弘明集 12

English (machine translation) 12

Language: English

12.1

Compiled by the Vinaya Master Śramaṇa Sengyou of Jianchu Monastery in Yangdu of the Liang

Letter from Xi Zuochi to Śramaṇa Dao'an
Letter from the Prince of Qiao discussing Confucius and the Buddha, with a reply by Zhang of Xin'an
Letter from Zheng Daozi to the Dhyāna Master discussing squatting while eating
Letter from Fan Bolun to Minister of Education Wang discussing squatting while eating
Letter in reply from Dharma Master Yi to Fan Bolun (together with Fan's second reply)
Letter from Fan Bolun to the two Dharma Masters [Dao]sheng and [Hui]guan
Memorials by Fan Bolun on squatting while eating, together with four imperial edicts and exchanges
Three memorials by Jin Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong and others maintaining that śramaṇas should not revere kings (together with two imperial edicts)
Letter from Huan Xuan to the Eight Seats discussing monks revering kings (together with the Eight Seats' reply)
Letter from Huan Xuan to Prefect Wang discussing revering kings (together with eight exchanges of replies with Prefect Wang)
One letter from Dharma Master Huiyuan of Mount Lu replying to Huan Xuan discussing that śramaṇas should not revere kings (together with two letters from Huan Xuan)
Edict of Huan Xuan ordering that śramaṇas no longer revere the Son of Heaven, together with replies from Bian Sizhi and others (five exchanges)
One letter from Dharma Master Huiyuan of Mount Lu to Huan Xuan discussing the screening of śramaṇas (together with one directive from Huan Xuan)
One letter from Dharma Master Zhi Daolin to Huan Xuan discussing the prefectural tally requesting the registers of śramaṇas
Memorial by Śramaṇa Daosheng of Tianbao Monastery to Emperor Wu of the Qi discussing examining and testing monks

12.3

The Collection Spreading the Light that I compiled brings together treatises defending the Dharma. However, the reason letters and memorials are recorded here is that the matters are profound. Consider that when śramaṇas renounce the world, neither rank nor emolument can entangle them. Ever since the Han and Wei dynasties, through eras of heroes and sages, all have extended courtesy to them, none demanding their prostrations. Yet Lord Yu abused his authority and arbitrarily initiated heterodox opinions, and Huan's pretended support continued these frivolous debates. If Lord He had not spoken, the Dharma's marks would have sunk forever; if the Venerable [Hui]yuan had not debated, the affairs of the Saṅgha would have been wiped out at once. Looking back to antiquity with deep sighs, how could these not be compiled? In the Gu hexagram of the Book of Changes, one 'does not serve kings or princes'; in the Conduct of the Scholar in the Book of Rites, one 'does not act as a minister to the Son of Heaven.' Even among the four classes of common folk there are those who do not bend; how much more so for those who abandon the secular to follow the Dao—how could ministerial rites be demanded of them? Thus [such disputes] do not arise in times of peace and clarity, but frequently emerge in degenerate eras. As for Hengbiao's brief words and Master Yuan's resisting Huan [Xuan], although merely preserving oneself is not extraordinary, they were nonetheless sufficient to encourage and strengthen the Dharma essentials. The 'Sunlight' [treatise] is a discourse that awakens the secular; my own 'Three Denunciations' are explanations that destroy Māra. Therefore, both are recorded here.

