廣弘明集 14.6

14.6

我皇誕膺天命弘濟區宇。覆等蒼旻載均厚地。掃氛祲清八。表救塗炭寧兆。民五教敬敷九功惟。序總萬古之徽。猷改百王之餘弊。網羅庶善。崇三寶以津梁。芟夷群惡。屏四部之稊莠。遵付囑之遺旨。弘紹隆之要術。功德崇高昊天罔喻。但縉紳之士祖述多途。各師所學異論鋒起。或謂三王無佛而年永。二石有僧而政虐。損化由於奉佛。益國在於廢僧。苟明偏見未申通理。博考興亡足證浮偽。何則亡秦者胡亥。時無佛而土崩。興佛者漢明。世有僧而國治。周除佛寺。而天元之祚未永。隋弘釋教。而開皇之令無虐。盛衰由布政。治亂在庶官。歸咎佛僧寔非通論。且佛唯弘善不長惡。於臣民戒本防非。何損治于家國。若人人守善家家奉戒。則刑罰何得而施。禍亂無由而作。騏驥雖駿。不乘無以致遠。藥石徒豐。未餌焉能愈疾。項籍喪師。非范曾之無算。石氏興虐。豈浮圖之不仁。但為違之而暴亂。未有遵之而兇虐。由此觀之。亦足明矣。復有謂正覺為妖神比淨施於淫祀。訾而謗之無所不至。聖朝勸善。立伽藍以崇福。迷民起謗。反功德以為尤。此深訕上非徒毀佛。愚竊撫心而太息。所以發憤而含毫者也。忝賴皇恩預霑法雨。切瑳所惑積稔於茲。信隨聞起疑因解滅。昔甞苟訾而不信。今則篤信而無毀。近推諸己廣以量人。凡百輕毀而弗欽。皆為討論之未究。若令探賾索隱。功齊於澄什。必皆深信篤敬。志均於名僧矣。師政學匪鉤深識不臻妙。少有所聞微去其惑。謹課庸短著論三篇。辯惑第一明邪正之通蔽。通命第二辯殃慶之倚伏。空有第三破斷常之執見。覈之以群言。考之以眾善。上顯聖朝之淨福。下折淫祀之虛誹。徒有斯意寔乏其才。屬辭鄙陋援證膚淺。雖竭愚勤何宣聖德。庶同病而未愈者。聞淺譬而深悟也。如藩籬之卉或蠲疾於腹心。藜藿之餐儻救餒于溝壑。若金丹在目玉饌盈案。顧瞻菲薄良足陋矣。

Our Emperor has gloriously received Heaven's mandate and vastly aided the realm. His canopy matches the blue heavens, and his support equals the thick earth. He has swept away baleful vapors, purified the eight bounds, rescued people from the mud and coals, and brought peace to millions of subjects. The five teachings are respectfully disseminated; the nine achievements are brought into order. He gathers the splendid guidelines of all antiquity, and remedies the lingering defects of the hundred kings. Encompassing all goodness, he venerates the triratna as a ford and a bridge; mowing down all evils, he clears away the weeds among the four assemblies. Following the entrusted final behests, he broadens the essential methods of succession. His merits and virtues are lofty; the vast heavens cannot be compared [to them]. Yet among the gentry and scholars, their ancestral traditions pursue multiple paths; each follows what he has learned, and diverse arguments bristle like lance-points. Some say that under the Three Kings there was no Buddha yet their reigns were long, while the two Shi rulers had monks yet their government was tyrannical; that the decline of good rule stems from revering the Buddha, and the benefit of the state lies in abolishing monks. Merely airing one-sided views, they have not put forward comprehensive principles. A broad examination of rise and fall is sufficient to prove their falsehood. Why so? The one who destroyed the Qin was Huhai, when there was no Buddha, yet the empire crumbled; the one who promoted Buddhism was Emperor Ming of the Han, when the era had monks, yet the state was well-governed. The Northern Zhou eliminated Buddhist monasteries, yet the reign of Tianyuan was not prolonged; the Sui promoted the teaching of Śākya, yet the decrees of Kaihuang were not tyrannical. Prosperity and decline depend on the dissemination of government; order and chaos rest with the officials. To cast the blame onto the Buddha and monks is truly not a valid argument. Furthermore, the Buddha solely promotes good and does not foster evil; for ministers and subjects, the precepts guard against wrongdoing. How could this harm the governing of family and state? If every person keeps the good and every family observes the precepts, how could punishments ever be applied, and on what grounds could disaster and chaos arise? Though a steed be swift, without riding it one cannot reach afar; though medicines be abundant, without ingesting them how can they cure illness? Xiang Yu's loss of his army was not due to Fan Zeng's lack of strategy; the Shi family's tyranny, was that the fault of Fotudeng's lack of benevolence? It is only that they violated him and became violent and chaotic; there has never been one who followed him and became ferocious or cruel. Viewed in this light, it is abundantly clear. Furthermore, there are those who call the Perfectly Enlightened One a demonic spirit, and liken pure generosity to illicit sacrifices, heaping slander and calumny without end. The Sagely Court encourages goodness, erecting saṅghārāmas to exalt blessings; yet deluded people raise slander, conversely taking merit and virtue as faults. This deeply disparages the sovereign, not merely defaming the Buddha. I foolishly stroke my chest and sigh deeply; this is why I am stirred with indignation and take up my brush. Having humbly relied on imperial grace and shared in the rain of Dharma, I have polished away my doubts over accumulated years. Faith arose with hearing, and doubts dissolved through understanding. In the past, I once heedlessly criticized and did not believe; today, I believe wholeheartedly without slander. Deducing from myself and evaluating others widely, whenever the common crowd lightly disparages and does not revere, it is entirely because their investigation has not been exhaustive. If they were made to probe the subtle and seek the hidden, matching their efforts to Fotudeng and Kumārajīva, they would surely all have deep faith and devout respect, matching their aspirations to the famous monks. My learning does not penetrate the deep, and my knowledge does not attain the wondrous; but having heard a little, I have slightly removed doubts. I have respectfully exerted my modest ability to compose a treatise in three essays: 'Dispelling Doubts' is the first, clarifying the accessibility and obstruction of heterodoxy and orthodoxy; 'Understanding Destiny' is the second, distinguishing the reliance and latency of calamity and blessing; 'Emptiness and Existence' is the third, shattering the rigid views of annihilation and permanence. I have checked them against the words of many, and verified them with all kinds of good deeds. Above, they make manifest the pure blessings of the Sagely Court; below, they crush the empty slanders of illicit sacrifices. I merely harbor this intent, but truly lack the talent; my wording is vulgar and base, and my citations superficial. Though exhausting my humble diligence, how can it proclaim the Sagely Virtue? I hope that those who share the same illness and have not yet recovered, upon hearing shallow analogies, will deeply awaken. Just as a plant from the hedge might cure a disease of the heart, or a meal of coarse greens might save someone from starving in the gutters—if the golden elixir were before one's eyes, and jade delicacies filled the table, looking back on such meager things would indeed be contemptible."