弘明集 4

English (machine translation) 4

Language: English

4.1

Compiled by the śramaṇa Sengyou of Jianchu Monastery in Yangdu under the Liang

4.2

Treatise on Fathoming the Nature, by He Chengtian
Refutation by Yan Yanzhi, Guanglu Daifu

When the two modes [Heaven and Earth] took their positions, the emperors and kings joined them as a third; within the universe none is more exalted. Heaven is divided by yin and yang; Earth is utilized through firmness and yield; Man is established by benevolence and righteousness. Without Heaven and Earth, Man is not born; without Man, Heaven and Earth are not efficacious. The Three Powers share the same essence and mutually rely upon each other to come to fruition. Therefore [Man] can receive a clear and harmonious qi, and his spirit is exceptionally penetrating. His sentiments synthesize past and present, and his wisdom encompasses the myriad things. His subtle thoughts plumb the deepest mysteries, and his fabrications equal the work of creation. Those to whom humanity and capability are attributed become rulers and leaders. They nurture the common people and assist Heaven in propagating virtue. The sun and moon are pure and bright; the four spiritual creatures arrive. Auspicious winds harmonize with the musical pitch-pipes, and the jade candle radiates its glow. The nine grains, the domestic beasts, the produce of the land and the broods of the waters—the hundred varieties of sour and salty flavors—furnish their provisions. Frameworks of buildings, boats and carriages, the melting of metals and blending of clay, silk, ramie, black and yellow fabrics furnish their implements and garments. Adorned with rites and standards, delighted with the eight tones, materials are gathered and living things bred, with nothing not provided. Now, when the people's consumption is frugal, they are easily satisfied; when easily satisfied, their strength is surplus; when their strength is surplus, their will and sentiments are tranquil; and the desire to delight in good order arises from this. When affairs are simple, there is no disturbance; when there is no disturbance, the spirit is efficacious; when the spirit is efficacious, plans and deliberations are prudent; and the tasks of beneficial governance are accomplished thereby. Therefore, Heaven and Earth instruct the people with frugality and plainness; Qian and Kun demonstrate to man through the easy and simple. The reason they instruct and reveal with such earnest diligence is precisely this profound. How could [man] be lumped together with those that fly, sink, squirm, and crawl as 'sentient beings'? As for those living creatures, one takes them at the proper season and uses them according to the Dao. Setting fire awaits strong winds; hunting and fishing wait for the wild dogs and otters [to hunt first]—this is how one accords with Heaven's seasons. A grand officer does not take fawns or eggs; commoners do not use close-meshed nets; singing the 'Rush-leaves' poem and extending transformation even to the nighttime fish—this is how one loves and utilizes things. Keeping away from the slaughterhouse and kitchen, observing caution regarding the five offenses, the Yin sovereign changing the prayer [over the nets], Confucius fishing with a line but not a net—this is how one illuminates the way of benevolence. When it comes to life, there must be death; when the corporeal form is exhausted, the spirit disperses, just as spring flourishes and autumn withers, the four seasons alternating in turn. How could there be any further receiving of a corporeal form? The Classic of Poetry says: 'The genial and courteous gentleman / Seeks blessings without deviation'—this means that magnifying the Dao rests with oneself. 'The three former kings are in heaven'—this means that the refined spirit has ascended far away. As for harboring cravings within while outwardly dreading expedient teachings, brooding deeply upon future rebirth, and bestowing gifts while hoping for recompense—the former masters of antiquity never spoke of such things. I am indeed unperceptive and know not how to pursue such matters.

4.5

Explaining [the Critique of] He of Hengyang's 'Treatise on Arriving at the Nature [of Things]'