12.4

Letter to Śramaṇa Dao'an

12.5

Xi Zuochi

12.6

On the fifth day of the fourth month of the third year of Xingning, Zuochi bows his head and makes prostration. I have heard that you respond to the true and tread in the correct, your brilliant understanding harmonizing within; your compassionate teachings shine comprehensively, sheltering both the religious and the secular alike. Those who take emptiness as fundamental awaken to the import of impermanence; those who preserve being realize the expedient of treating the body as external. Your pure breeze washes across the Central Lands; your luan-call resonates throughout the eight directions of obscurity. In profound taste and far-reaching planning, what toil could compare to yours? Your disciple has heard that that which rains upon the six directions before the morning ends is the cloud that fills the sky; that which broadens its deep source to moisten the eight limits is the flow of the four great [rivers]. The true and non-active descends, and the myriad things rely on its beneficence; the fundamentally mindless moves, and high and low receive its moisture. How much more so when, pitying the world, you descend to walk among us, and taking compassion on the era, you are born, your origins tied to delivering beings and your illumination of the Dao consisting in training the secular. You mount the carriage that does not rush so as to traverse the path that has no distance; you command the conveyance of treating the body as external so as to respond to the quests of the ten directions. How then could jade merely bestow moisture upon a single mountain, or ice freeze in but one valley, gazing toward Langfeng without turning your carriage, withholding yourself from this world without teaching and delivering? Furthermore, since the Great Teaching flowed eastward, more than four hundred years have passed. Although regional princes and laymen have occasionally practiced it, the ancient teachings of Zhendan were enacted in earlier ages; the fortune of the Dao shifts with time, and the secular world has not entirely awakened, merely causing lower scholars to delight in ripples and waves. Only Emperor Ming, the Ancestor Su, was truly endowed with virtue sent from Heaven and began to revere this Dao. With his own hand he painted the Tathāgata's countenance; in his mouth he tasted the purport of samādhi. His strict precepts surpassed those of recluse hermits; his profound ancestors were celebrated in non-arising. Once the Great Clod made its song, the myriad cavities roared. Among worthy and wise gentlemen, none did not turn to this lineage. Although the sun and moon are distant, their light shines ever brighter; the flourishing of the endeavors of the Dao was never more splendid than today. Is this not what is meant by the Moon Radiance Youth passing into quiescence and about to be born in the true land, and the wondrous bowl moving eastward suddenly verified in our time? Furthermore, I have heard that three thousand who attained the Dao have all been seen in Nanyang; brilliant scholars and bodhisattvas have refined and expounded the true words, examining above the instructions of sages and masters, and testing below the efficacy of practicing the Dao. If the profound sūtras go forth together, who could it be but you? Cherishing the Dao and surpassing in instructions, whom else could descend? For this reason, the monks of this region all cherish eager longing, their eyes yearning to rejoice in the golden-colored auspicious sign, their ears awaiting the supreme treasury; old and young share the same vow, religious and secular harbor the same aspiration, and their feelings of deep longing cannot be described in ordinary words. If the auspicious clouds move eastward and the jewel turns its radiance, if you step once upon the seven-jeweled seat and look for a moment upon the lamp of the bright vow, raining sweet dew upon the abundant grass and planting sandalwood on the riverbanks, then the Tathāgata's teaching will once more be exalted in this present day, and the profound waves and extraordinary resonances will again cleanse our whole generation. Unable to bear my longing, I draft this letter to express the accumulation within my heart; how could I fully convey it? Disciple Xi Zuochi of Xiangyang bows his head and makes prostration. (The preface to Yu Chan's Eulogy on the Hall of Delighting in the Worthy also states: 'Emperor Ming, the Ancestor Su, deeply loved the Buddha-Dao and personally traced the wondrous image.')

12.7

Letter from the Prince of Qiao Discussing Confucius and the Buddha

12.8

The Buddhist teaching regards transgressions and blessings, cause and effect, as being like shadows and echoes. The sage's words are clear and exact, striking fear into people's hearts. Yet from the ancient emperors and monarchs, Wen and Wu, to the Duke of Zhou and Confucius, their canons, counsels, instructions, and proclamations lacked nothing in completeness; yet none clearly set forth the three times or openly expounded karmic retribution. Those many sages all exhausted principle and fully plumbed human nature, illuminating the conditions of things; how could they bear to watch people sink and drown without being willing to lend a hand, without ever offering a single word to point out the ford and path? Furthermore, 'he angled but did not use a net; he shot at birds with an attached cord, but not at roosting birds'; 'broad, large, and fat animals are offered up to the Sovereign on High.' Judging from this, it is indeed difficult to understand. I hope you gentlemen will explain and present this in outline, providing clear evidence to dispel this confusion.

12.9

Reply by Zhang of Xin'an

12.10

Looking up, I reply to your profound purport, which is not an ordinary teaching. Bowing down, I reflect upon my lack of attainment, and with bowed head make this general response. In my humble view, penetrating all things depends upon resonance, and entering awakening relies upon conditions. If one truly lacks good causes, then river and sea will foster confusion. Therefore, awaiting inquiries is likened to striking a bell, and inspiring understanding depends on feelings of eager frustration. The wondrous awakening exhausts principle; it is both sage and divine. Its light illuminates the eight directions, and looking up and down it observes the nine realms. Yet when its fortune encounters a span of a hundred years, seeming as vast as ten thousand kalpas, is this not because auspicious conditions have not yet formed, so that transforming influence cannot take hold? For this reason the sage spirit paused its course and this culture did not record it; unable to manifest subtle principles, they aimed at direct reprimand and fundamental guidance, merely using subtle manifestations and gentle persuasion to guide them toward the profound and distant. Loving life guides the source of the three times; accumulating goodness initiates the steps of karmic retribution. Hunting with nets and sparing the roosting birds illustrates benevolence; seasonal hunting broadens trust. Once beings were gradually soaked and steeped until habit was formed, stinginess and blockage were dispelled day by day; only afterward did the Dao flourish in the court of the august Han, and the instructions spread during the Yongping era. Things were freed from delusion and people yielded like the grass before the wind. We truly know that the radiant blossoms of Fangxun were not yet dawn, and King Wenxuan had not yet risen. It is not that their purports were divergent so as to lead to different understandings, but that principles were equal though both encountered obstacles. In adhering to the profound and distant, who would dare to speak recklessly? Erring in what is right, I have been rash and foolish.

