弘明集 11.15

11.15

覽君書具一二。每患浮言之妨正道。激烈之傷純。和亦已久矣。孟子有云。君王無好智。君王無好勇。智之過生乎患禍所遵正當仁義為本。今因修釋訓始見斯行之所發誓念履行欲卑高同其美。且取解脫之喻。不得不小失存。其大至於形外之間。自不足及言。真俗之教其致一耳。取之者未達。故橫起異同。君云。積葉栖信便是言行相舛。豈有奉親一毀一敬而云大孝。未之前聞。夫仁人之行。非殘害加其美。廉潔之操。不籍貪竊成其德。如此則三歸五戒。豈一念而可捨。十善八正寧瞥想之可貴。未見輕其本而能重其末。所謂本既傾矣。而後枝葉從之。今云。二途離異何得相順此言故是見其淺近之談耳。君非不覩經律所辯。何為偏志一方埋沒通路。夫士未常離俗施訓。即世之教可以知之。若云斯法空成詭妄更增疑惑。應當毀滅就即因而言。閨門孝悌者。連鄉接黨竟有幾人。今可得以無其多絓諸訓誥。經史箴誡悉可焚之不君今遲疑於內教。亦復與此何殊哉。所以歸心勝法者。本不以禮敬標其心。兢仰祇崇者。不以在我故忘物。今之慇懃剋己者。正為君輩之徒耳。欲令相與去憍矜除慢慠節情慾制貪求修禮讓習謙恭奉仁義敦孝悌課之以博施。廣之以泛愛。賞之以英賢。拔之以俊異。復何慚於鬼神乎。孜孜策勵良在於斯。雖未能奉遵。亦意不忘之。今未有夜光之投而按劍已起。欲相望於道德。寧不多愧。當由未見此情故常信期心耳。在懷則不然。每苦其不及。司徒之府本五教。是勸方共敦斯美行以率下欲。使詭妄諂佞望門而自新。浮偽蕩逸踐庭而變迹。等彼息心之館。齊此無慾之臺。不亦善乎。一則仰順宸極普天之慈。二則敬奉儲皇垂愛之善。宵旦而警惕者。正患此心無遂耳。悠悠之語好自多端。其云願善故言未知傷化之重。儻令詭事以忠孝。佞悅以仁義。虛投以禮讓。假往以方直。乃至一日剋己天下歸仁。況能旬朔有餘。所望過矣。本自開心所納正苦此矯不多如其此煩未廣。故鄙薄深慨。君正應規諫其乖開發未達。云何言傷孝本語損義基。於悒有懷非所望也。若此事可棄則欣聞餘善。又云。未必勸人持戒。當令善由下發必如此而弘教者放勛須四凶革而啟聖虞舜待商均賢而德明如斯而遂美。其可望乎。君之此意則應廣有所折。便當詰堯以土階之儉。嘉離宮之麗。貶禹以茅茨之陋。崇阿房之貴。恥汲黯之正容。榮祝陀之媚色。其餘節義貞信謙恭之德。皆當改途而反面。復何行之可修也。凡聞於言必察其行。覩於行必求於理。若理不乖而行不越者。請無造於異端。且殊塗同歸。未必孱然一貫。頃亦多有與君此意同者。今寄言此紙。情不專一者。厝心於疑妄。國君普宣示之略言其懷無見髣髴翰迹易煩。終不盡意。比見君別更委悉也。

