[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) › [弘明集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102) › 11.10 # 弘明集 11.10 弘明集 11.10 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.10) 釋道高白。重奉深誨。義華旨遠。三讀九思方服淵致故。知至理非庸近能測。微言奧辭非鄙訥所參。今謹率常淺麁陳所懷。夫萬善為教其途不一。有禪宴林藪。有修德城傍。或曲躬彈指。或歌頌言詠。皆耳眼所共了為者亦無量。斯則受悟之津由闇寄之稱。何必受悟於因。鑒觀何必闇寄。其則生疑。疑亦悟本。請當論之。疑則求解。解則能悟。悟則入道。非本如何。雖儒墨之競興。九流之是非。乃爝火之不息。非日月之不輝。何急急於示現。而促促於同歸哉。今不罔季俗無證。驗以徵誠。亦不謬大聖悋昭昭之光明。而世之疑者裾以不覩形。遂長迷於大夢。橫沈淪而溺生死。先儒往哲粗有舊說。途無異轍。輒述而不作。夫亡身投誠必感。感則俱見。不感不見。其有見者以告不見。其不見者會不信見。聖人何嘗不在群生。何常不見哉。聞法音而稱善。芻狗非謂空陳。覩形像而曲躬。靈儀豈為虛設。姬孔救頹俗而不瞻。何暇示物以將來。若丘旦生遇於結繩。則明三世而不已。問今佛事其焉在乎。低首合掌莫非佛事。但令深悟有方殊途同歸耳。前疏所弘彼此疑信者。正為世人不見便謂無佛。故取不見。周孔為其成准耳。此乃垂拱而相隨。豈矛盾之謂哉。使君生知無假素氣天然。居大寶之地。運頴脫之恩。流浪義苑涉驟書園。吐納餘暇優遊永日。德音既宣莫不側聽。貧道學業麁淺。弘慚簡札。上酬謬略。懼塵盛藻。追增悚愧。流汗霡霂謹白。 > "Shi Daogao states: I have repeatedly received your profound instruction; its meaning is flourishing and its purpose far-reaching. Only after reading it thrice and reflecting on it nine times did I submit to its profound purport. Hence I know that ultimate truth cannot be measured by the ordinary and near, and subtle words and profound dictions cannot be engaged in by the base and halting. Now I shall respectfully follow my customary shallowness to sketch roughly what I hold in mind. Now, in teaching the myriad good deeds, the paths are not uniform: some practice dhyāna in groves and marshes; some cultivate virtue near city walls; some bow their bodies and snap their fingers; some sing hymns and chant verses. All are equally comprehended by ear and eye, and those who perform them are countless. Thus the ford to attain awakening originates from what may be called implicit faith. Why must attaining awakening depend on direct observation? Why must implicit faith generate doubt? Moreover, doubt is also the root of awakening—allow me to discuss this: through doubt, one seeks understanding; through understanding, one is able to awaken; through awakening, one enters the Dao. How is it not the root? Although the Ru and Mohists contend and the Nine Schools dispute over right and wrong, this is merely a torch flame that does not cease, not the sun and moon failing to shine. Why be in such haste for manifestation, and so hurried for a common destination? Now I do not deny that in these latter times there are no proofs, using verification to summon sincerity; nor do I say by mistake that the Great Sage begrudges his clear light. Rather, the doubters of the world, simply because they do not see his form, remain long lost in the great dream, vainly sinking and drowning in birth and death. The former Ru and past sages have roughly provided old explanations; the paths do not take different ruts, so I merely transmit without creating. When one sacrifices one's life and casts oneself into sincerity, one must evoke a response; when there is a response, both see. Without a response, one does not see. Those who have seen tell those who have not seen; those who have not seen will never believe those who have seen. How has the Sage ever not been among living beings? When has he ever not been seen? Hearing the sound of Dharma and praising goodness, the straw dogs are not said to be set out in vain; beholding the bodily image and bowing, how could the divine rite be established without reality? Ji and Kong, seeking to rescue a decaying age, had no time to spare; how could they have leisure to show beings the future? Had Qiu and Dan lived at the time of knotted cords, they would have made the three times clear without end. You ask where the Buddha's deeds are today: bowing one's head and joining one's palms—none of these is not a Buddha's deed! One only needs to have a method for profound awakening; different paths reach the same destination. What the previous letter expounded regarding doubt and faith between each other was precisely because worldly people, not seeing him, immediately say there is no Buddha; hence I took the invisibility of Zhou and Confucius as an established standard for them. This is following hand-in-hand with folded arms; how could it be called a contradiction? Inspector, you possess innate knowledge without needing assistance, and your pure character is natural. Occupying an eminent office, you exercise extraordinary grace; you wander in the garden of meaning and gallop through the grove of texts. In your leisure from administrative duties, you stroll through the long day; when your virtuous words are declared, none fails to incline his ear. My learning is coarse and shallow, and I am greatly ashamed of my writing. In replying above with errors and omissions, I fear I have defiled your magnificent composition, only adding to my awe and shame, with sweat trickling down. Respectfully stated." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.9) - [Next: 11.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.11) - [Up: 11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102~en-mt.11.10) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.10) · Pramāṇa