4.6

Yan Yanzhi

4.7

Previously I received your treatise and perceived therein your profound and broad considerations: you elevate and exalt the human way while degrading and distancing the animal species. Phenomena have clear evidence, and your points do not deviate from righteousness. Regulating sentiments and aiding the teachings, it is enough to make rival schools sweep away their tracks. How much more so for one who seeks harmony—how could I forget what to align with? Yet I fear only that if the qin and se lutes are played on a single note, the harmony of the performance will be lost once more. Therefore, I briefly expand on several points to fully elicit your later reply. You state that those who 'share the same essence with the two modes and together form the Three Powers' must refer to those who unify their virtue, not an appellation for ordinary men. However, generally designating the various species under the common title of 'sentient beings' is likewise an appellation for all that possess consciousness; how could it be an honorary title for superior sages? Thus, those who discuss the Three Powers do not include serfs and slaves, and those who speak of sentient beings—how do they improperly confound sages and the wise? Although one's sentiments lie in distinguishing ranks, there is naturally no worry of throwing the human relations into disorder. If one can draw upon both textual traditions and uphold both together, penetrating the principles, moderating their differences, setting aside the phrasing of the one and adopting the substance of the other, then through their shared reality the double gong notes can be self-harmonized and the split tally brought back together. Why should you be so disgruntled, clinging to the lü pitch-pipe to destroy the lü standard? Furthermore, 'the great virtue [of Heaven and Earth] is called life'; the myriad beings all share it, and what they share is their myriad being—how could the life [of each] be deemed different? Life that is not different should properly be considered 'sentient [multitude]'. It is only that among the multitude of categories, stupidity and wisdom differ in varying degrees. Humans employ creatures for their nourishment, and creatures are employed to nourish humans. Though at first this might accord with the natural order, in the end it leads to slaughter and destruction. The myriad desires sprout and cravings cannot be restrained; the harm to life is vast and cruel, and heavenly principle is stifled and extinguished. The August Sage pitied this state of affairs, but being unable abruptly to snatch away their attachments, he established the teachings on awaiting the seasons for creatures and was scrupulous regarding the classic texts on according with the seasons, intending thereby to unfold benevolence, nurture sentience, and gradually restore tranquility. Those who take the Dao as their mind might not stop at these limits. Furthermore, I know that by the great standard, birth and death are equated with flourishing and withering; looking at the various realms of existence, it is indeed fitting to be so. Yet in the preservation or extinction of the spiritual principle, perhaps it differs from withered roots changing and decaying? If it were identical to plants and trees, it should simply turn to smoke and vanish. Yet you also state that 'the three former kings have ascended far away, their refined spirits are in heaven.' If the refined spirit must exist, and thus truly differs from plants and trees, then would not the doctrine of receiving a corporeal form [again] gain further support? Is it not because of the pure goodness of the three former kings that their retribution is to be born in heaven? Wishing to refute future rebirth, you instead establish ascending to the heights; what was to be refuted is rather reaffirmed—truly we know it cannot be eliminated by effort. If there is merely a refined spirit without bodily form, I do not know on what it relies to establish itself in heaven. I am timid about making court-like judgments, and therefore strive to seek models to rely upon; yet deliberating back and forth, I have not attained peace of mind. Everything within the compass of qi and destiny inevitably elicits a response. The way of giving and retribution is an inevitable tally. Stating that it must tally—why suspect it of being done with anticipation? Therefore, one who leaves behind favors makes no demands, but one who preserves merit has an expectation. That an expectation is preserved does not vitiate the virtue of the favor; indeed, people may be worthy or unworthy, and thus their intentions may be public-spirited or private. One cannot, merely because some people look for a reward, assert that all cultivation of virtue involves demands. Moreover, the constant saying of worldly times values that the giver should not remember it, and a gentleman adhering to righteousness gives favors without possessing them. How much more so for those who hear the essentials of the Dao—could it be that they cannot have an empty mind, but must act always harboring cravings and dreading expedient teachings in every matter? You fail to guide them to ascend above, and ever drive them to sink below. Though you rebuke and take them to task deeply, you yourself have already spoken profusely without restraint. Your defended city has always been strong, making it difficult for an arrow-borne letter to penetrate; and as I dwell in sorrow and distress, my sentiments and thoughts have nothing to rely upon. Having recently received your honorable missive, I wished to spread out my thoughts, compose a reply, and resolve doubts, though I fear it may not hit the mark. Yan Yanzhi speaks.