12.11

Letter to the Dhyāna Master Discussing Squatting While Eating

12.12

Zheng Daozi

12.13

The teachings of the sages cultivate the root and discard the branch, taking the mind as instruction and adapting to circumstances to effect function. None has ever gone against nature or violated corporeal form while yet solidifying the great transformation. Even though corporeal forms differ from the secular and their endeavors surpass the world, when it comes to the etiquette of bowing and revering, and the manners of yielding and saluting, these arise from what is within, and religious and secular are not different. Therefore, when fasting, lecturing, or practicing one's duties, the ritual garments are worn completely; bowing has its order, and precedence has its sequence. A reverent mind fills within and the corporeal form is solemn without. Bowing one's head to the ground does not permit the posture of tiptoeing and squatting; gathering one's skirts in bowing is not something in which leaning sits can share. Yet to take squatting while eating as a function of the mind and abandoning ritual decorum as restraining coarseness—matters and principles contradict each other, and I do not see how this is coherent. Teachings of conditioned phenomena each have their significance. As for the Pratyutpanna [samādhi], it pains the corporeal form to preserve the Dao: the Dao is drawn close while the corporeal form is treated as distant. Its practice has principle, and its function has a root. But the teaching of squatting while eating has no significance to promote. In advancing, it does not mortify the corporeal form; in retreating, it incurs disrespect and laxity. Those who see the corporeal form without reaching the Dao will lose their feelings of reverence and solemnity and give rise to words of shock and disrespect. Could this be what is meant by the sages establishing teachings according to circumstances, or the principle of not taking the ritual cap to Yue? Tracing where it arose, it perhaps came from the nature of foreign lands, or was intended to straighten what was crooked, aiming at a specific remedy; just as acute illness requires quick medicine, it is not a method for long-term practice. When corporeal form and teaching correspond, matters and principles have their order. Since they prescribe the three robes and conduct bowing, regulated by Dharma drums and arranged in order, how can one tiptoe and squat in their midst, with decorum and laxity opposing each other? If in the past it was appropriate, it was merely an expedient for a single day according to the needs of the situation, and cannot serve as an instruction for all time; this principle is easily understood. Therefore, many asked about benevolence, yet returning to ritual was the root. Now you meditate and transform the mind, but cling to external traces without changing; in principle it is trivial, and in function it is coarse. If there is something I have not understood, dare I not express my thoughts? Zheng Jun bows with head to the ground.

12.14

Letter to Minister of Education Wang and Others Discussing Monks Squatting While Eating

12.15

Fan Bolun

12.16

Fan Tai respectfully states to the high ministers and various worthies: The monks of today have two methods of sitting. Formerly, at the Jetavana, it seems this was not so. Based on what we see in foreign lands today, spoken languages differ and what is adopted or discarded also varies. The sages established teachings in accordance with custom and propagated the doctrine by adapting to regions; they did not even change their language, so why must one laboriously insist on identical regulations? Yet a single state ought not to have two rules, and how could a single hall admit of differences? But now, each relies on his own partial views, affirming himself and negating others, failing to fathom the original intent behind the establishment of the rules, regarding mere blind conformity as good. Without a master to settle it, matters have come to this: having no emptiness to receive others, yet having an obstinate attachment [to their own view]; failing to seek the reality of the fish and hare, while competing to attack the trivialities of the trap and snare. If this trend is not changed, the Way will be difficult to attain. Beneath the King of Trees for six years, [the Buddha] achieved right awakening; when he first elucidated the profound doctrine and personally spread his high seat, in all cases he sat cross-legged and did not sit with one leg raised. In seated meditation to attain concentration, the principle certainly allows no casual lounging; the merit of squatting to eat lies in seeking not to eat one's fill. These are all partial regulations of a single state, not a universal institution for all under Heaven. Just as cold regions lack the ritual of wearing fine linen, and Ri-nan does not observe the rule of woolens and furs, one must not, seeing Great Yu first shedding his clothes, assert that there are no longer ceremonial caps. I ask that both sides let their positions go and entrust the matter to a gentleman who can strike a middle course. In my modest wish, Fan Tai merely hopes to achieve uniformity for the single meal in today’s assembly; beyond this, it is not something I can know. Ritual values harmony, and the monastic rules esteem uniformity. Now, when mounting the vegetarian feast hall and facing the holy images, it is as if the spirits are present. Among the images are the four pairs and eight stages [of noble persons]; in principle there can be no divergence. Could the feeling of selfish insistence temporarily yield? When Master Shi [Dao'an] was in Xiangyang, the partial method had already arrived, yet he considered it and did not adopt it; he must have had his reasons. Hence, casting down his staff and boarding a carriage, the principle was to conform with the multitude. Recently, at the Dhyāna Master's heavenly assembly in the Bodhimanda, they also sat square; is this not because preserving the great and disregarding the small cannot be accomplished all at once? Square sitting is never inappropriate, whereas squatting is timely; for those who sit square, adapting to anomalies is difficult, while changing once to achieve uniformity is easy. Moreover, that a host lowers himself to show respect to a guest has long been the precedent. I consulted Master [Hui]yi again, but received no response at all. Therefore, I respectfully state my concurrence to seek the middle course. I hope you will bestow some spare words to cover my timid feelings.

