廣弘明集 18.17

18.17

近見君釋疑論。蓋即情之作。料檢理要殆乎有。中但審分命之守似未照其本耳。福善莫驗亦僕所常惑。雖周覽六籍逾深其滯。及覩經教始昭然有歸。故請以先覺語當今之學者也。君以為審分命所鍾可無祈驗於冥中餘慶之言在於勸教。請審分命之旨。為當宅情於理任而弗營邪。為忘懷闇昧直置而已邪。若宅情於理則理未可喻。善惡紛互逆順莫檢。苟非冥廢豈得弗營。若直置而已。則自非坐忘事至必感。感因於事則情亦昇降。履信獲祐何能不慶。為惡弗罰焉得無怨。雖欲忘懷其可得乎。靖求諸己其效明矣。又勸教之設必傍實而動。直為訓之方不可一塗而盡。故或若反而後會。或曉昧於為言。是以塗車芻靈堂室異詔。或顯其遠或徵其近。令循教之徒不苟求於分表。飲和之士自足於仁義。故深淺並訓而民聽不濫。而神明之賾蘊於妙物。豈得顯稱積善。正位履霜而事與教反理與言違。夷齊自得於安忍。顏冉長悲於履和。恐有為之言或異於此。若謂商臣之徒教所不及汲引之端蓋中智已還。而安于懷仁不沒其身。臧會以僭有後魯國。則分命所鍾於何而審。玄明之唱更為疑府矣。是以古之君子知通圮之來其過非新。賢愚壽夭兆明自昔。楚穆以福濃獲沒。蔡靈以善薄受禍。郄宛以釁深莫救。宋桓以愆微易唱。故洗心以懷宗。練形以聞道。拔無明之沈根。翳貪愛之滯網。不祈驗於冥中。影嚮自徵。不期存於應報。而慶罰以彰。故能反步八極水鏡萬有。但微明之道理隔常域。堯孔拯其麁宜有未盡。史遷造其門而未踐乎室。惜其在無聞之世。故永悲以窮年。君既涉其津。亦應不遠而得。此乃幽明之所寄。豈唯言論而已。乖敘多年聊以代懃。

Recently I saw your "Treatise Resolving Doubts." It is indeed a work drawn from personal sentiment; its examination of the essential principles is very nearly on mark, yet in discerning the adherence to one's allotted destiny, it seems not yet to have illuminated its root. That blessing does not verify goodness has also been my longstanding perplexity: though I surveyed the Six Classics widely, my obstruction only deepened; it was only upon beholding the scriptural teachings that I first clearly found a refuge. Therefore, let me use the words of those of prior awakening to speak to the scholars of today. You take it that if one discerns what is allotted by destiny, one need not pray for verification in the unseen realm, and that the words about "lingering celebration" are meant for exhortation and instruction. Allow me to inquire into the purport of discerning allotted destiny: should one lodge the sentiments in principle and yield to it without contrivance, or should one forget concerns in oblivious obscurity and merely leave things as they are? If one lodges the sentiments in principle, then principle cannot yet be comprehended: good and evil are intermingled and disordered, and contrary and concordant states cannot be examined; if not through an unseen nullification, how could one avoid contrivance? If one merely leaves things as they are, then unless one "sits in forgetfulness," whenever affairs arrive one will surely be moved; when being moved is caused by affairs, sentiment will also rise and fall: walking in faithfulness and obtaining protection, how could one fail to celebrate? Committing evil without being punished, how could there be no resentment? Though one wishes to forget concerns, how could that be possible? If one quietly seeks it in oneself, the effect is obvious! Furthermore, the establishment of exhortation and instruction must proceed by drawing upon reality; it is merely that the methods of admonition cannot be exhausted by a single path. Thus, some seem contrary at first and only later harmonize; some are obscure regarding their spoken words. For this reason, clay carriages and straw effigies differ in ordinance between the hall and the chamber; some manifest what is distant, while others summon what is near—so that those who follow the teaching do not improperly seek beyond their allotment, and scholars who drink of harmony are inherently content with benevolence and righteousness. Therefore, the deep and the shallow are taught side by side, and the people's hearing is not misled. Yet the mystery of spiritual illumination is harboured within subtle things: how could it openly proclaim the accumulation of good, establish the hexagram lines upon "treading on frost," and yet have affairs run counter to instruction and principle conflict with words? Bo Yi and Shu Qi found self-attainment in tranquil endurance; Yan Yuan and Ran Geng grieved continually though treading in harmony. I fear that intentional words might differ from this. If it is said that figures like Shangchen were beyond the reach of the teaching, and the means of guidance were only for those of middling intelligence and below, yet when Dong Anyu harboured benevolence his person was not spared, while Zang Hui, through usurpation, had descendants in the state of Lu—then in what can the allotment of destiny be discerned? The proclamation of "mystic clarity" would then turn out to be a repository of doubts! Therefore, when the gentlemen of old understood that the coming of success and decline stems from faults that are not recent, and that the signs of wisdom, folly, longevity, and premature death have been clear since the past: King Mu of Chu died a natural death because of dense blessings; Duke Ling of Cai suffered calamity because his goodness was slight; Xi Wan could not be saved because his fault was profound; Duke Huan of Song had his prayers answered easily because his transgression was minute. Therefore, they cleansed their minds to cherish the ancestral principle, refined their forms to hear the Way, pulled out the deep roots of ignorance, and blocked the tangled net of craving and clinging. They did not pray for verification in the unseen realm, yet shadows and echoes manifested of themselves; they did not expect retribution, yet celebration and punishment were clearly displayed. Thus they were able to retrace their steps through the eight extremes and mirror the myriad existences as clear water. Yet the principle of subtle illumination transcends ordinary domains: Yao and Confucius rescued the coarse aspects, so it is appropriate that their teachings were not exhaustive; Sima Qian reached the threshold but did not enter the inner chamber. It is lamentable that they lived in an age without hearing [the Dharma], and thus grieved perpetually to the end of their years. Since you have already crossed into its ford, you should also attain it before long. This is that in which the unseen and manifest are lodged; how could it be a matter of mere discourse? We have been parted for many years; I send this for now in place of diligent inquiries.