4.8

In Reply to Yan of Yongjia

4.9

I respectfully read your fragrant letter and examined its profound tenets. You distinguish the Three Powers and verify their refined essence; you expound the mind of the Dao and praise the gentleman who practices giving; you synthesize the hidden and the manifest, extending sincerity to reach all things. To practice this oneself is fine; to spread it as a teaching is broad. There is almost nothing to criticize. Upon reflecting on where your fine instruction leads, it seeks to make me look toward the Northern Dipper, return from confusion to the right path, and reflect on what I might have been too blind to fully comprehend. Therefore I reiterate my original intention. You state that those who 'together form the Three Powers' must refer to those who unify their virtue. Even among men of superior wisdom, how could that be so? The way of establishing man is derived from benevolence and righteousness. The feeling of commiseration is the external mark of the benevolent; the sense of shame and dislike is the beginning of a righteous mind. The trees of Mount Niu had their nature sheared away by axes; tranquil thoughts are turbidly agitated by deliberations of gain and harm. If one genuinely nurtures their sprouting and aids their good mind, yet they are preserved without being counted, would that not be a fault? You also state: 'Those who discuss the Three Powers do not include serfs and slaves, and those who speak of sentient beings—how do they improperly confound sages and the wise?' Having heard your instruction, I still do not know by what criterion the two paths are to be distinguished. Are Yi Yin and Yan Hui to be demoted below, and Ning Wuzao, Zichan, and Jizha attached above? I look forward without weariness to having my lack of understanding dispelled. If we can truly uphold both textual traditions together, harmonizing the tones and matching the tallies, would that not be the ultimate good? You also say: ''The great virtue [of Heaven and Earth] is called life'; the myriad beings all share it, and what they share is their myriad being—how could the life [of each] be deemed different?' I do not say this is not so. Although human life equally receives the great virtue, humans cannot be called 'sentient beings' [among beasts]. For example, although the sage shares the endowment of the five constants, he cannot be called an 'ordinary man.' Why take life that is not different as necessarily meaning it must be 'sentient [multitude]'? Your letter says: 'Humans employ creatures for their nourishment, and creatures are employed to nourish humans.' If the general distinction is like this, then you turn around and agree with my humble opinion. As for cravings being unrestrained and harming living things with cruelty, what is termed excess and extravagance—the sages indeed already eliminated them. You also say: 'Those who take the Dao as their mind might not stop at these limits.' May I ask, as for those who do not stop: will they themselves not kill, or will they make all who receive the teachings do the same? If they do not kill themselves but obtain enough from the market stalls, this is still keeping away from the slaughterhouse and kitchen. If you wish to extend this to registered households, I see that your elegant argument cannot be established. You also say: 'If it were identical to plants and trees, it should simply turn to smoke and vanish; on what does the refined spirit rely to establish itself in heaven?' Now, the spirit and soul are indistinct and fleeting, and the wandering soul undergoes transformations; when aroused and made sorrowful, how could it not be so? Zilu was rebuffed concerning knowing death; Zigong erred in what he asked about. Not receiving a corporeal form again was clearly stated in my previous treatise; as for the means on which it relies, please refer to the Master's reply. As for the way of giving and retribution being an inevitable tally, this should refer to the tall gate of the Yu family awaiting the celebration of accumulated goodness, or Bo Yang not boasting and receiving the blessing of dukes and marquises; what has this to do with a future rebirth? You also say: 'The constant saying of worldly times values that the giver should not remember it, and a gentleman adhering to righteousness gives favors without possessing them.' True indeed are these words! A subtle and smooth way sets up retribution to solicit favors—this is what preachers prioritize. Delighting in retribution while granting favors is the common practice of the whole world. Fearing to suffer the guilt of cumulative kalpas through the scriptures, and giving diligently to reap a manifold multiplied retribution—this does not resemble how our party practices the Dao. This is why I am disgruntled. Knowing that you wish to guide them to ascend above, I do not begrudge it at all. But a gentleman who abides in reality disdains the flash of foreknowledge, and therefore does not do it. If a gift does not relieve urgent need, and a favor is given merely to register merit, would not those of high discernment also feel ashamed? This is my constant mind that I follow and have long remained unchanged in; inwardly I feel ashamed before Bo Yuzi, having no leisure for what you have stated. He Chengtian speaks.

