[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) › 5.31 # 廣弘明集 5.31 廣弘明集 5.31 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5.31) 孫盛曰。夫有仁聖必有仁聖之德。迹此而不崇。則陶訓焉融。仁義不尚。則孝慈道喪。老氏既云絕聖。而每章輒稱聖人。既稱聖人則迹焉能得絕。若所欲絕者。絕堯舜周孔之迹。則所稱聖者。為是何聖之迹乎。即如其言。聖人有宜滅其迹者。有宜稱其迹者。稱滅不同吾誰適從。 > Sun Sheng says: If there are benevolence and sagehood, there must be the virtue of benevolence and sagehood. If one leaves traces of these and does not venerate them, how can molding and instruction blend together? If benevolence and righteousness are not esteemed, then the way of filial piety and compassion is lost. Laozi already spoke of abandoning sagehood, yet in every chapter he praises the sage. Since he praises the sage, how can his traces be abandoned? If what he wished to abandon were the traces of Yao, Shun, the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius, then as for the sage he praised, what sage's traces were they? If it is as he said, among sages there are those whose traces ought to be obliterated, and those whose traces ought to be praised. Praising and obliterating being inconsistent, whom should we follow? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5.30) - [Next: 5.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5.32) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103~en-mt.5.31) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.5.31) · Pramāṇa