弘明集 4.22

4.22

釋曰。所云上仁上義。謂兼總仁義之極。可以對饗天地者耳。非謂少有恥愛便為三才。前釋已具怪復是問四。彼域中唯王是體知三。此兩儀非聖不居。易老同歸可無重惑。案東魯階差。僑札理不允備。何由上附至位。依西方准墨。伊顏未獲法身。故當下麗生品。來論挾姬議釋。故兩解此意。冀以取了反致辭費。聖作君師賢為臣資。接暢神功影嚮大業。行藏可共默語亦同。體分至此何負黃裳。議者徒見不得等位。元首橫生誚恨。而不知引之極地。更非守節之情。指斷如斯。何謂無准。

Explanation: What is called superior benevolence and superior righteousness means uniting the pinnacles of benevolence and righteousness, being able to stand opposite and receive offerings from Heaven and Earth. It does not mean that merely possessing a small degree of shame or love constitutes the Three Powers. The previous explanation was already complete; it is strange that you ask this again. In that realm within the domain, only the king embodies it; in this one, the Two Poles are inhabited by none other than sages. The Yijing and Laozi converge on the same conclusion, so there need be no repeated doubt. Examining the grades of Eastern Lu [Confucianism], the principle of Zheng Qiao and Wu Zha is not fully complete; how could they ascend to attach to the supreme position? Relying on the standards of the Western regions, Yi Yin and Yan Hui had not yet attained the Dharma-body; hence they should descend and attach to the classes of living beings. Your arguments seized upon Zhou rituals and explanations; thus I explained this meaning in both ways, hoping to achieve clarity, which instead led to a waste of words. The sage serves as ruler and teacher; the worthy serves as minister and resource. Connecting and expressing spiritual efficacy, shadowing and echoing the great enterprise, their action and concealment can be shared, and their silence and speech are also identical. When essence and allotment reach this, how do they fall short of 'yellow skirts'? Disputants merely see that they cannot attain equal status with the Sovereign, and arbitrarily give rise to blame and resentment, not knowing that drawing them to the ultimate ground is no longer the sentiment of guarding one's station. With the point determined like this, how can it be called without standard?