[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) › 8.40 # 廣弘明集 8.40 廣弘明集 8.40 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [8.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8.40) 問。魯隱公者。蓋是讓國之賢君。而人表評為下下。老子者。乃無為之大聖。漢書品為中上。故知班彪父子詮度險巇。先生何乃引之為證。答曰。吾子近取杜預之談。遠忽春秋之意。隱公者桓公之庶兄也。桓公幼小攝行政事。及桓長大歸政桓公。雖能歸政不能去猜。譛毒於是縱橫。遂為桓公所弑。既不自全陷弟不義。讓國之美竟復何在。此而非下孰有下乎。漢書之評。於是乎得。且孔子受命。遂號素王。未聞載籍。稱老為聖。言不關典。君子所慚。問尚書云。惟狂克念作聖。惟聖罔念則狂。子云。聖也則不關學。是何言歟。 > The questioner asks: Duke Yin of Lu was a worthy ruler who ceded his state, yet the Table of Historical Figures rates him as low-lower. Laozi was a great sage of non-action (asaṃskṛta), yet the Book of Han ranks him as middle-upper. Thus we know the assessments of Ban Biao and his son were precarious and unfair. Why, Sir, do you cite them as evidence? I reply: You, Sir, rely on Du Yu's remarks near at hand, but overlook the meaning of the Spring and Autumn Annals afar. Duke Yin was the elder brother of Duke Huan by a concubine. When Duke Huan was young, he acted as regent in governmental affairs; when Huan grew up, he was to return the government to Duke Huan. Although he was able to return the government, he was unable to dispel suspicion; slanderous malice ran rampant, and he was eventually murdered by Duke Huan. He neither preserved himself nor prevented his younger brother from sinking into unrighteousness; where then was the beauty of ceding the state? If this is not low, what could be low? The evaluation of the Book of Han was correct in this regard. Furthermore, Confucius received the mandate and was consequently called the Uncrowned King; it has never been heard in the historical records that Laozi was called a sage. To speak of what does not concern the canons is what the gentleman is ashamed of. The questioner asks: The Book of Documents says: 'Only the madman, through reflection, can become a sage; only the sage, through heedlessness, becomes a madman.' You said that being a sage does not concern learning; what kind of talk is that? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 8.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8.39) - [Next: 8.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8.41) - [Up: 8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103~en-mt.8.40) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2103.8.40) · Pramāṇa