唐護法沙門法琳別傳 2.14

2.14

皇上未喻可否須陳。乞撿論文自分涇渭。威等又問法師曰。論第二云。撿諸古史逖聽先儒。不聞靈寶之名。未記天尊之說。又稱妄加穿鑿廣製齋儀。靡覿出要之方。但肆貪求之術。道士之號無由而來。河上之言逈無蹤跡者。但道言靈寶之妙祕在玄臺。老辯天尊之神大羅端拱。三元十真之製。斯即出要之方。六齋七品之儀。豈是貪求之術。道士之名尚矣。河上之說久焉。胡乃斥朝庭之宗崇。非家國之虔敬。徒悕五聽未越三章。天網縱寬疎而詎漏。法師對曰。琳聞。九首雙瞳之典。金天火帝之文。白秦赤漢之謨。三國二京之誌。是稱左史右史記事記辭。直筆直言無矯無妄。故吳主孫權問尚書令闞澤曰。仙有靈寶之法。其教如何。闞澤對曰。夫靈寶者。一無氏族可依。二無成道處所。教出幽谷非人所知。真是幽居濫說。非聖人製也。吳主善其對焉。所言天尊之號出自佛經。竊我聖蹤施乎己典。何者案五經正史三皇已來。並不云別有天尊住於天上。但敘周公孔子制禮刪詩。所以五典三墳。靡覩大羅之稱。前王往帝。不聞郊祀天尊。安有執玉簡披黃褐垂素髮戴金冠。別號天尊。端拱九華之殿。獨稱大道統御七映之宮。縱有道教辯天尊。諸子談靈寶。此乃道聽途說。詎可依憑。委巷之書非關國典。又齋儀矯製事跡可尋。莫不廣列金銀頒班繒綵。並是三張詭述修靜妄言。斥破逗遛備如琳論。又道士之號老教先。無河上之名。儒宗未辯。何者。姚書云。始乎漢魏終暨苻姚。皆號眾僧以為道士。至魏太武世。有寇謙之流。始竊道士之名。私易祭酒之稱。此豈琳之臆斷。乃是史籍盛明。又班固漢書文帝傳。及潘岳關中記。嵆康皇甫謐高士傳。及訪父老等書。皆無河上公結草為菴現神變處。事並虛謬不涉典謨。妄搆斐然動成卷軸。當今主上垂拱問道坐朝。九族既親平章百姓。寔可黜三張之穢術。闡五千之妙門。琳今愕愕而犯顏。望顯主上為明后。若唯唯而從旨。慮陷聖帝於昏君。伏惟萬乘。幸納於蒭蕘敢陳一中斯言。若允埃露冀益高深。威等又問法師曰。論第三云。梁高祖留心釋典祈祐捨身。隋文帝荷負四生棟梁三寶。拓拔淪於正法。宇文毀於尊容者。即應蘊福延慶積惡招殃。何乃魏則數葉臨軒。周乃累君傳嗣。梁嬰侯景之難。隋纔二世而亡。是知天道無親頓成虛闡。禍淫福善胡其爽歟。因何損替者翻享遐齡。崇敬者無終厥壽。進退鉾楯情狀皎然。去取自乖足知虛謬。法師對曰。琳聞。道教浮疎詎明三報。儒宗偓促但敘一生。故仲尼答季路曰。生與事人汝尚未知。死與鬼神爾焉能事。袁宏後漢書曰。道家者流出於老子。老子以清虛淡泊為主。祐善嫉惡為教。畜妻子用符書。禍福報應在一生之內。此並區中之近唱。非象外之遐談。所以荀悅碩疑史遷深惑。至如唐虞上聖乃育朱均。瞽叟下愚是生有舜。顏回大賢而夭絕。商臣極惡而胤昌。盜跖縱暴而福終。夷齊至仁而餓死。張湯酷吏七世垂纓。比干正臣一身屠戮。諸如此例胡可勝言。僉惑致疑故常情耳。所以我之種覺獨號遍知。遐唱四生廣敷三報。欲使繁疑霧卷夙滯雲披。玉牒周陳金言備顯。故經云。有業現苦有苦報。有業現苦有樂報。有業現樂有樂報。有業現樂有苦報。或餘福未盡惡不即加。或宿𠎝尚在善緣便發。如灰覆火豈得稱無。若闇尋聲當知必有。且夫善惡無爽狀麟鬪以日虧。報應有歸。等鯨亡而星現。但察感通之分。足明善惡之來。然則簫楊周魏之流。可不思而自釋也。威等又問法師曰。論第四云。高祖武皇帝者。似若詔出已後方造論端。

the August Emperor does not understand, requiring advice on what is fitting and improper to be presented. I beg you to examine the text of the treatise; the Jing and Wei rivers will naturally separate themselves.' Liu Dewei and the others questioned the Dharma Master again: 'In the second fascicle of the treatise, it says: "Examining all ancient histories and listening from afar to past Confucians, one does not hear the name of Lingbao, nor is there any record of the doctrine of Tianzun." It also states: "Arbitrarily making forced interpretations, they fabricated elaborate fasting rituals; nowhere seeing the method for ultimate liberation, they merely gave rein to the art of covetous pursuit. The title 'Daoist' has no origin from which it comes, and the words of Heshang Gong are completely devoid of any trace." However, the Daoists say that the marvel of Lingbao is kept secret in the Mysterious Terrace; Laozi explained the spirit of Tianzun as resting quietly in Daluo. The regulations of the Three Origins and the Ten Realized Ones are precisely the methods for ultimate liberation; how could the ceremonies of the Six Fasts and Seven Ranks be arts of covetous pursuit? The title 'Daoist' is an ancient one; the teachings of Heshang Gong have existed for a long time. Why do you disparage what the court venerates, and deny the devotion of family and state? You merely wish to undergo the five listeners' interrogation, yet you have not transgressed the three-clause penal law. Though the net of heaven is wide and coarse, how could it let you escape?' The Dharma Master replied: 'I have heard that the canons of the Nine Heads and Double Pupils, the writings of the Golden Heavens and the Fire Emperor, the plans of the White Qin and the Red Han, and the records of the Three Kingdoms and Two Capitals—these are what are called the Left Scribe and Right Scribe recording events and recording words; they wrote with straight brushes and spoke straight words, without falsity or deceit. Thus King Sun Quan of Wu asked the Prefect of the Masters of Writing, Kan Ze: "The immortals have the method of Lingbao; what kind of teaching is it?" Kan Ze replied: "As for Lingbao, first, it has no clan or genealogy to rely on; second, it has no place where the Dao was realized. The teaching came out of a dark valley and is not known to men; it is truly an absurd claim from someone living