佛祖歷代通載 8.87

8.87

(42) Minister of Education Yuan Can, speaking on behalf of the śramaṇa Master Tong, refuted it, saying in summary: "The sun's light stood still and the constant stars hid their brightness: this portent of the [Buddha's] nativity occurred before Laozi. It certainly was not only upon his passing through the western pass that this auspicious sign became manifest! Furthermore, as for the records of the Western Regions and the expositions of the Buddhist sūtras, their customs consider crawling on one's knees to be courteous and do not look upon squatting as respectful; in the Dao, circumambulating thrice is regarded as reverent, and an arrogant posture is not prized as solemnity. How could this belong exclusively to barbarian lands and only later reach this realm? The Xiang River youth approached the sovereign by crawling forward on his knees; the King of Zhao met King Wen of Zhou by ascending with three circumambulations. Now, the Buddhist Dharma accords with transforming influences, sometimes adapting and sometimes reforming: pure and faithful [lay] gentlemen do not alter their appearance or attire, whereas men who have quieted their minds invariably change their vestments and looks. Changing what is fundamental to follow the Dao does not mean following foreign customs; though regional manners naturally differ, there is no worry of disorder. Confucius, Laozi, and Śākyamuni may have been identical in person, but if one examines the doctrines they instituted, their paths are decidedly different. Confucius and Laozi took worldly instruction as fundamental, whereas the Śākya clan took world-transcendence as its core aim. Since their points of departure diverged, their ultimate goals are also distinct. Moreover, immortal transcendence prizes transformation of bodily form, whereas nirvāṇa prioritizes cultivation of the spirit. One who transforms his form turns his white hair black, yet is still unable to attain deathlessness; one who cultivates his spirit diminishes worldly defilements day by day, abiding placidly in permanence. The path of nirvāṇa is the ground of deathlessness; if spirit cultivation is like this, how can they be called identical?" At that time, He Zhenzhi, Regular Attendant, saw Gu Huan harmonizing the two teachings and was deeply dissatisfied. He wrote a letter to Huan, sharply arguing that Daoism was not fit to be compared to the Śākya clan. Huan replied to his letter, rigidly clinging to his own views. Zhenzhi wrote to him again: "You have condescended to return your explanations, thoroughly exploring profound matters. You have already harmonized the radiance of Daoism and Buddhism, yet you distinguish the Jing and Wei rivers between the Śākya and Li [religions]; you have extended this by category all the way to chess and go. However, the more you expound the Buddha, the more you miss the mark; the finer your intended meaning, the more obscured it becomes. This is what is called running around trying to eliminate one's footprints, or leaping about to silence one's shadow—how could one ever escape them? I shall once again summarize the essential points to indicate the grand ultimate goal. When the Great Ultimate bifurcated, the two polarities were falsely established; when the five aggregates joined and arose, form and consciousness mistakenly manifested. Consciousness forms karmic knots through flowing defilement; form is born through causal conditions due to clinging to desire. Before the Three Sovereigns, the people were mostly ignorant and crude; being ignorant and crude, they nested in trees, lived in caves, drank blood, and devoured raw meat. Rulers, ministers, fathers, and sons were as estranged as barbarians and natives to one another, just like birds and beasts, or akin to ignorant infants. The teachings of the Dao could not penetrate them, nor could humaneness and righteousness transform them. When they were submerged in desire and drowned in waves, upon striking the shore they sought salvation; seeking salvation, they prayed for the good; praying for the good, the Sage responded. Now, what is a Sage? One who resonates with things and thereby attains unhindered penetration. Unhindered penetration does not penetrate by itself; resonance does not resonate by itself. It is always present in this penetration, yet always originates from that [resonance]. Speaking from the perspective of 'that', it is a mirror suspended in a high hall; speaking from the perspective of 'this', all ten thousand images converge into it. Therefore, we know that India occupies the central realm of the Sahā world and abides at the auspicious gathering of purity and goodness; hence it was able to resonate with the Utmost Sage, being the central territory of the trichiliocosm. Since the Sage responded there, the renown has covered this land. Beholding the brilliance of the sun and moon, what need is there for the acute sight of Li Zhu? Hearing the crash of thunder, why employ the keen hearing of Shi Kuang? Therefore, that base and high are different things does not detract from their sharing the same Dao; that the left and right are two polarities does not impair the celestial balance. Impairing not the celestial balance, the clouds move with Dharma teachings; not detracting from the same Dao, the rain falls upon both barbarians and Xia. The Dao is one; forms are two. The Dao is truth; forms are worldly. Since truth is like the one, the worldly is also like the two. Exhausting the two to attain the one, one ought to unify its methods; extinguishing the worldly to return to truth, one must surely transcend worldly ways. Thus the Tathāgata established the models, and through mysterious kalpas the standard remains identical. Even if Confucius and Laozi were Buddhas, they concealed their light and gave secret guidance, rescuing narrow minds and establishing benevolence and righteousness to closely accommodate human dispositions. Therefore, preserving bodily form and maintaining ancestral rites, extending benevolence to the six relations, conserving life and nourishing nature while regarding external things as separate from oneself—this is doing good to the utmost, but not beauty to the utmost. This is indeed a system of finite bounds, falling short of completing the journey. How could one compare their Dao to bodhi, or match their sagacity with the Muni? Furthermore, the Buddhist teaching expounds the essential yet is vast; being essential yet vast, the refined and the coarse both have their levels; the refined and coarse having their levels, firmness and softness reach a single balance. Therefore, the clear ford flows profoundly, and its honest regulations are easy to follow. Making a circle by sight is easy; making a circle by hand is difficult. Would one not abandon the difficult and follow the easy? The Daoist scriptures are crude and simplistic, frequently giving rise to forced interpretations; as for the Lingbao and Miaozhen, they are patched together from the Lotus Sūtra, yet their composition and application are clumsy in the extreme. As for the Shangqing and Huangting, what they esteem is consuming potions, chewing stones, and ingesting morning mist; not only are their practices impossible to emulate, but their Dao is hard to harmonize with. What is worthwhile therein lies solely in the five-thousand-word text [of the Daodejing]. Perfect non-action is its function; yet in using non-action, it has not yet managed to transcend existence. If transcending existence were its aspiration, why nourish the numinous fungus? What is guided by the Buddhist Three Vehicles embraces the nine classes of beings equally; embracing the nine classes equally, both movement and stillness are attained. The principle of dhyāna penetration is merely one of the three [learnings], not the ultimate. The dhyāna sūtras are subtle and wondrous, their experiential realms refined and profound; attempting to grasp the truth through this alone is still not enough. Now to claim that the Dao lies solely in non-action and attaining the One—if attaining the One through non-action is all, then it discards the covenants of a thousand years; discarding the covenants of a thousand years does not require grand proclamations. As for clarifying the fundamental tenets, drawing gatherings together, and guiding trends, if one were to abandon study and subtle reflection, would that not be negligent? How could that be the Daoist teaching's fish-trap? Respectfully investigating what has been argued, [Gu Huan] understands neither the Buddha nor the Dao. Here is a concluding verse to briefly respond to your remarks:"