廣弘明集 9.13

9.13

又文始傳云。老子從三皇已來。代代為國師化胡。又云湯時為錫壽子。周初郭叔子。既為國師應傳典籍。何為不述。但列伊尹傅說呂望康邵之人乎。而傅說者。惟注老子為柱下史。道家注為周師。便是俗官。如何史傳不說。又上皇元年歲在丁卯。計姬王一代七百餘年。未聞上皇之號。檢諸史傳皆云。老子以景王時度關。魯哀十六年孔丘卒。即周敬王時。敬王即景王之子。景王即幽王之後一十餘世。此則孔老同時。而化胡經乃云。幽王之日度關。不聞更返。何得與孔子相見乎。化胡又云。為周柱史七百年。計周初至幽王。止有三百餘年。何得妄作。然上皇之年道門詭號。故靈寶云。我於上皇元年半劫度人。其時人壽萬八千歲。如何超取半劫前號將來近世用乎。一何可笑。且上皇無極並是無識穿鑿。作者欲神其術。仍以年號加日。冀有信者從之。

Furthermore, the Wenshi zhuan says: 'Ever since the Three Sovereigns, Laozi has been the national preceptor generation after generation, converting the barbarians.' It also says: 'In the time of Tang he was Xishouzi, and at the beginning of Zhou he was Guoshuzi.' Since he was the national preceptor, he ought to have transmitted canonical records. Why did he not recount them, listing only people such as Yi Yin, Fu Yue, Lü Wang, and Kang Shaogong? As for Fu Yue, he only annotated that Laozi was the Archivist below the Pillar, while Daoists annotate that he was the preceptor of Zhou; thus he was a secular official. Why do the historical chronicles not mention this? Furthermore, the first year of Shanghuang was in the cyclical year dingmao; calculating the entire Ji royal line of seven-hundred-odd years, no reign title of 'Shanghuang' is ever heard of. An examination of all the historical chronicles shows they all say Laozi crossed the pass during the reign of King Jing. In the sixteenth year of Duke Ai of Lu, Kong Qiu died, which was in the time of King Jing of Zhou; King Jing [of Zhou] was the son of King Jing [who reigned earlier], and that King Jing was more than ten generations after King You. This means Confucius and Laozi were contemporaries. Yet the Huahu jing says he crossed the pass in the days of King You and was never heard to return; how could he have met Confucius? The Huahu jing also says he served as the Archivist of Zhou for seven hundred years; yet from the beginning of Zhou down to King You was only three-hundred-odd years. How could they fabricate such falsehoods? Thus the year of Shanghuang is a fraudulent title of the Daoist portal. Therefore the Lingbao says: 'I delivered people in the half-kalpa of the first year of Shanghuang; at that time the human lifespan was 18,000 years.' How could they reach back to pluck a title from before a half-kalpa ago and apply it to recent times? How utterly laughable! Moreover, 'Shanghuang' and 'Wuji' are both the baseless fabrications of the ignorant. The author, wishing to make his art seem miraculous, appended days to reign titles, hoping that believers would follow it.