12.17

Shi Huiyi's Reply to Fan Bolun

12.18

Fifty men, including Shi Huiyi of the Jetavana Monastery, respectfully address the dānakapatis: As for the rules of a śramaṇa, they should precisely and strictly adhere to the sūtras and vinaya, taking faith and obedience as the foundation. If one wishes to contravene the sūtras, rebel against the vinaya, follow one's own mind, and consider oneself right, this is a profound catastrophe for the Great Dharma and the head of defiling the Way. In establishing precepts, the Tathāgata made exceptions and prohibitions: where there is an exception, one practices it without doubt; where there is a prohibition, no one dares violate it. The precepts guard the śramaṇa from touching or approaching women with his body or hands. Practitioners keeping the precepts, seeing a female relative drifting and drowning in deep water, watched her die and none dared rescue her. Thereupon, the worldly people said that śramaṇas have no compassion, asking what kind of Way this was. Therefore, because of the world's criticism and suspicion, the Tathāgata made an exception for this one precept, allowing rescue in times of disaster. The precepts established by the Tathāgata are a uniform institution; one can only strictly observe and practice them—how could one allow private opinion to arbitrarily change or create them? Even mundane Confucians still strictly preserve the 'Xia fifth month' omission, none daring to supplement its month, wishing profoundly to guard against far-fetched interpretations and cut off the tendency to delight in novelty and difference. How much more so with the precepts instituted by the One of Triple Knowledge—how would anyone dare arbitrarily open or restrict them? Dānapati Fan wishes to have this assembly abandon the squatting posture to follow the square, seeking a harmony free of difference. Although you cherish the beauty of harmony, harmony that is not in accordance with the Way is seeking mere conformity, not seeking true harmony. Ever since this Jetavana Monastery had an assembly up to the Dharma gatherings, there has never been a time without both square and squatting groups. Since there is no evidence in the sūtras or vinaya, yet you suddenly wish to alter the Buddha's Dharma, this is no small matter, and we truly dare not agree to your high opinion. This monastery has received and upheld the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya for a long time. Furthermore, the vinaya contains explicit text explaining the method of squatting to eat in eight discussions. If originally there were no regulation for squatting to eat, then the two hundred and fifty precepts would not exist. It states: 'Food must not be placed on the couch; discarded food must be placed by the right foot.' It also states: 'One must not dangle the feet or cross the shins.' Is this not clear proof of squatting to eat? The vinaya precepts are the secret Dharma of the śramaṇa; unless one is the ruler of a state, one may not participate in hearing them. Now the dānapati doubts the square and squatting postures, wishing to initiate their rise or fall. I, a poor monk, cannot but weigh their importance and briefly cite several items to show that they have a source, willingly enduring the transgression of proclaiming the precepts. The opening or closing of the Buddha's Dharma rests with the dānakapatis: if opened, we together obtain the merit of protecting the Dharma; if blocked, we shall together incur the sin of destroying the Dharma. I sincerely hope you will reflect three times, so that both the unseen and the manifest may have no regret.

12.19

Reply to Master [Hui]yi

12.20

I reply: My previous essay had already covered this; it is only that the Venerable One's intent was strong and his vigor fierce, so that he did not examine it. Precepts are meant to prevent wrongdoing; if there is no wrongdoing, what need is there for precepts? Therefore, for foolish and confused people, the precepts adapt to customs and modify the vinaya. The Central Land originally did not squat with one leg raised; thus the vinaya concerning gathering the bones and crossing the shins can properly be omitted. In the precept about eating by hand, there is no text about using spoons and chopsticks; why do you place weight on the squatting posture while making light of eating by hand? The vinaya forbids approaching women by hand, yet soon after permits rescuing a drowning relative; this was due to the doubts of ordinary people, which indeed sufficed to alter the sage's vinaya. It is all the more evident that the two hundred and fifty precepts are not natural, immutable rules. If so, stubbornly upholding them does not count as complete attainment, and relying on one's own mind is not something to be heavily blamed. The missing text of 'Xia fifth month' was stubbornly kept without doubt; once what is clearly and prudently seen is understood, how could one act simply out of regard for the multitude? The meaning of raising one leg lies in readiness to advance; if one desires haste, affairs cannot proceed, but if one sits properly, one cannot remain at ease. Sometimes there are arrogant men, so it is not permitted by ritual and law to have two systems in one hall. The Venerable One's conformity is seamlessly unified, while this disciple's harmony is clearly singular. How would I dare confront your battle array of fifty men? Therefore, out of fear of the adversary, I fell silent, hoping for rescue from the highest good.

12.21

Fan Bolun's Letter to the Two Dharma Masters [Dao]sheng and [Hui]guan

12.22

The customs of foreign lands are themselves not uniform. When Deva [Saṃghadeva] first arrived, everyone among [Hui]yi and [Hui]guan bathed in and closely studied his teachings. These were merely Hīnayāna teachings, yet they claimed they were the ultimate truth, asserting that the sūtras of non-arising and the Vaipulya scriptures were all works of Māra. Later, when Deva preached the scriptures, he did not even mount the high seat. Later, when Faxian arrived and the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] was first proclaimed, they claimed the words of permanence were the supreme among all principles, and that the ultimate doctrine of Prajñā fell beneath them. Deducing from this, they simply lack inner mastery and change whenever they hear something new. Comparing it to archery, when a later shot hits the mark, it surpasses the earlier one; thus one knows that the foreign vinaya is not a fixed, immutable rule.

