dare not damage or injure them.' When Zengzi was near death, he said: 'Uncover my hands! Uncover my feet!' Now the śramaṇas shave their heads; how completely this violates the words of the sage, failing to accord with the way of a filial son! You, sir, are usually fond of discussing right and wrong and weighing the bent and the straight, yet you turn around and approve of this?" Master Mou said: "Slandering sages and worthies is unbenevolent; weighing things without impartiality is unwise. If one is neither benevolent nor wise, how can one establish virtue? If virtue will not be established, one belongs to the company of the recalcitrant and obstinate. How could discussion be taken lightly? Long ago, a man of Qi took a boat to cross a river, and his father fell into the water. His son rolled up his sleeves, seized his father by the hair and turned him upside down, causing the water to pour out from his mouth, and thereby the father's life was revived. Now, seizing the head and inverting the body is the height of unfiliality, yet he did so to preserve his father's person. If he had folded his hands and observed the ordinary norms of a filial son, his father's life would have ended in the water. Confucius said: 'One may advance toward the Way with someone, yet not be able to weigh circumstances with him'—this refers to acting as the occasion requires. Furthermore, the Xiaojing says: 'The former kings possessed supreme virtue and the essential Way,' yet Taibo cut his hair and tattooed his body, conforming of his own accord to the customs of Wu and Yue, violating the principle of 'body, hair, and skin.' Yet Confucius praised him, saying that he could indeed be called possessing supreme virtue. Confucius did not censure him because of his cutting of his hair. Viewed from this, if one possesses great virtue, one is not restricted by minor details. The śramaṇa renounces family wealth, abandons wife and children, and listens to no sounds and watches no beauty; this may be called the utmost deference. How could it violate the sage's words or fail to accord with filiality? Yu Rang swallowed hot coals and lacquered his body; Nie Zheng flayed his face and mutilated himself; Bo Ji perished in the flames; Gaoxing disfigured her features. Gentlemen died for righteousness in their bravery, and we have never heard that they were mocked for destroying themselves. If the śramaṇa's shaving of beard and hair is compared to these four, is it not far more [justified]?"