4.10

Further Explanation for He of Hengyang

4.11

I have slightly followed the affairs of the seasons, personally harvesting the mountain fields. In the lulls of the farming household, elderly peasants are my companions. My speech stops at grain and crops, and my efforts are spent entirely on plowing and herding. Discussing the year's yield and counting the plow-pairs, I hear nothing of lofty principles. Having received your subtle argumentation once again, it has brought me clarity and solace. Your instructive letter is exquisitely thorough, making me feel ever more ashamed of my obstinacy. Now, having once again forgotten my former intention to lay down the brush, I set forth what remains unsaid.
Examining principles by relying on one's own ideas is not as good as analyzing them through the sacred texts. The discourse on the Three Powers must indeed be based on the three lines [of the hexagram]. Once the three lines are laid out, the middle line represents the virtue of the ruler. This is why its spirit reaches to the Supreme and exalts the One Sovereign. Therefore, I previously stated that unless one embodies harmony with Heaven and Earth, one cannot properly respond [to this position]. You have profoundly investigated this with pure thought, yet you are unwilling to agree, still fearing that an inclusive embrace would discard nothing and broad containment would leave nothing out. While your intent to treat all things with earnestness is truly generous and abundant, I fear the proper order of principle and status will become confused and disordered, and those mimicking real virtue will only multiply.
If the arising of compassion exhausts the measure of universal love, and the practice of shame at evil carries to the utmost the rectitude of helping the upright, then that is supreme benevolence and supreme righteousness, and I would find no fault in it. But those who practice it out of true feeling are few, while those who exploit it for profit are many. Those who merely partake in their share of it without reaching its culmination cannot be matched with the Two Modes (Heaven and Earth). Now, we should make those who have reached the culmination our teachers, and take those who have not reached it as our raw material, fostering their respect and yielding, removing their malice and contention, causing axes to be melted into blades and self-interest to be put to rest, thus guiding the people of a hundred generations onto the path of trust and honesty. Then what sprout would not flourish, and what good would not be aided? To falsely accuse me of ‘not counting them’ does not grasp my meaning.
The Three Powers stand on an equal footing; one must not take those of one-sided talent as their vessels. 'Sentient beings' is a general designation; one must not blur it with those who have realized the Unborn. Therefore, here we exclude the commoners and slaves, and there we single out the sagely and wise. The simultaneous adduction of both sets of texts was intended precisely for this. If Zichan and Ji Zha could not yet unify the Dao, how could they ascend to attach themselves to the august sovereigns and kings? Since Yi Yin and Yan Hui still shared in reliance on pneumatic transformation, it is fitting that they adhere to the lower category. The distinction between the two paths is easier to grasp than the profound purport.
You also understand that although human life universally receives the Great Virtue, humans cannot be called 'sentient beings'—just as although the sages equally partake of the Five Constants, they cannot be called 'ordinary men'. That they cannot be called 'ordinary men' is because what makes a person eminent is their spiritual intelligence. Now, if they have already universally received life and are identical with the multitude, why taboo the designation of 'common multitude'? Therefore, one should distinguish their extraordinary spirit, but should not differentiate their attainment of life. Merely dreading the name of 'multitude' does not diminish the reality of the multitude. Does this not resemble the people of Shu and Liang fleeing their fears, ultimately unable to escape them?
As for what was called 'humans employing things for nourishment, and things being employed to nourish humans'—this meant that the foolish and the wise undermine each other, and the deluded and the calculating constrain one another. These matters arise from human cleverness, not from heavenly principle. For this reason, in the beginning one pities the rising of sprouts, and in the end one laments their gloomy destruction. How could this share the same purport with your domestic beasts of a hundred kinds?
In general, being stirred to action and having the good flow forth is the nature of the common people; transforming and regulating them is the achievement of the supreme sages. Even when carefully erecting fences and dikes, one still worries about overflows; how much more so when nothing is left unprovided to satisfy extravagant desires! If you are just opening the way for excess, how can you discuss eliminating extremes? Therefore, one knows that discussions of cruelty to living things cannot share joys and sorrows with petty men. The intention to kill is partial; the sentiment that loves life is broad. When it is said, 'acting with the Dao as one's mind,' it means that through broad sentiments for life, one causes emptiness to be dispelled and reality to be pursued, so that no living thing is cut short prematurely and beneficial favors reach to Heaven without being considered mere favors. How could benevolence stop at fawns and eggs, taking the habits of wolves and otters as its model?
Extrapolating this forward: not only will one personally no longer lay the blame on the markets or kitchens, but outside of markets and kitchens, there is no lack of proper nourishment. What was written by Shennong, what was described by Xi Kang (Zhongsan), what Gongli praised, and what Zhongyan perfected—these are also recorded in antiquity. Now that we have heard of such persons, why must cutting and gutting be taken as the nature that receives harmony, and scalding and boiling be the means to assist the good?
If, because the registered households are difficult to unify, you worry that my humble thesis cannot be established—this is like seeing the disobedience of the Two Uncles and fearing that the virtue of Zhou would perish prematurely. If you can extend your vision with far-reaching plans and hold to them for generations, then the daily calculations can be fulfilled and yearly achievements can be expected.
Spirit and plants are indeed already distinguished. The response concerning the 'wandering soul' is also an explanation of the spirit. If, although non-corporeal, it exists, could there ever be a non-corporeal existence under Heaven? In consideration of this, there is only doubt, which ought to be corrected and settled. Zhongni (Confucius) did not answer because existence and non-existence were not yet distinguished. Since you have distinguished its existence, how could you agree with an answer that left it undistinguished? Although you are fond of learning, I fear you have not found the proper ground to rely on. Perhaps dawn and dusk are separated by a gulf, and the hidden and the manifest are far apart, causing the bright moon to cease its illumination and worldly wisdom to delimit the mind's knowledge, believing it must match reality. When it comes to the culmination of the essence, you do not examine it, and your thoughts turn as if things were utterly inexistent. Or perhaps like worldly people holding on to uncut jade who are rebuked in the jade market, an interpreter dragged by vulgar custom returns to recount the state's conditions. If it has not yet been fully illuminated, please allow me to fully state the recent explanation once more.
In speaking of retributive giving, when one first mentions cosmic allotment, it is because things do not happen in vain; rather, each resonates according to its category. Among categoric resonances, the human mind is the greatest. The movements of the mind's arts are beyond what records and calendars can capture; by the time their accumulation reaches what can scarcely be traced to its source, how could one arbitrarily seize upon worldly opinions and rely on them as supreme evidence? Zhuang Zhou said: 'If one acts recklessly and sloppily, the retribution will be likewise.' Sun Qing (Xunzi) said: 'The dynamics of retribution arrive each according to its kind.' When future lives are clearly set forth as warnings, can one fail to revere them? A person of compassionate protection sees deeply into these numbers; thus they speak correctly of their root, rather than courting their branches. They foster beauty, check evil, bring the people back to great accord, deliver the kinds of living beings into the realm of the deathless, and cause blessings to encompass myriad things, their reverence surpassing that of the hundred spirits. How could it be fitting that their fortunes should merely culminate in offspring and their blessings be limited to ministers and chancellors? When one constantly uses goodness to rescue, goodness also follows; its dynamic is like a shadow and a gnomon, arriving of itself without premeditation—what need is there to speak of it? To demand favors, delight in rewards, doubt transgressions, and strive in giving—this seems to stem from immediate experiences, selfish sentiments, and distant suspicions of moral teaching. Thus, just as one punishes those who boast of their merit, yet blindly faults those who forget the worthy, retaining and discarding have different meanings, and public and private matters have distinct intents; this was already fully explained before, so I will not repeat it. I suppose that those who dwell in the solid and despise the superficial will once again see how to dwell in the thick and avoid the thin. If giving is not to relieve urgency, and favors are done with the expectation of praise, such a person is truly a pest to the Dao. What you feel ashamed of, I, Qiu, also feel ashamed of.