in reclusion, not made by a sage." The King of Wu approved his answer. The title "Tianzun" comes from Buddhist scriptures; they stole our sagely traces and applied them to their own texts. Why? Examining the Five Classics and official histories from the Three Sovereigns onward, none state that there is another Tianzun dwelling in the heavens; they only relate that the Duke of Zhou and Confucius instituted the rites and edited the Odes. Thus among the Five Documents and Three Tomes, nowhere is the name "Daluo" to be seen; among former kings and past emperors, we do not hear of suburban sacrifices to Tianzun. How could there be one who holds a jade tablet, wears a yellow robe, lets hang white hair, and wears a golden cap, separately named Tianzun, resting quietly in the Hall of Nine Glories, solely termed the Great Dao, governing the Palace of Seven Radiations? Even if Daoist teachings speak of Tianzun, and the philosophers speak of Lingbao, this is merely gossip heard on the road; how can it be relied upon? Books of the alleys have nothing to do with state canons. Moreover, the fasting rituals are forged fabrications whose traces can be traced; none fail to display gold and silver abundantly and distribute patterned silks and colored cloth. These are all deceitful narrations of the Three Zhangs and the absurd words of Lu Xiujing; the rebuttals against their vacillation are fully presented in my treatise. Furthermore, the title of "Daoist" was originally absent from the teaching of Laozi, and the name "Heshang" is not recognized by the Confucian lineage. Why? The Book of Yao says that from the Han and Wei down to Fu Jian and Yao Xing, the assembly of monks were all referred to as Daoists. Down to the reign of Emperor Taiwu of Wei, the likes of Kou Qianzhi first stole the name "Daoist" and privately altered the title of "libationer". How could this be my own subjective judgment? It is clearly recorded in the historical records. Furthermore, Ban Gu’s Han shu, Annals of Emperor Wen, Pan Yue’s Records of Guanzhong, Ji Kang’s and Huangfu Mi’s Biographies of Eminent Scholars, and works such as Inquiries to Elders, contain no place where Heshang Gong built a thatched hut and manifested divine transformations. These matters are entirely baseless and false, not found in the classics or canons, yet they were recklessly fabricated in grand rhetoric, continually filling whole scrolls. At present, the sovereign rests his robes, inquires into the Dao, and sits in court; having united the nine clans, he brings harmony to all the common people. Truly, he should abolish the defiled arts of the Three Zhangs and elucidate the wondrous gate of the Five Thousand Characters. Today, I am outspoken and risk imperial wrath, hoping to reveal the sovereign as an enlightened ruler; if I were merely submissive and complied with the trend, I fear it would cast the sagely emperor into the role of an unenlightened monarch. I humbly hope that the Sovereign of Ten Thousand Chariots will deign to accept this humble view, as I dare to present my sincere words; if allowed, may these drops of dew add to the heights and depths [of the state].' Liu Dewei and the others questioned the Dharma Master again: 'In the third fascicle of the treatise, it says: "Emperor Wu of the Liang set his mind on the Buddhist scriptures, praying for blessings and renouncing his body; Emperor Wen of the Sui shouldered the four modes of birth, acting as a pillar for the triratna. The Tuoba dynasty sank the saddharma, and the Yuwen dynasty destroyed the venerable statues." If so, then harboring blessings should extend prosperity, and accumulating evil should invite calamity. Why, then, did the Wei occupy the throne for several generations, and