I have read your letter and grasp it in detail. I have long lamented that superficial words obstruct the upright Dao, and that vehement passion harms pure harmony. Mencius said: 'A ruler has no fondness for cunning; a ruler has no fondness for valor.' The excesses of cunning give rise to disaster and misfortune; what one should abide by must take benevolence and righteousness as the foundation. Now, because of cultivating the instructions of Śākya, one begins to see the initial vow and thought of this practice; in putting it into practice, one desires that both the lowly and the exalted share in its excellence. Taking the metaphor of liberation, one cannot help but sustain small losses to preserve the great. As for what lies beyond external forms, it is naturally not worth speaking of. The ultimate teachings and secular teachings have one and the same end; it is only because those who grasp them have not penetrated them that differences and agreements arbitrarily arise. You say that accumulating generations of faith is simply words and deeds contradicting each other, and you ask how there can be serving of parents where one defames them at one moment and respects them at another, calling it great filial piety, saying this has never been heard of before. Now, the conduct of a benevolent person does not add to its excellence by cruelty and harm; the integrity of a pure person does not establish its virtue through greed and theft. In this manner, how could the Three Refuges and the Five Precepts be abandoned in a single thought? How could the Ten Good Deeds and the Eightfold Right Path be treasured only in fleeting thoughts? I have never seen one who disparages the root yet can value the branches. As it is said, once the root has toppled, the branches and leaves follow it down. Now you say that the two paths diverge and are different, so how can they be reconciled? These words are merely the talk of one who sees only what is shallow and near. It is not that you have not seen what is explained in the sūtras and vinaya; why do you stubbornly focus on one side and bury the thoroughfare? A gentleman never departs from the worldly when dispensing instruction; this can be known from the teachings of the world itself. If one were to say that this Dharma is purely deceptive and false, only increasing doubts, and ought to be destroyed, then speaking immediately of human relationships: how many people in contiguous neighborhoods and connected villages actually maintain filial piety and fraternal respect within their households? Can we, because they are not numerous, implicate all instructions and pronouncements, and burn all the classics, histories, and admonitions? Are your current doubts regarding the inner teaching any different from this? The reason people turn their hearts to the supreme Dharma is originally not to display their minds through ceremonial reverence; those who revere and worship it with trepidation do not forget others on account of being centered on themselves. Our current diligence and self-restraint are precisely for the sake of people like you. We wish to have us together cast off pride and arrogance, eliminate insolence, moderate desires, curb greed and pursuit, cultivate ritual deference, practice humility, uphold benevolence and righteousness, promote filial piety and fraternal respect, encourage wide giving, broaden universal love, reward the outstanding and worthy, and promote the talented and extraordinary. Then what shame would there be before ghosts and spirits? Zealous self-encouragement truly resides in this. Though I have not yet been able to fully practice it, my mind does not forget it. Now, before the nocturnal jewel has even been tossed, you have already risen with your hand on your sword; wishing to emulate each other in virtue and Dao, should you not feel much shame? This must be because you have not seen these sentiments, and therefore rely solely on your habitual prejudices. In my own heart, it is not so: I constantly distress over my own shortcomings. The Office of the Minister of Education fundamentally encourages the Five Instructions. We are now jointly promoting these excellent deeds to lead those below, wishing to cause deceit, vanity, and flattery to reform themselves as soon as they look toward our gate, and to cause frivolity, falsehood, and dissipation to change their tracks as soon as they step into our courtyard. To make this place equal to that Hall of Quelling the Mind, and to align this with that Terrace of Freeing from Desire—is this not good? First, we respectfully accord with the universal compassion of the Emperor under Heaven; second, we revere and uphold the benevolent love bestowed by the Crown Prince. Being vigilant day and night is solely out of fear that this mind might not be fulfilled. The idle talk of common folk naturally takes many forms. When they say they wish for goodness, their words do not yet understand the gravity of harming transformation. If one were to serve with loyalty and filial piety through deceit, please with benevolence and righteousness through flattery, defer with ritual through empty pretension, and act with uprightness through feigning, then if one could restrain oneself for even a single day, all under Heaven would return to benevolence—how much more so if it lasts for more than a month? My hopes are indeed exceeded. What my open heart accommodates is precisely the distress that such pretense is not more common; if such vexations are not broadened, I am deeply dismayed by petty shallowness. You ought to admonish errors and enlighten those who have not yet understood. Why do you say it harms the root of filial piety, and why do your words impair the foundation of righteousness? Feeling despondent in my heart, this was not what I expected. If this matter can be discarded, I would gladly hear of your other virtues. Furthermore, you say: 'One need not urge people to uphold the precepts; goodness should be made to arise from below.' If one were to promote teaching strictly in this way, Fangxun would have had to wait for the Four Evils to reform before opening sageliness, and Yu Shun would have had to wait for Shangjun to become worthy before his virtue shone. If only in such a way could excellence be achieved, how could it ever be hoped for? If your intention were carried out, it would lead to broad destruction: one would then have to reprimand Yao for the frugality of his earthen steps and praise the splendor of detached palaces; disparage Yu for the rusticity of his thatched roof and venerate the magnificence of the Epang Palace; feel ashamed of Ji An's upright countenance and honor Zhu Tuo's charming smiles. All the remaining virtues of integrity, righteousness, chastity, trustworthiness, humility, and deference would have to change paths and turn face. What conduct would be left to cultivate? In general, upon hearing words one must observe the deeds; upon seeing deeds one must seek the principle. If the principle is not violated and the deeds do not transgress, please do not generate heterodox views. Moreover, different paths lead to the same destination; they do not necessarily have to be uniformly identical. Recently there have also been many who share your opinion. I now commit these words to this paper. Those whose minds are not unified lodge their thoughts in doubt and delusion; our ruler universally proclaims it to them. I have briefly spoken of my feelings; do not view this as vague. Traces of ink easily become tedious, and ultimately cannot exhaust my meaning. When I meet you again soon, we shall discuss it in full detail.