4.12

Response Again to Yan [Yansun], Magistrate of Yongjia

4.13

From my youth I trusted my narrow views, and in old age I hold to them all the more firmly. Having spoken of them, it was difficult to let them decompose within my heart; therefore, I wished to rely on the flowing wind to entrust my scales and feathers. With generous intent you have kept me in mind, kindly offering a second explanation; your citations are comprehensive and clear, and your florid language is vast and abundant. Even fine jade has occasional blemishes, which a lowly man may point out; and when the moon holds its crescent, a rustic person can gaze at its lack. How could I merely be fond of debate without having reached an end? Once again I submit questions seeking further instruction, hoping to exhaustively examine what remains blocked.
Your letter states: 'The discourse on the Three Powers must indeed be based on the three lines [of the hexagram]. Once the three lines are laid out, the middle line represents the virtue of the ruler. This is why its spirit reaches to the Supreme and exalts the One Sovereign.' If, according to the thesis of your discourse, one takes the three lines as the Three Powers, then the initial line corresponds to Earth and the third discusses the position of Heaven. However, 'withdrawing from the world without regret' is not the designation of the heavy earth, and 'the gentleman strives diligently' is not the appellation of the azure heaven. If they truly have no reliance on the Two Modes, what basis is there for establishing humans? It is only that the line lies in central harmony, and thus should correspond to the virtue of the ruler.
You also say: 'If the arising of compassion exhausts the measure of universal love, and the practice of shame at evil carries to the utmost the rectitude of helping the upright, then that is supreme benevolence and supreme righteousness.' This is to grant that those who embody benevolence and righteousness constitute the Three Powers. Then you say: 'Zichan and Ji Zha have not yet attained ascending attachment, while Yi Yin and Yan Hui should properly adhere to the lower category.' If so, even those of the 'yellow lower garment' still fall short! Although the purport of the abstruse has no standard for high and low, those who are deluded have still not awakened.
Yin and yang mold the qi; hardness and softness bestow nature. With round heads and square feet, our outward appearances do not differ; compassion and shame at evil are present in all alike. It is only that when participating in the essence of the Two Modes, one must take benevolence and righteousness as the starting point. I know you wish to restrict this with designated vessels and be cautious in what you grant, but this causes benevolent people and pure scholars to compare their nature to the feathered and furred herds, and worthy men who aspire [to goodness] to share their qi with shelled creatures! Could this truly be the intention behind establishing the symbols?

4.14

You also say: 'Now, if they have already universally received life and are identical with the multitude, why taboo the designation of "common multitude"? Therefore, one should distinguish their extraordinary spirit, but should not differentiate their attainment of life.' Since the spirit of extraordinary intelligence is different from the multitude, how could their principle of attaining life ever be identical even for a moment? Life is rooted in principle, yet principle differs; to what could the designation of 'life identical to the multitude' be attached? If you cling to this name of 'life' and insist on having it conform to the multitude, would not things formed by the chaotic blend also be included in this category?
You also say: 'Even when carefully erecting fences and dikes, one still worries about overflows; how much more so when nothing is left unprovided to satisfy extravagant desires! If you are just opening the way for excess, how can you discuss eliminating extremes?' You initially said: 'The august sages set forth teachings to observe things and carefully adhered to the classics of the seasons, in order to reverse gradual decline and halt excess.' Now you again object by saying 'just opening the way for excess.' It is unclear whether this is an objection to my humble discourse, or a criticism of the sages!
You also say: 'Outside of markets and kitchens, how could there be a lack of proper nourishment? What was written by Shennong and described by Xi Kang (Zhongsan)—why must cutting and gutting be taken as receiving harmony, and scalding and boiling be the means to assist the good?' Now, the pure sacrifices, young calves, and the three sacrificial beasts of the ancestral temple and altars of soil and grain, along with the morning fragrances and offering vessels prepared to serve guests, and the old of seventy waiting for meat to be satisfied—how could one merely lay out herbs and stones and take them as the superior medicines? What I worry cannot be established is not that your grand discourse is difficult to maintain, but upon reflection I fear that this matter cannot be abruptly abandoned in the world.
You also say: 'Could there ever be a non-corporeal existence under Heaven? In consideration of this, there is only doubt, which ought to be corrected and settled.' Examining your intention, it seems you do not reject the existence of ghosts, but rather maintain that ghosts must have material form; could you be misled because the texts of Tianzhu describe ghosts as a distinct category of living beings? In ancient times, people used ghosts and spirits as a teaching; they were listed in the canonical scriptures and spread across the bamboo tablets. Zichan of Zheng and Ji Zha of Wu also considered it to be so. Therefore, with the six changes of the Yunhe lute, heavenly spirits truly descended; with the nine completions at Longmen, both human ghosts and spirits all arrived. You, who nobly uphold the Rites of Zhou, have recently neglected this meaning; why then interrogate the 'non-corporeal existence' as a rambling and fragmented debate?