12.23

Those who sit with one leg raised are never upright; when preaching the Dharma from a high seat, they also raise their legs and squat. Food in foreign lands is mostly eaten by hand, and the precepts have no mention of spoons and chopsticks. The cohort of Huiyi knows this but does not change it, yet as for sitting with one leg raised, they are permanently unabashed; to conform and contradict oneself like this—who can untangle it? This disciple's thought has always been that to share a fault with others is better than boasting of oneself. This is pushing one's heart to delight in unity, not presuming to seek self-righteousness. Today, white-robed laymen who uphold the Dharma decidedly cannot adopt foreign garments; why must śramaṇas stubbornly maintain this partial rule?

12.24

Memorial on Squatting to Eat

12.25

Fan Bolun

12.26

Your servant states: Your Majesty has embodied and comprehended the Buddhist principle and is about to fathom its ultimate reaches. With a far-reaching mind and distant aspirations, you investigate its subtleties with precision. I only regret that 'the one who stirs me' is no longer of the past, and responding in audience is not easy. Since youth, your servant has had faith in the Great Dharma and cultivated good nature through habit; I have heard some of the remaining discourses and vaguely grasped the profound school. In the past, while attending Your Majesty's seat, I was excessively favored with your kind encouragement, but my thoughts were crude and my speech stammering, unable to achieve flowing expression. This has been a regret lasting my entire life. Recently, I challenged Huiyi on squatting to eat; it was merely my modest desire for harmony, not daring to seek superiority over others. Eating at your windward side, it has already reached the celestial hearing. Your servant submits that this matter is merely a partial regulation of a single state, not a permanent rule universally valid across the scriptures. Customs in foreign lands are not uniform, and spoken languages also differ. The sages did not change their language; why alone stubbornly change their practices? Words serve to express meaning, and once meaning is attained, words are forgotten; rituals serve to preserve reverence, and once reverence is established, bodily forms may be discarded. Therefore, sages instituted precepts according to circumstances and adapted rules according to customs. When one has attained the Way, there can even be no vinaya; considering how its safeguards proliferate, their adoption and abandonment depend on the time, and their openness or restriction relies solely on principle. Is it not obtuse to glue the bridges of a zither or wait by a tree stump? Monks today, though skillfully guided by teachers, have no single supreme standard in the Way. Each trusts his own view and few are able to receive others with an open mind, to the point of competing in differences within a single hall and failing to harmonize in an era of universal peace. Your servant privately feels ashamed of this; how much more so should those who differ from your servant? The Minister of Works, broad-minded and enlightened, recognizes what is reasonable and does not consider your servant's words wrong. The present prominent figures are not yet earnest in their faith in the Way and have no predetermined opinions; they regard pleasing both sides as fine and indecision as greatness. If we wait for this to be regulated, the Yellow River might first turn clear! Huiyan and Daosheng originally did not squat; Huiguan seems to regret his initial position. I humbly surmise that the imperial mind must already have formed a view. I do not now expect a bright edict to issue alone, but if Your Majesty's intention were roughly conveyed, the Chancellor would observe from below and be transformed—who then would say it is not proper? The imperial influence is about to extend far, and written culture and vehicular tracks are about to achieve great unity. Although minor differences are subtle, their gradual growth must not be fostered. If what is green and tender is not cut, one will soon need an axe. Therefore, one should proceed from the near to the far, making it so that none harbor disobedience. In the Eastern Jin resurgence, the High Seat [Śrīmitra] came to travel, loving the Central Land, and did not speak of this rule. Master Shi [Dao'an] was most earnest in believing the Way; he did not make its rules an ordeal, considering them and not adopting them; there must have been a purpose. Kumārajīva was preeminent and unrestrained; though not easily fathomable, when he shaved his hair he did not sit with one leg raised, which can also be verified. When the Dhyāna Master first arrived, he went to the palace seeking an audience, wishing to enter and squat in the old manner; the principle could not be permitted, so he was not allowed to advance. Later, when the assembly gathered at Dong'an, they indeed did not squat to eat. These are past events of the previous reign that your servant personally witnessed. Respectfully submitted.

12.27

Your servant states: Your Majesty recently visited the Jetavana Monastery, and your servant earnestly requested an inscription and eulogy, seeming to recall a vague assent. After the imperial carriage returned, your servant reverently carved on the monument: 'Eulogy by the Emperor', these three words alone. For the crime of taking liberties, I am willing to accept punishment. As for recording blessings in the unseen realm, I do not know if that matched [your intent]. If you would bestow a few characters in the divine brush, your servant would die without decaying, and for promoting customs, it would be beneficial and without harm. If Your Majesty is too occupied with the myriad affairs of state, your imperial intention could naturally be delegated. How could the scribes and bodyguard ministers lack the wish to exert themselves? What distance is there like Pi Chen and Shi Shu? This need not labor the imperial thought, which also accords with the intent of wearing the crown tassels. Your servant's career has long declined, and the road of life is exhausted; my humble mind cares only for the next life. Having received profound favor and more than sufficient salary, I assess that I will never repay this sage era. In the sincerity of offering a horse's head or tying grass, I pray Your Majesty will take pity and not blame your servant's words.

