[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) › [釋氏稽古略](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037) › 4.357 # 釋氏稽古略 4.357 釋氏稽古略 4.357 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.357](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4.357) 原道論　宋帝御製論曰。朕觀韓愈原道。言佛老之相混三教之相紕。未有能辯之者。但文煩而理迂。揆聖人之用心則未昭然。何則釋氏專窮性命。棄外形骸不著名相。而於世事了不相關。又何與禮樂仁義哉。然尚猶立戒曰不殺不淫不盜不飲酒不妄語。夫不殺仁也。不淫禮也。不盜義也。不飲酒智也。不妄語信也。如此與仲尼又何遠乎。從容中道聖人也。聖人所為孰非禮樂孰非仁義。又烏得而名焉。譬如天地運行陰陽循環之無端。豈有意春夏秋冬之別哉。此世人強名之耳。亦猶仁義禮樂之別。聖人所以設教治世不得不然也。因其強名揆而求之則道也。道也者仁義禮樂之宗也。仁義禮樂固道之用也。楊雄謂老氏棄仁義滅禮樂。今迹老子之書。其所寶者三。曰慈曰儉曰不敢為天下先。孔門曰溫良恭儉遜（讓避御諱）。又曰。惟仁為大。老子之所謂慈豈非仁之大者耶。曰不敢為天下先。豈非遜之大者耶。至其會道則互相偏舉。所貴者清淨寧一。而與孔聖果相背馳乎。蓋三教末流。昧者執之自為異耳。夫佛老絕念無為。修心身而已矣。孔子教以治天下者。特所施不同耳。譬猶耒耜而耕機杼而織。後世徒紛紛而惑固失其理。或曰當如之何去其惑哉。曰以佛修心。以老治身。以儒治世斯可也。唯聖人為能同之。不可不論也（中興治蹟十三朝聖政錄）。 > "Discourse on Tracing the Way." The Song Emperor's imperially composed discourse states: "We observe that Han Yu's Tracing the Way speaks of the mixing of Buddhism and Daoism and the intertwining of the three teachings, but none has yet been able to distinguish them properly. However, his text is cumbersome and his reasoning roundabout; when examining the intention of the Sage, it is not yet lucid. Why is this? The Śākya lineage exclusively investigates nature and destiny, casts aside the physical form, does not cling to names and marks, and is completely unconnected to mundane affairs; how, then, could it conflict with ritual, music, benevolence, and righteousness? Yet it still establishes precepts, saying: no killing, no sexual misconduct, no stealing, no drinking of alcohol, and no lying. Now, not killing is benevolence; not engaging in sexual misconduct is ritual propriety; not stealing is righteousness; not drinking alcohol is wisdom; and not lying is trustworthiness. Being like this, how far is it from Confucius? He who naturally accords with the Mean is the Sage. Among the actions of the Sage, what is not ritual and music, and what is not benevolence and righteousness? How could they even be named? Just as the movement of Heaven and Earth and the cycle of yin and yang have no starting point, how could there be a deliberate distinction among spring, summer, autumn, and winter? This is merely what worldly people arbitrarily name. It is also just like the distinctions of benevolence, righteousness, ritual propriety, and music: the reason the Sage established teachings to govern the world was that it could not be otherwise. Seeking and investigating according to these arbitrary names, one finds the Way. The Way is the ancestor of benevolence, righteousness, ritual propriety, and music; benevolence, righteousness, ritual propriety, and music are indeed the functioning of the Way. Yang Xiong said that Laozi cast aside benevolence and righteousness and extinguished ritual and music. Now, tracing the texts of Laozi, what he treasures are three things: compassion, frugality, and not daring to take the lead in the world. The school of Confucius says: gentle, good, respectful, frugal, and yielding (avoiding the imperial taboo character for 'yielding'). It also says: 'Only benevolence is great.' Is Laozi's so-called compassion not the greatness of benevolence? His saying 'not daring to take the lead in the world'—is that not the greatness of yielding? As for their union with the Way, each singles out one aspect; what is valued is purity, stillness, and tranquil unity. Do they really run counter to the Confucian Sage? It is only the later degenerate followers of the three teachings: the ignorant cling to them and make distinctions on their own. Now, the Buddha and Laozi cut off thoughts and abide in non-action, merely cultivating mind and body. Confucius taught in order to govern all under Heaven; it is simply that what they applied differs. It is like plowing with a plowshare and weaving with a loom; later generations are confused in their myriad disputes, truly losing the principle. Someone may ask, 'How should one dispel this confusion?' We reply: Cultivating the mind with the Buddha, governing the body with Laozi, and governing the world with the Ruists—this will suffice. Only the Sage is able to harmonize them; it cannot be left undiscussed" (Zhongxing zhiji shisanchao shengzheng lu). > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.356](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4.356) - [Next: 4.358](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4.358) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037~en-mt.4.357) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [佛祖統紀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.47.59) — 志磐, Classical Chinese - [佛祖歷代通載](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2036.20.66) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4.357](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2037.4.357) · Pramāṇa