[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [廣弘明集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103) › 25.42 # 廣弘明集 25.42 廣弘明集 25.42 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [25.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25.42) 竊以朝廷之敘肅敬為先。生育之恩色養為重。釋老二教今悉反之。抗禮於帝王。受敬於父母。而優容自昔迄乎今代。源其深致蓋有以然。諒由剔髮有異於冠冕。袈裟無取於章服。出家故無家人之敬。捨俗豈拘朝廷之禮。至於玄教清虛道風遐曠。高尚其事不屈王侯。帝王有所不臣。蓋此之謂。國家既存其道所以不屈其身。望准前章無違舊貫。謹議。議拜者。明沙門應致拜也。昔皇覺御㝢尚開信毀之源。豈惟像末不流弘約之議。頃以法海宏曠類聚難分有穢玄猷。頗聞朝聽。致使拘文之士。廢道從人。較而言之。未曰通方之巨唱也。余所以考諸故實隨而彈焉。庶崇佛君子。或能詳覽。 > I venture to submit that in the order of the imperial court, reverence and respect come first; in the debt of being born and raised, filial nurture with pleasing countenance is paramount. The two teachings of Śākya and Laozi now invert both of these entirely: they stand on equal terms with emperors and kings, and receive obeisance from their own fathers and mothers. Yet indulgence has been granted them from antiquity down to the present age. When we probe the deep reasoning for this, there is indeed good cause. Truly it is because shaving the hair is distinct from capping and robes, and the kāṣāya has nothing in common with official garb. Leaving the household, they therefore lack the obeisances of household kin; casting off the mundane, how could they be bound by court etiquette? As for the profound teaching's purity and emptiness, its winds of the Way being vast and remote, they hold high their pursuit and do not bow to kings and lords. When emperors and kings do not treat them as subjects, it refers precisely to this. Since the state maintains their teachings, it therefore does not bend their persons. I request that following the previous statutes, we do not violate former precedent. Respectfully submitted. \[Note on\] 'Debating the obeisance': this clarifies that śramaṇas should render obeisance. Formerly, when the Sovereign Enlightened One governed the world, he still opened the origins of faith and slander; how much more in the Semblance and Final ages would deliberations on broadening or restricting it fail to circulate? Recently, because the dharma-ocean is broad and vast, the mingled kinds are difficult to distinguish, and defilements have entered the profound path, of which the court has heard much. This has caused men bound by the letter of texts to discard the Way and follow human customs. Weighing it up, this cannot be called an overarching, open-minded pronouncement. I have therefore investigated the precedents and refuted them accordingly, in the hope that gentlemen who revere the Buddha might peruse them in detail. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 25.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25.41) - [Next: 25.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25.43) - [Up: 25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103~en-mt.25.42) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [集沙門不應拜俗等事](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.3) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.25.42) · Pramāṇa