4.15

You also say: 'When future lives are clearly set forth as warnings, can one fail to revere them? A person of compassionate protection sees deeply into these numbers.' It is unclear whose child this so-called 'person of compassionate protection' is! If one relies on the doctrines of retribution in non-Buddhist texts, they are all what I call provisional teachings. Whenever examining the ultimate principle, you never analyze it using the words of the sages, but instead widely gather bizarre and uncanny tales to bolster your position. Does this not resemble using water to save [someone from] water?
You also say: 'Things do not happen in vain; rather, each resonates according to its category. When one constantly uses goodness to rescue, goodness also follows; its dynamic is like a shadow and a gnomon, arriving of itself without premeditation.' If these words are truly so, then things resonating by category must match in light and heavy, and the dynamics of the shadow and gnomon must have measure in long and short. Adorning earth and wood does not give rise to a mind of compassion; hunting in accordance with the seasons does not root a cruel and tyrannical nature. Why should the splendid joy of the heavenly palaces be awarded to ascend, and why should the dark torments of the hells be punished to plunge into? To make such sweeping declarations that reach extremes of high and low, while establishing teachings without scales or measures, has reached this point!
Furthermore, wet nurses and guardians extend their care even to filth and grease, while skilled cooks hold their knives with their hearts trembling before the maternal lineage. Those sages had radiance equal to the sun and moon, and their transformations opened the Three Beginnings. If retributive response were bound to match reality, what harm would it have been to the teaching, instead of locking it away in the records of Fuxi and Tang Yao, and burying it during the generations of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius? First tying nets to fish and hunt, giving rise to sins by the hundred million; then instituting sacrificial beasts, opening up punishments of the long night; abandoning that heavenly kitchen and relishing these domestic animals! There was never the benevolence of rescuing the drowning, yet they arbitrarily brought about the cruelty of pushing people into ditches. That this is not so should be evident to your profound reflection. If you say that even the wisdom that exhausts the spiritual still has something it could not comprehend, then although your lofty feelings love the wondrous, I imagine you have not yet reached the point of insulting the sages.

4.16

When discussing benevolence and righteousness, you say: 'Few act out of true feeling; many act for profit.' Speaking of bestowing beneficence, you allow for disregarding the worthy and forgetting repayment. Since those acting out of true feeling are already few, who can disregard the worthy? Since those acting for profit are many, how can you speak of forgetting repayment? If one can take scholars who delight in giving as the standard to look for among those wishing for benevolence, expound the idea of forgetting repayment, and distinguish the mind tending toward righteousness, then righteousness is truly found right here, and seeking benevolence is not far off. As for rescuing the classes of living beings into the realm of no death, their blessings extending over myriads of things and their veneration surpassing a hundred spirits—this purport is grandly fabricated and beyond what the original treatise encompassed. Is it not that 'when the army of Qin was about to flee, its envoy spoke insolently'? How could I be pressing you hard? Sit, and I shall tell you! When a sage is above, he does not vie for superiority with the hundred spirits. There is a beginning and there is an end; how could there be a realm of no death? Distinguishing and clarifying the unseen and manifest, thoroughly examining myriad things, up from the first knotted cords down to the flourishing of cultural teachings, their nature is led by the Dao. Therefore, they cut off designations of intimacy and praise. Violations of heaven and earth do not harm the measure of universal love. Hunting and fishing nourish both the worthy and the base. The catches of the three grades indeed fill the banquet halls and kitchens. Metal and stone sound forth brilliance; pipes and flutes harmonize the measure. 'Intoxicated with wine, sated with virtue, aiding these ten thousand years.' Those who dwell in retirement broaden the enterprise that renews daily; those who serve in office propagate the teachings of former kings. Sincerity is manifest to the enlightened lord; moisture extends over myriad creatures. Dragon-patterned robes adorn the spectacle; ringing jades regulate the pace. This is indeed the joyous realm of Yao and Confucius! When unappreciated, one 'reclines in the valley of Kao' to cultivate one's own person; one kills a chicken and makes millet merely to lodge one's feelings. Some bore tripods and engaged in butchering and cooking to spread their illustrious names for ages to come; others slaughtered sheep and brandished knives, their high ambitions transcending the floating clouds. Such is also the mindset of the gentleman. Why must one demean the extending of blessings through accumulated goodness, longing without proof for future lifetimes, turning one's back in this life on genuine joy while alive, wearily toiling in vain without a destination? Chasing the wind and catching shadows is not the beauty of the Mean; admiring foreigners and being dazzled by the bizarre departs from the attainment of comprehensive minds. Squatting in homage and bowing in yielding can ultimately never stand together. I venture to wish that you, my friend, would discard duality and follow unity. As for the two masters of Shu and Liang, and the worldly metaphor of relay couriers and runners, they are not pertinent to the original thesis; hence I will not discuss them in full again.