12.28

Imperial Rescript: I have learned of your discussion with Huiyi regarding squatting to eat. Recently, I also heard of it roughly; in my general view, I do not differ from the tenor of your submission. However, since I have not read the Buddhist scriptures, I have no reason to regulate matters based on personal views alone. I do not know what Huiyan and Daosheng think; if they are in complete agreement, Huiguan seems unwilling to regret his initial position. Recently, could you not seek the middle ground further with the monks? Regarding the inscription and eulogy for the Jetavana, I also do not recall promising it. Since this is not what I am accustomed to, and in addition I have had no leisure, I have not been able to reciprocate, which I regret very much.

12.29

Second Memorial

12.30

Your subject says: Having reverently received the enlightened decree, I am filled with awe and apprehension. My narrow and tube-sighted views are not worthy of being laid before Your Majesty. It is solely because the matter has already reached Your hearing that I could not remain at peace in silence. Now the imperial decree once more orders us to seek the mean further. Therefore, rash as I am, I again state my original thoughts. Your subject maintains that wherever the principle lies, one should happily not let the letter impair the intent. The Five Thearchs did not adopt each other's rituals; the Three Kings did not preserve each other's music. To change mandates in accordance with the times is a great principle in both cases. Zhuang Zhou compared past and present to boats and carts; Meng Ke said that believing entirely in books is worse than having no books at all. For this reason, testifying about the stolen sheep was not uprightness, and hear [good words and act upon them] has two applications. When the Great Dao was practiced, the world belonged to all; how much more so with your subject's humble unity under one hall! And how much more so with the partial regulations of a foreign custom, which are fundamentally not the teachings of the Doctrine of the Mean! Huiyi, Daosheng, and Huiguan, receiving the image [from the words], widely received Your sagely decree. Should they be questioned from above, I would hope that they would reply upward relying on reason, not daring to bolster themselves by mere numbers or seek precedence over others. Huiguan's reply to me had no basis in principle at all; he merely praised me with extravagant words and censured me as interfering with wrongness. Inferring from this, I suspect he must have regrets, but has not yet turned back to the good, stubbornly defending his words. Your subject Sengyou also considers this to be so. Huiyi's vast battle array has already collapsed; their fleeing path is severed. Relying on this for rescue, it is difficult indeed for them to exempt themselves. How much more so when the Master of the Covenant is above, so that their principled words are known to be exhausted! Your subject recently challenged Huiguan, and I respectfully present it again as follows. Because of my foolishness and meanness, though striving for wisdom I have grown senile. Not only are my words off the mark, but I deeply fear that I am unaware of my own muddle-headedness. The courtiers in attendance are truly the hope of our times; yet they could neither pity my intention nor instruct my shortcomings. All of this was brought on by myself and is my own fault alone. I prostrate myself and pray:

12.31

May Your Majesty record my past utmost devotion and not condemn my lack of wisdom as a crime, and may You again tolerate my rash presumption amid defilement, as I privately rely on the ancient classic regarding the age at which punishments are not applied.

12.32

Memorial of Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong on Śramaṇas Not Being Obliged to Pay Full Homage

12.33

In the sixth year of the Xiankang reign of the Jin dynasty, Emperor Cheng was young, and Yu Bing assisted in government. Yu Bing maintained that śramaṇas should pay full homage to the ruler. Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong and others argued that they should not pay homage. The matter was referred to the ritual officials for detailed deliberation, and the erudites' opinion agreed with Chong's. The Chancellery, taking Yu Bing's intent, rejected it. Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong, Vice Directors Chu Yi and Zhuge Hui, and Masters of Writing Feng Huai, Xie Guang, and others submitted a memorial that śramaṇas should not pay full homage.

12.34

12.35

"The ten thousand realms have disparate customs, and the ways of spirits are difficult to discern: this has an origin. Truly, one of broad view and penetrating understanding should not find it strange. How much more so with the rites of bowing, kneeling, and prostration—why must they be so esteemed? One must return to the original intention of why the former kings esteemed them. Was it merely that they were fond of this bending and folding, sitting and rising in circular steps? Assuredly it was not. Building upon the respect between father and son, they established the hierarchy between lord and minister; they instituted laws and regulations and exalted the ritual order. How could this be in vain? Truly there was a reason. Since there was a reason, how can it be changed? If so, when the names and rites were established, could they have been without feeling? Moreover, is there really a Buddha now, or is there no Buddha? If there is a Buddha, his Dao is inherently broad; if there is no Buddha, what principle is there to take? Even if we grant that it is truly so, that would be an affair beyond this realm. How could affairs beyond this realm be embodied by those within this realm, such that they should deform their corporeal frames, violate ordinary duties, alter ritual canons, and abandon the teaching of names? This is what I deeply doubt. The teaching of names has its origins, not abandoned for a hundred generations. Even when starting before dawn to display it widely, later generations are still in peril. The harms of such peril are difficult to trace; yet now people would gaze from afar with longing toward what is vast, murky, indistinct, and unclarified, discarding rituals in a single morning and abolishing the teachings in the present age, letting the vulgar throng become arrogant and loose toward regulations and laws! This, too, is what I deeply doubt. Even granted that it is truly so, even granted that it exists, I would merely comprehend it in the divine radiance and grasp it within my breast. The grand model of regulations and laws inherently cannot be abolished in the upright court. All these people are subjects of the Jin. In terms of their talents and intelligence, they are ordinary persons. Yet to rely on the difficulty of discerning what is preached, borrow attire to transcend regulations, display the haughty etiquette of foreign customs, and straighten their corporeal frames before the sovereign of ten thousand chariots—this, too, is what I do not accept. You gentlemen are all vessels of the state: in wise speech you should fathom the subtle and hidden; in discussing governance you should prioritize the state's canons. If this is not so, what shall I expound?"

