弘明集 5.41

5.41

答曰。夫幽宗曠邈神道精微。可以理尋難以事詰。既涉乎教則以因時為撿。雖應世之具優劣萬差。至於曲成在用感即民心而通其分。分至則止其智之所不知。而不關其外者也。若然則非體極者之所不兼。兼之者不可並御耳。是以古之語大道者。五變而形名可舉。九變而賞罰可言。此但方內之階差。而猶不可頓設。況其外者乎。請復推而廣之。以遠其類。六合之外存而不論者。非不可論。論之或乖。六合之內論而不辯者。非不可辯。辯之或疑。春秋經世先王之志辯而不議者。非不可議。議之或亂。此三者皆即其身耳目之所不至。以為關鍵。而不關視聽之外者也。因此而求聖人之意。則內外之道可合而明矣。常以為道法之與名教。如來之與堯孔。發致雖殊潛相影響。出處誠異終期則同。詳而辯之指歸可見。理或有先合而後乖。有先乖而後合。先合而後乖者。諸佛如來則其人也。先乖而後合者。歷代君王未體極之至。斯其流也。何以明之。經云。佛有自然神妙之法。化物以權廣隨所入。或為靈仙轉輪聖帝或為卿相國師道士。若此之倫在所變現。諸王君子莫知為誰。此所謂合而後乖者也。或有始創大業而功化未就。迹有參差故所受不同。或期功於身後。或顯應於當年。聖王即之而成教者。亦不可稱算。雖抑引無方必歸塗有會。此所謂乖而後合者也。若今乖而後合。則擬步通塗者。必不自崖於一揆。若今合而後乖。則釋迦之與堯孔。歸致不殊斷可知矣。是故自乖而求其合。則知理會之必同自合而求其乖。則悟體極之多方。但見形者之所不兼。故或眾塗而駭其異耳。因茲而觀。天地之道功盡於運化。帝王之德理極於順通。若以對夫獨絕之教不變之宗。故不得同年而語其優劣。亦已明矣。

I answer: "The hidden principle is boundless and distant; the divine Dao is subtle and profound. It can be sought through principle, but is difficult to interrogate through specific affairs. Once it touches upon teaching, it takes adapting to the times as its rule. Although the instruments for responding to the world differ in ten thousand gradations of superiority and inferiority, when it comes to subtle fulfillment in practical application, they respond to the minds of the people and open up their allotted capacities. Once their allotted capacities are reached, they stop at what their wisdom cannot know, without concerning what lies beyond it. If so, it is not that the one who embodies the ultimate cannot encompass both, but merely that encompassing both, he cannot deploy them together. Therefore, when the ancients spoke of the Great Dao, only after five alterations could forms and names be raised, and only after nine alterations could rewards and punishments be mentioned. These are merely gradations within the realm, yet they still could not be established all at once—how much less what lies beyond it!

"Please let us examine and extend this further to broaden its analogies: What lies outside the six directions is preserved but not discussed—not because it cannot be discussed, but because discussing it might lead to deviation. What lies within the six directions is discussed but not debated—not because it cannot be debated, but because debating it might lead to doubt. The records of the past kings' governance in the Spring and Autumn Annals are debated but not judged—not because they cannot be judged, but because judging them might cause disorder. These three cases all take what one's own ears and eyes cannot reach as their crucial boundary, without concerning what lies beyond sight and hearing. If one seeks the intention of the sages by this, the inner and outer paths can be reconciled and illuminated.

"I have always maintained that the Dharma of the Dao and the teaching of names, the Tathāgata and Yao and Confucius, though differing in their initial manifestations, secretly affect and influence one another; their emergence and retirement are indeed different, but their ultimate aims are the same. If we analyze and discern them in detail, their destination can be seen. In principle, some are first united and then diverge, while others first diverge and then unite. Those who are first united and then diverge are the Buddhas and Tathāgatas. Those who first diverge and then unite are the successive generations of sovereigns who have not yet reached the ultimate embodiment—they belong to this stream.

"How do we know this? The sūtras say that the Buddha possesses a natural and wondrous Dharma: he transforms beings through expedient means, extensively adapting to wherever he enters. He may appear as an immortal, a wheel-turning sage king, a minister, a state preceptor, or a Daoist master. Such manifestations appear wherever appropriate, and neither kings nor gentlemen know who he is. This is what is meant by being united first and then diverging.

"Others initially establish great enterprises, but their meritorious transformation is not yet complete. Because their traces are uneven, what they receive is not the same: some look for achievement after this life, while others manifest responses in their present age. The sage kings who build upon this to establish their teachings are also beyond count. Although their restraint and guidance take countless ways, they inevitably converge on the path of return. This is what is meant by diverging first and then uniting.

"If now they diverge first and then unite, those who intend to tread the open thoroughfare must not confine themselves to a single measure. If now they are united first and then diverge, it is definitely known that the destinations of Śākyamuni and Yao and Confucius are not different. Therefore, if one seeks their unity from their divergence, one knows that their accord in principle is necessarily the same; if one seeks their divergence from their unity, one realizes the manifold ways of embodying the ultimate. It is only because those who see mere forms cannot encompass both that they are alarmed by their differences on the various paths. Viewing it from this, the Dao of heaven and earth exhausts its merit in revolving and transforming; the virtue of emperors and kings carries its principle to the utmost in compliance and circulation. If compared with the incomparable teaching and the unchanging principle, they cannot be spoken of in the same breath, and their superiority and inferiority are already clear."