4.17

Further Explanation to [Governor] He of Hengyang

4.18

The sagely deliberations are hard to fathom, and spiritual responses cannot be measured. As the Master of Central Scattering [Xi Kang] said, 'Those of middling capacity exhaust themselves, yet none can find their beginning.' How could shallow shores probe and draw from them? It is merely that Emperor Wen of Wei's asbestos cloth was recorded as an anomaly in another age, and Teng Xun's shrimp whiskers brought shame upon his contemporaries; hence with matters beyond regular measures, one is timorous about judging them arbitrarily. You have already examined their reality and falsehood, and are now recording them for immortality, uniquely discerning their firmness and refinement. It is hard to raise further doubts. I merely write down my remaining thoughts, resolving them point by point in accordance with your reply. The affairs intertwine misfortune and blessing; the concepts mingle the barbarian and the Huaxia. Although aiming for concise statements, it spontaneously amounts to a wordy text. Beyond this, I wish to say no more.

4.19

[He Chengtian's] Reply: If, according to the thesis, one takes the three strokes as the Three Powers, then the initial stroke corresponds to the Earth line, and the third line discusses the Heavenly position. However, 'withdrawing from the world without regret' is not an appellation for 'thickly supporting' [Earth]; 'the gentleman diligently toils' is not a title for 'the azure expanse' [Heaven]. If indeed the Two Poles have nothing to rely upon, what is to be drawn upon to establish humanity? It is simply that when the line is centered and harmonious, it appropriately corresponds to the ruler's virtue.

4.20

Explanation: I have heard from former scholars that the pure symbols began with three strokes, and the combined hexagrams concluded with six lines. The three strokes established the foundation, the positions of the Three Powers. When the six lines have not yet changed, they are what the host of dragons traverses. Therefore, after the hexagrams were doubled, they were clarified through withdrawal and office. Thus, withdrawing from the world, diligently toiling, lying hidden, and acting together are the sage's timely righteousness, a way that combines them. If, because the initial line is not Earth and the third position is not Heaven, one considers the Two Poles to have nothing to rely upon and nothing to be drawn upon to establish humanity, I do not know where your previous discussion that the Three Powers share a single essence arose from. If you still receive it from the Great Treatise [Xici] and do not transgress ancestral instruction, why do you uniquely obtain it in doubled hexagrams yet lose it in single emblems? If outside the text of righteousness there are separate Three Powers, this is merely a new idea from the Spring and Autumn period, of which I have no knowledge. Moreover, although 'withdrawing from the world' and 'diligently toiling' are not the names of covering and supporting, within a single essence they have not lost the reality of low and high. How can one, through words describing change and motion, abolish the principle of establishing the foundation? You also realize that because the line is centered and harmonious, it should correspond to the ruler's virtue. If there were merely a centered and harmonious line yet ultimately no centered and harmonious person, what would the line emulate? If center and harmony lie in virtue, one cannot have a person who turns his back on center and harmony. The thesis of essential union certainly cannot be dismissed.

4.21

Reply: Superior benevolence and superior righteousness mean allowing those who embody benevolence and righteousness to constitute the Three Powers. Searching further, you also said: 'Zheng Qiao and Wu Zha failed to ascend above; Yi Yin and Yan Hui appropriately attached below.' Then even a person of 'yellow skirts' still falls short. Although profound purports have no fixed standard of high and low, those who are confused remain unenlightened.

4.22

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?

4.23

Reply: Yin and yang fashion the qi; hardness and softness endow the nature. With round heads and square feet, their nocturnal appearances do not differ. Commiseration and shame at evil are everywhere in the broad throng. But in participating in the essence of the Two Poles, one must certainly take benevolence as the starting point.

4.24

Explanation: If you say that having a round head and square feet must entail sharing the reality of shame and commiseration, and that because nocturnal appearances do not differ, all can participate in the essence of the Two Poles, should the gangs of Zhi and Qiao also be counted among the Three Powers? If they truly cannot, one must not, seeing the shared feature of horizontal eyes, place them in the same ranks as the great man. The measures of the broad throng are difficult to equate. As it is said, 'The benevolent rest in benevolence; the wise profit from benevolence.' It is also said: 'Exerting oneself borders on benevolence; fearing punishment forces one to benevolence.' If you equate them all to the correct position, truth and falsehood will be confused. Zhuang Zhou said: 'In the world, good people are few, and bad people are many.' If their divisions are like this, how can you say 'they are everywhere'?

