[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) › 11.11 # 弘明集 11.11 弘明集 11.11 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.11) 李和南。雅論明受悟之津。爰自疑得闇寄有餘無取鑒觀。鞠躬讚誦咸足屆道。覽復往況彌覩淵賾。然所謂像法乖正求悟理麁。借筌會旨無假示見。此固姬孔所以垂訓。輝光所以垂示。表則取之世典綽焉足矣。放光動地徒何為乎。若正信不止於俯仰。而佛事備舉於形聲。大覺所由妙其色涉求之可基其始。故知信者必以儒墨致疑。學者將由無證自悔。悋明無咎於三五。潛景道德愆於十號矣。豈不然乎。又所謂姬孔務拯頹季。無暇來生。設在結繩三世自明。亦又不然。七經所陳義兼未來。釋典敷載事正緣報。故易云。積善餘慶積惡餘殃。經云。無我無造無受者。善惡之業亦不亡。此則緣教常緩兼訓已弘。豈謂所務在此所闕在彼哉。來論雖美。故自循環之說耳。望復擢新演異。以洗古今之滯。使夷路坦然積礙大通也。深願大和上垂納毫欵。弟子李淼謹呈。 > "Li respectfully bows: Your elegant treatise clarifies the ford to attain awakening, stating that it originates from doubt, that implicit faith is sufficient without needing direct observation, and that bowing and singing hymns are all sufficient to reach the Dao. Reviewing your earlier analogies, I see its profound subtlety all the more. However, what is called the Semblance Dharma deviating from the True Dharma, and seeking awakening through coarse principles, borrowing the fish trap to comprehend the purport without needing manifest signs—this is indeed how Ji and Kong handed down instruction, and how brilliance handed down demonstration; drawing models from the secular classics is more than enough. What was the purpose of vainly radiating light and shaking the earth? If right faith does not stop at bowing and raising the head, and Buddha's deeds are fully enacted in form and sound, then that by which the Great Awakening is wondrous lies in his physical form; seeking it can establish its beginning. Therefore we know that believers will surely incur doubt through the Ru and Mohists, and learners will naturally repent through lack of proof. Begrudging light was no fault of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, but concealing his brightness and virtue is a transgression for the Ten Epithets! How could it not be so? Furthermore, as for your assertion that Ji and Kong were striving to rescue a decaying age and had no leisure for future lives, and that had they lived at the time of knotted cords the three times would have been clarified naturally—this too is not so. What the Seven Classics set forth in meaning encompasses the future; what the Buddhist scriptures unfold and record in fact directly addresses causes and retributions. Therefore the Changes says: 'A family that accumulates good deeds will have an abundance of blessings; a family that accumulates evil deeds will have an abundance of calamities.' The sūtra says: 'There is no self, no creator, and no receiver of karmic fruition; yet good and evil karma does not perish.' Thus, instruction on causes is ever continuous, and combined admonitions are already vast; how could one say that what they focused on was here, while what they lacked was there? Although your previous argument was fine, it is still a circular argument. I hope you will once again produce something new and expound something different, so as to wash away the obstructions of past and present, making the level road smooth and clearing all accumulated hindrances. I deeply pray the Great Upādhyāya will deign to accept my sincere feelings. Disciple Li Miao respectfully presents this." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.10) - [Next: 11.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.12) - [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.11.11) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.11.11) · Pramāṇa