12.36

Second Memorial by Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong, Chu Yi, Zhuge Hui, Feng Huai, Xie Guang, and Others

12.37

Your subjects, He Chong, Prefect of the Masters of Writing, Champion General, Pacifying Army, and District Marquis; Chu Yi, Cavalier Regular Attendant, Left Vice Director, and Earl of Changping; Zhuge Hui, Cavalier Regular Attendant, Right Vice Director, and Earl of Jian'an; Feng Huai, Master of Writing, Intendant, and Marquis within the Passes; and Xie Guang, Master of Writing and Viscount of Anchang, say: The imperial decree is as stated to the right. We subjects are benighted and deficient, insufficient to praise and elevate Your sagely intent or to broadcast and propagate the great principle. Prostrating ourselves and reviewing the enlightened decree, we are shaken with fear and apprehension. We have investigated and deliberated together: whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha is assuredly not something that your subjects can determine. Yet examining the surviving texts and delving into their essential purports, the prohibitions of the five precepts truly assist the royal transformation. They disparage glaring reputations and conduct, and value hidden, dark integrity. The practice of virtue lies in forgetting one's body, embracing the subtle sentiment of a single mind. Furthermore, since its rise in the Han era down to the present day, although the teaching has experienced rises and declines, in terms of abuses there have been no妖 or delusion; in terms of spirits enduring through time, there has been no parallel. Even when there is harm, there must be benefit; how much more so when there must be benefit! The foolish sincerity of your subjects truly desires that the insignificance of dust and dew may add moisture to Mount Song and the ocean; our humble circumstances lower us before the imperial ultimate. If now we make them bow in a stroke, their Dharma will be ruined, causing the custom of cultivating the good to be abolished in a sagely age; when habit becomes nature, it will surely bring sorrow and dread. Concealing this within our subjects' hearts, we privately feel uneasy. Although we are blind and ignorant, how could we dare use a partial view to deceive the sagely hearing? We merely maintain that through three generations of reigns, the people have experienced enlightened sages. If now we do not make regulations for them, there will be no defect in the royal law, and the patterns of the unseen realm may remain free of obstruction. Therefore we state our foolish sincerity again, begging You to deign to examine and inspect it. Respectfully submitted.

12.38

Emperor Cheng's Second Decree

12.39

"I have examined what was stated; the feelings and intents are complete. Truly, matters of the obscure realm cannot be fully conveyed by parables. Yet their general outline, and the eternal standards of great persons and spirits, roughly have their distinctions and categories. Generally speaking, when the hundred kings instituted laws, although substantiality and refinement varied with the times, none ever mixed governance with disparate customs or mingled transformations with the grandiose and absurd. Could it be that the past sages were not perceptive, while the coming sages are broadly penetrating? Furthermore, the minor goodness of the five precepts roughly resembles human relations, yet should they omit ritual respect toward the lord of the world? Rites are heavy; respect is great; the mainstays of governance are exhausted in this. The lord of ten thousand chariots does not love honor, nor do the people of the realm love humility; yet if the lowly and the honored are not set forth, the king's teaching cannot be unified. If it is divided in two, there will be disorder. This is how the past sages codified laws to embody the state, about which one ought not to be confused. A person of versatile talent may gather broadly and go prepare those affairs; cultivating them at home is acceptable, but cultivating them in the state and the court is unacceptable. How could this not be clear? Examining what was stated, you truly also have not been able to clarify whether it exists or not. Even if you clarified it, I would still hold that it cannot participate in governance; how much more so when it is wholly non-existent, should it be practiced side by side?"

