弘明集 7.14

7.14

論云。無生之教賒無死之化切。切法可以進謙弱。賒法可以退夸強。疑曰。無生即無死無死即無生。名反實合容得賒切之別耶。若以跡有差降故。優劣相懸者。則宜以切抑強以賒引弱。故孔子曰。求也退故進之。由也兼人故退之。致教之方不其然乎。

The treatise says: "The teaching of non-arising is lax; the transformation of non-dying is pressing. The pressing teaching can advance the humble and weak; the lax teaching can restrain the boastful and strong." The objection says: Non-arising is just non-dying, and non-dying is just non-arising. When their names are opposite but their reality is identical, how can there be a distinction between lax and pressing? If because their traces have gradations, their superiority and inferiority are far apart, then one ought to use the pressing to curb the strong and the lax to guide the weak. Thus Confucius said: 'Qiu holds back, therefore I urged him forward; You has energy for two men, therefore I held him back.' Is not the method of conveying instruction just like this?