廣弘明集 8.37

8.37

答曰。子之問也。似未通遠。夫帝王功成作樂。治定制禮。此蓋皇業之盛事也。而左史記言。右史記事。事為春秋。言為尚書。百王同其風。萬代齊其軌。若有位無才。猶虧弘闡。有才無位。灼然全闕。昔周公攝政七載。乃制六官。孔老何人得為教主。孔雖聖達無位者也。自衛迴輪始弘文軌。正可修述非為教源。且柱史在朝本非諧贊。出周入秦為尹言道。無聞諸侯。何況天子。既是仙賢。固宜雙缺。道屬儒宗已彰前簡。

I reply: Your question seems not yet to have reached a profound understanding. When sovereigns achieved merit, they created music; when order was established, they formulated rituals. These are the magnificent undertakings of imperial enterprises! The Scribe of the Left recorded speeches, and the Scribe of the Right recorded events: events became the Spring and Autumn Annals, and speeches became the Book of Documents. The hundred kings shared this manner, and myriad generations conformed to this track. If one has position without talent, propagation is still deficient; if one has talent without position, it is clearly entirely lacking. Long ago, the Duke of Zhou acted as regent for seven years and then instituted the six offices. What kind of men were Confucius and Laozi that they could be lords of teaching? Although Confucius was sagely and eminent, he lacked position. Only when his chariot returned from Wei did he begin to promote the textual standards; this was merely editing and transmitting, not being the source of a teaching. Moreover, when the Historian of the Pillar was at court, his duty was fundamentally not to offer counsel and assistance; leaving Zhou to enter Qin, he spoke of the Way only for the Magistrate [Yin Xi], remaining unheard among the feudal lords, to say nothing of the Son of Heaven. Since he was an immortal or worthy, he was certainly deficient in both [talent and position]. That Daoism belongs to the Confucian lineage has already been made manifest in the earlier scrolls.