[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) › 7.20 # 弘明集 7.20 弘明集 7.20 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7.20) 論云。蹲夷之儀婁羅之辯。猶蟲讙鳥聒何足述傚。疑曰。夫禮以申敬樂以感。和雖敬由禮申。而禮非敬也。和同樂感樂非和也。故上安民順則玉帛停筐風淳。俗泰則鍾鼓輟響。又鍾帛之運不與二儀並位。蓋以拯頓權時不得已而行耳。然則道義所存無係形容。苟造其反不嫌殊同。今狐蹲狗踞。孰曰非敬。敬以申心。孰曰非禮。禮敬玄符如徒捨含識之類。人標其所貴。貴不在言。言存貴理。是以麟鳳懷仁見重靈篇。猩猩能語受蚩禮章。未知之所論義將何取。若執言損理則非知者所據。若仗理忘言則彼以破相明宗。故李叟之常非名欲所及。維摩靜默非巧辯所追。檢其言也。彼我俱遣。尋其旨也。老釋無際。俱遣則濡沫可遣。無際則不負高貴。何乃遠望。波若名非智慧。便相挫蹙比類蟲鳥。研復逾日未愜鄙懷。且方俗殊韻。豈專胡夏近唯中邦。齊魯不同權輿俶落。亦古今代述以其無妨指錄。故傳授世習彼若非也。則此未為是。如其是也則彼不獨非。既未能相是則均於相非。想茲漢音流入彼國。復受蟲讙之尤。鳥聒之誚婁羅之辯亦可知矣。一以此明莛楹可齊。兩吝兼除不其通乎。夫義奧淵微非所宜參。誠欲審方玄匠。聊申一往耳。傾心遙佇。遲聞後裁。 > The treatise says: "The squatting etiquette of the barbarians and their clever debates are like the buzzing of insects and the chattering of birds—how are they worth narrating and emulating?" The objection says: Ritual expresses reverence; music induces harmony. Though reverence is expressed through ritual, ritual is not reverence; though harmony is induced by music, music is not harmony. Thus, when the ruler is secure and the people compliant, jades and silks remain in their baskets; when customs are pure and the realm is at peace, bells and drums cease their sound. Moreover, the operation of bells and silks does not stand equal with heaven and earth; they are merely adopted out of necessity as temporary expedients to rescue the distressed. Thus, where Dao and righteousness reside, they do not depend on external appearances; if one attains their return, one does not mind difference or sameness. Now, as for crouching like a fox and squatting like a dog, who can say this is not reverence? When reverence expresses the heart, who can say this is not ritual? Ritual and reverence subtly tally, just as if one were merely casting aside sentient beings. Humans mark what they value; value does not lie in words; words are preserved to value principle. Therefore, the qilin and phoenix cherish benevolence and are honored in sacred texts; the ape can speak, but receives ridicule in the ritual texts. I do not know, in the treatise's discourse, what meaning is to be adopted! If one clings to words and damages principle, it is not what the wise rely on. If one relies on principle and forgets words, then they illuminate the essential principle by dismantling characteristics. Therefore, Old Li's 'constant' is not what names or desires can reach; Vimalakīrti's silence is not what clever rhetoric can pursue. Examining their words, both self and other are dismissed; tracing their aims, Laozi and the Buddha are boundless. When both are dismissed, then mutual moistening can be abandoned; when there is boundlessness, one does not fail what is lofty and noble. Why look from afar and, seeing that the name 'Prajñā' is not 'wisdom', immediately belittle and humiliate it, comparing it to insects and birds? Pondering this for days, it has not satisfied my humble thoughts. Moreover, regional customs have different sounds; are they restricted only to the Hu and the Chinese? Even nearby in the Central States, Qi and Lu were not the same. Beginning and ending have also been recorded differently through ancient and modern times; because they did not impede pointing to the meaning, they were transmitted and practiced through generations. If they were wrong, then this \[Chinese practice\] would not yet be right; if this is right, then that is not alone wrong. Since we cannot yet affirm each other, we are equal in mutual negation. I imagine that when these Han sounds flow into their country, they too suffer the blame of buzzing insects and the ridicule of chattering birds; their clever debates can also be known. By illuminating this with unity, the stalk and the pillar can be made equal; if both stingy attachments are removed, is that not broad and penetrating? The depths of meaning are subtle and profound, not something I should take part in; truly desiring to investigate the directions of the mysterious master, I have merely set forth my thoughts once. Leaning forward in distant anticipation, I eagerly await your subsequent judgment. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7.19) - [Next: 7.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7.21) - [Up: 7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102~en-mt.7.20) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.7.20) · Pramāṇa