廣弘明集 8.39

8.39

答曰。余既庸昧奚敢穿鑿。廢智任誠唯依謨典。嵇子云。老子就涓子學九仙之術尋乎練餌。斯或有之。至於聖也則不云學。論語曰。生而知之者上。學而知之者次。依前漢書。品孔子為上上類。皆是聖。以老氏為中上流。並是賢。又何晏王弼咸云。老未及聖。此皆典達所位。僕能異乎。孔子曰。吾無常師。問禮於老聃。斯其義也。有問農云。吾不如老農。又問圃云。吾不如老圃。入太廟每事問。豈農圃守廟之人。而賢於孔丘乎。竊比遜詞斯其類也。故知他評近實自謙則虛。侮聖之談恐還自累（孔子問樂於長弘。學琴於師襄子。豈弘子之流皆賢於孔子乎。聖人之迹於斯可見）。

I reply: Being mediocre and ignorant, how would I dare to make far-fetched interpretations? Discarding intellectual contrivance and relying on sincerity, I depend solely on the canonical records. Master Ji [Kang] said: 'Laozi studied the arts of the nine immortals under Master Juan, seeking refined elixirs.' This may well have occurred. As for being a sage, it is not said to come from study. The Analects says: 'Those who are born with knowledge are superior; those who learn and so have knowledge are next.' According to the Book of the Former Han, Confucius is ranked in the uppermost-upper category, all of whom are sages; Laozi is placed in the middle-upper stream, all of whom are worthies. Furthermore, He Yan and Wang Bi both said that Laozi had not yet reached sageliness. These are all rankings given by classical scholars; how could I differ from them? Confucius said: 'I have no constant teacher.' His inquiring about ritual from Lao Dan had this very meaning. When someone asked about farming, he said, 'I am not as good as an old farmer'; when asked about gardening, he said, 'I am not as good as an old gardener.' When entering the Grand Ancestral Temple, he inquired about every matter. Could the farmer, gardener, and temple-keeper be worthier than Kong Qiu? His 'privately comparing himself' was words of humility of this kind. Thus we know that others' assessments are close to reality, whereas self-deprecation is merely modest words. To speak of insulting the sage might rather bring blame upon yourself! (Confucius inquired about music from Chang Hong and studied the zither under Master Xiang; could Hong and his kind all be worthier than Confucius? The traces of the sage can be seen from this.)