the Zhou pass the succession through successive rulers, while the Liang suffered the disaster of Hou Jing, and the Sui fell after only two generations? From this we know that the Way of Heaven has no favorites is suddenly shown to be empty, and how could bringing calamity to the dissolute and blessing the good have been mistaken? Why is it that those who damaged and suppressed [the Dharma] instead enjoyed long life, while those who venerated it did not finish their allotted years? Their advantages and disadvantages are contradictory, and the facts are clear; your selection of examples is contradictory, fully showing its falsity.' The Dharma Master replied: 'I have heard that the Daoist teaching is shallow and broad, so how could it clarify the three retributions? The Confucian tradition is narrow, recounting only a single lifetime. Thus Confucius answered Ji Lu: "You do not yet know life and how to serve men; how could you serve ghosts and spirits in death?" Yuan Hong's Hou Han shu says: "The current of Daoists originated from Laozi. Laozi took pure emptiness and tranquil indifference as primary, and helping the good and hating evil as his teaching; keeping wives and children, they used talismans and registers; calamity, fortune, and karmic retribution occurred within a single lifetime." These are all petty assertions within the mundane world, not grand statements beyond the forms. Therefore, Xun Yue harbored great doubts, and Sima Qian was deeply perplexed. As for the supreme sages Yao and Shun, they fathered Danzhu and Shangjun; the utterly foolish Gusou gave birth to Shun. Yan Hui was a great worthy yet died young; Shangchen was exceedingly evil yet his line flourished. Robber Zhi indulged in violence yet died in prosperity; Boyi and Shuqi were of ultimate benevolence yet starved to death. Zhang Tang was a harsh official whose tassel of office hung down for seven generations; Bi Gan was an upright minister yet his body was slaughtered. Cases such as these—how could they all be mentioned? General confusion giving rise to doubts is indeed ordinary human feeling. Therefore, our Fully Enlightened One alone is titled the Omniscient, far-reachingly proclaiming the four modes of birth and broadly expounding the three retributions, wishing to roll back the thick fog of numerous doubts and disperse the clouds of long-standing obstructions, completely displaying the jade tablets and fully manifesting the golden words. Thus the sūtra says: "There is karma that manifests as suffering and brings a retribution of suffering; there is karma that manifests as suffering and brings a retribution of joy; there is karma that manifests as joy and brings a retribution of joy; there is karma that manifests as joy and brings a retribution of suffering." Sometimes, remaining blessings have not yet been exhausted, so evil retribution is not immediately added; sometimes, past transgressions still remain, while wholesome conditions have already emerged. Like ashes covering fire, how can it be called non-existent? If you seek the sound in the dark, you must know it is certainly there. Furthermore, that good and evil are never mistaken is like the eclipse of the sun when the qilin fights; that retribution has its destination is like the star appearing when the whale dies. Merely by examining the fraction of resonance, it is sufficient to clarify the coming of good and evil. Thus, as for the likes of Xiao, Yang, Zhou, and Wei, can they not be understood and resolved of themselves?' Liu Dewei and the others asked the Dharma Master again: 'In the fourth fascicle of the treatise, regarding Gaozu, the Martial Emperor, it seems as though you only began composing the treatise after the edict had already been issued.'