4.25

Reply: Knowing that you wish to restrict them through names and vessels, conforming to what they temporarily borrow, you thus make benevolent people and pure scholars equate their natures with the hairy herds, and worthy men who approximate sages share their qi with armored creatures. Could this be the intention of establishing emblems?

4.26

Explanation: Names and vessels are limited genuinely because endowment and essence are incomplete. Even if one wishes to borrow them, what can be done about 'doubtful light'? Containing sentience to become human cannot be shared by the hairy herds; receiving qi to generate life is not something pure scholars can differ in. The emblems emulate their spirit, not their living existence; equating them as one—is this not deceptive and reckless?

4.27

Reply: You say that having already been equally covered as identical with the multitude, and so forth. Since the spirit of extraordinary sentience is distinct from the multitude, how could the principle of obtaining life ever be momentarily identical? Life is rooted in principle, yet the principles differ. Where is the designation of life that is identical with the multitude to attach? If one insists on this designation of life and forces it to follow the multitude, then will that thing formed in chaos also be included in the category?

4.28

Explanation: Previously, I said that being identical in what is myriad, how could the obtaining of life be different? You replied that you did not consider this incorrect, and further said: 'Why take life that is not different as necessarily being the multitude?' This eliminates my 'being the multitude' while accepting my 'not different.' How could there be what is not different yet not the multitude? That is why I said again: 'Therefore one should distinguish its extraordinary sentience and should not make different its obtaining of life.' Now your reply again says: 'How could the principle of obtaining life ever be momentarily identical? Life is rooted in principle, yet the principles differ.' May I ask whether the principle of obtaining life is still yin and yang? I do not see its difference, yet you say it has never momentarily been identical. If there is a different principle that is no longer illumination and vapor, then outside yin and yang there would be another path of receiving life; how could the three times be established? If you make the life formed in chaos share its qi with things, how could it be called 'formed in chaos'? If one merely borrows the name of life without seeing the reality of life, then it is not an equivalent of what was said before. Saying life is not life is just having a thing that is not a thing. This saying of Old Master Li [Laozi] perhaps has another meaning. To interrogate existence through non-existence is quite inappropriate.

4.29

Reply: You say: 'Scrupulously making walls and embankments,' and so forth. At first you said: 'The august sage established teachings that observe things, scrupulously following the classic of seasonal appropriateness, intending thereby to reverse gradual decay and halt excess.' Now you again raise difficulties regarding 'just opening up what is excessive.' It is not clear whether this is to challenge my humble opinion or to ridicule the sages.

4.30

Explanation: Previously, observing your original treatise from the nine grains down to Confucius angling but not using a net, I first came to know that your lofty opinion holds that all ruling and making stemmed from the sages, who personally acted as master craftsmen to lead the common people below. In my solitary, humble, and clumsy view, I personally consider that whenever something is undertaken, every movement must have a cause, and the sages accordingly set regulations for it so that they would not exceed bounds. The great divergence between these two views is where you and I differ. I wished to regulate their luxurious trends; hence there was the talk of halting excess. You are now explaining comprehensive preparations; I do not know where you remove excess to hit the mark. Your reply also says: 'As for what is called excess, the sages have already removed it.' Not understanding this meaning, I recently questioned you again about what is excessive. The reply said: 'It is not clear who is being challenged,' perhaps forgetting your own previous response.

4.31

Reply: You say: 'Outside the market kitchens,' and so forth. Offering purified sacrifices and buried offerings, calves with horns like cocoon-chestnuts, and the three victims for the ancestral temple and altars of soil and grain; offering fragrant bean-platters and meat-stands to supply guests; elders of seventy waiting for meat to be satisfied—how could one only lay out grass and stones and procure superior medicines? What I worry cannot be established is not to say that the grand thesis is hard to maintain, but rather, stepping back, I suspect this matter cannot be abruptly eliminated from the world.

4.32

Explanation: Shennong determined livelihoods, and the people of Zhou completed teachings. Having initiated grain eating, they also spoke of superior medicines; having used sacrificial beasts, they also praised duckweed and water-pepper. The way of sacrificial banqueting thus has no fixed prescription. Previously, citing that outside the market kitchens there are further nutritional foods was intended to point out the stagnation of old butchering and boiling, so as to clarify that prolonging life is not singular; it did not mean that the affairs of ordering the world should entirely procure grass and stones. However, the efficacy of domestic animals rarely reaches a hundred years of age, whereas the excellence of lingzhi and atractylodes is frequently heard to bring a thousand years. Judged from this, why must an elder of seventy owe gratitude to a meat diet? It is only that those who confine themselves to a single domain have no technique other than this. I expect that 'not abruptly eliminating it from the world' is still what was said in the previous explanation: being unable to abruptly deprive people of their fixations. Having just achieved agreement, dare I not praise its goodness? Since you know it cannot be abruptly eliminated, perhaps you do not claim that the Dao ends here.

First 32 of 54 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

弘明集 — 僧祐, Classical Chinese