佛祖歷代通載 8.86

8.86

(Xinwei [491 CE]) The recluse Gu Huan lived in seclusion without taking office and esteemed Huang-Lao. The History of the Southern Dynasties states: Because Huan observed that the two teachings of Buddhism and Daoism differed, and their scholars disparaged and slandered one another, he composed the 'Treatise on the Barbarian and the Chinese' (Yixia lun). Its summary states: 'To distinguish right from wrong, one should rely on the sacred scriptures. The Daoist scriptures state that Laozi entered the pass and went to Tianzhu, where the consort of the king of the country of Weishui (Vidiśā) was named Jingmiao. Laozi, taking advantage of her midday slumber, rode the essence of the sun into Jingmiao's mouth; the following year, on the eighth day of the fourth month, he was born from her right side. Falling to the ground, he immediately walked seven paces. Thereupon the Buddha-Way arose. This appears in the Xuanmiao neipian. Buddhist scriptures state that Śākya's attaining of Buddhahood is as countless as grains of sand and dust, and that he manifested as imperial preceptors, Daoist masters, or the leaders of the Confucian forest; this appears in the Ruiying benqi jing. Examining this, I say: among the Five Thearchs and Three Sovereigns, none ever heard of a Buddha. Among imperial preceptors and Daoist masters, none surpass Laozi and Zhuangzi; among the leaders of the Confucian forest, who surpasses the Duke of Zhou and Confucius? If Confucius and Laozi are not sages, who could match them? Yet what the two scriptures say matches like two halves of a tally: Dao is the Buddha, and the Buddha is the Dao. As sages they tally; their traces run contrary. Either they soften their light to illumine what is near, or shine forth their spirit to reveal what is far. Their Dao aids the world, so there is nowhere it does not enter; their wisdom encompasses all things, so there is nothing it does not accomplish. Their entrances differ, and their actions necessarily vary; each fulfils its nature, not altering its function. Therefore, the ceremonial caps and flowing sashes are the appearance of the Central Plains; shaving the hair and wearing loose robes are the dress of the various barbarians. Preserving the bodily form and maintaining ritual is the tradition that continues goodness; disfiguring the appearance and altering the form is the learning that severs evil. How could this apply only to fellow humans? It extends even to different creatures. Throughout boundless worlds, sages arise in succession: some elucidate the Five Classics, some propagate the Three Vehicles. Among birds they chirp like birds; among beasts they roar like beasts. Teaching the Chinese, they use the Chinese language; transforming barbarians, they speak barbarian tongues. Although boats and carts are equal in reaching afar, they differ in crossing rivers or traversing land; although Buddhism and Daoism are equal in achieving transformation, they differ as Barbarian and Chinese. If one says that because their destinations are equal their methods can be exchanged, could a cart cross a river or a boat travel on land? We repeatedly see rigid views: śramaṇas stick to their posts and Daoists contend with one another; the small and the great mutually attack each other. Some demarcate the Dao into two, while others conflate custom into one. This is dragging differences to make them identical, and shattering identity to make differences; it is the origin of discord and the root of confusion. Upon investigation, though the holy Dao is one, its methods have right and left; beginning without a starting point, ending without a conclusion. Nirvāṇa and immortal transcendence are each a single method. The Buddha is called "the Correct and True"; the Dao is named "the Correct and One". The "One" returns to deathlessness; the "True" meets with birthlessness. In name they are contrary, but in reality they unite. Yet the teaching of birthlessness is remiss and slow, while the transformation of deathlessness is urgent and direct. Urgent methods can advance the humble and weak; slow methods can check the boastful and strong. The Buddhist teaching is literary and broad; the Daoist teaching is plain and essential. What is essential cannot be believed by the coarse; what is broad cannot be mastered by the essential. The Buddha's words are flowery and beckoning; the Dao's words are substantial and restraining. Restraint allows the enlightened to advance alone; beckoning makes the benighted scramble forward. Buddhist sutras are profuse and evident; Daoist scriptures are concise and obscure. Being obscure, the wondrous gate is difficult to perceive; being evident, the straight path is easy to follow. Such is the distinction between the two teachings. The master carpenter has no fixed compass, yet squares and circles have forms; since vessels differ in use, teachings are likewise applied differently. The Buddha is a prescription for destroying evil; the Dao is a technique for promoting good. In promoting good, spontaneity is held high; in destroying evil, valour is deemed worthy. The traces of the Buddha are grand and bright, fitting for transforming external things; the traces of the Dao are subtle and secret, fitting for self-cultivation. The distinction between superior and inferior roughly lies herein.' Although Huan regarded the two teachings as identical, his intent was biased in favour of Daoism.