12.40

Third Memorial by Prefect of the Masters of Writing He Chong, Vice Director Chu Yi, and Others on Śramaṇas Not Being Obliged to Pay Homage

12.41

Your subjects, although truly benighted and unable to comprehend the distant intent, yet as far as being diligent day and night to think of cultivating the royal standards, how could we carelessly cling to a partial pipe-view and bring disorder to the great relations? It is simply because from the Han and Wei down to the Jin, we have not heard of dissenting opinions, and the laws governing the honored and the lowly have never suffered the slightest defect. Now the śramaṇas' cautious observance of precepts is single-minded, and their rituals are solely dedicated to that one purpose. As for those who observe the precepts strictly, they do not begrudge even their lives; how could they dare use their corporeal frames to show insolence toward ritual respect? Whenever we see them burning incense and chanting prayers, they invariably put the state first, desiring the flourishing of its blessings, their sentiments boundless, revering the superior and exalting compliance out of nature. The simplicity of their rites and ceremonies is simply due to their single-minded adherence to the Dharma. Therefore, when the former sages governed the world, they followed this and did not change it. The net of heaven is vast, wide-meshed yet letting nothing slip. We subjects sincerely hold that not making them bow brings no defect to the law. If we benefit them in accordance with what is advantageous to them and cause both the worthy and the foolish to dare use their full devotion, then above there will be the bestowal of heaven's canopy and earth's support, and below there will be people who hold fast to unity and cultivate the good. We respectfully state our foolish and shallow views again, hoping to receive Your examination and inspection. Respectfully submitted. At that time, Yu Bing's proposal was shelved, and in the end [śramaṇas] were not made to pay homage.

12.42

Huan Xuan's Letter to the Eight Ministers Discussing the Matter of Monks Paying Homage

12.43

Xuan bows twice, speaks, and bows his head. The eighth day is approaching. Formerly, all the śramaṇas did not pay homage to rulers. Although He [Chong] and Yu [Bing] debated it, they both followed what they saw and did not subdue each other through principle. Yu's intention was to honor the lord, but his principles and evidence were not complete. He's view arose from biased faith, and so lost both name and essence. As for the transformation of the Buddha, although it is vast and boundless, posited beyond seeing and hearing, yet it takes respect as its root. In this regard there is no difference; what is aspired to may be distinct, but it is not that reverent respect should be abandoned. Laozi equated kings and dukes with the Three Greats. Tracing what he valued, it all lies in nourishing life and circulating the movement [of Dao]. Could it be solely because sages were on the throne that he compared them to the Two Powers? It must be because the great virtue of heaven and earth is called life; and to nourish life and govern things rests with the ruler. Therefore, the divine vessel is honored and the rituals are truly exalted. How could it be that rulers are vainly exalted merely because the duty lies in royal governance? The means by which śramaṇas nourish life and sustain their existence are also daily used in the ordering of life. How could they receive its virtue yet discard its rituals, partake of its benefits yet abandon its respect? Since it is not tolerated by principle, it is also unsettling to human feeling. As a great matter of a whole era, we should seek the proper mean together. I hope we can investigate it fully with one another, so that by the eighth day it may be determined in detail. Huan Xuan bows twice and bows his head. Respectfully stated.

12.44

Reply of the Eight Ministers (This piece is taken from the Historical Precedents)

12.45

General of the Central Army, Prefect of the Masters of Writing, Huan Qian, Founding Marquis of Yiyang, and others, in dread and terror of capital punishment, respectfully receive the instruction regarding having śramaṇas pay homage to rulers. Although He and Yu debated it, they did not reach the bottom of it after all. This is a great matter, and it should be made just right, truly as in your refined discussion. However, the Buddhist Dharma and Yao and Confucius have different directions; ritual teachings directly run contrary to it. People regard hair and skin as weighty, yet [monks] shave them without hesitation. Leaving the family and abandoning relatives, they do not regard serving with pleasant countenance as filial piety. Viewing their corporeal frames as dirt and wood, they sever desire and stop contention; not looking to a single lifetime, they seek blessings for ten thousand kalpas. What the world values, they have cast away; what ritual teachings prioritize, they have severed all thought of. Serving the father and serving the lord are the utmost of natural ties; yet if they still leave their kin and loved ones, how could they pay ritual homage to the sovereign of ten thousand chariots? The situation naturally requires that it be omitted. Over three generations, they have been left outside the reins; this must be because the divine spirits have no fixed direction, showing that they are not restrained by rigid boundaries. Beyond seeing and hearing, there may perhaps be other principles. If we now make them pay respect, we fear that the things to be changed would be many, not only bowing and rising. Furthermore, when rulers revere the Dharma, it arises from respect and faith in its principles; yet to alter their ceremonies is again something not yet understood in human feeling. To accommodate them as they are is indeed the greatness of 'being lenient and forgiving.' Director Wang has separately replied to your difficult question. Kong Guo and Zhang Chang are there; I imagine they have already consulted you face-to-face regarding their thoughts. Dao Bao and the other monks are all sufficient to reply to your noble intentions. Subordinates like us do not understand Buddhist principles; speaking merely from our feelings, we are ashamed that it is not worth reading. Qian and others in dread and capital punishment.

12.46

Huan Xuan's Letter to Director Wang Discussing the Matter of Monks Being Obliged to Pay Homage to the King

12.47

The śramaṇas matching rituals with the Supreme Sovereign is precisely what is unsettling to human feelings. As a great matter of an era, we should discuss it thoroughly together. The letter to the Eight Ministers has just been dispatched to the capital. Now I send this with this courier. You are someone suitable to undertake this principle; I await hearing your virtuous voice.

12.48

Director Wang's Reply to Huan [Xuan]'s Letter

First 48 of 112 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

弘明集 — 僧祐, Classical Chinese