廣弘明集 10

English (machine translation) 10

Language: English

10.1

Compiled by the Śramaṇa Shi Daoxuan of the Ximing Temple of the Great Tang

Edict of the Zhou Ancestor Abolishing the Two Teachings and Establishing the Abbey of Universal Dao (Emperor Wu of the Zhou)
The Zhou Ancestor Summons Monks upon Pacifying Qi to Discuss Abolition and Establishment, and Defying the Edict (Shi Huiyuan)
The Zhou Ancestor Inspects Ye, and Petitions to Open the Buddhist Dharma (Ren Daolin)
Zhou Tianyuan Ascends the Throne and Confers on the Memorial of Wei Yuansong (Wang Mingguang)

10.4

Edict of the Zhou Ancestor Establishing the Abbey of Universal Dao After Abolishing the Two Teachings

10.5

Emperor Yuwen Yong of the Zhou

10.6

Emperor Wu was suspicious and jealous of the black-robed [monks] and received the teachings of Huang-Lao. He wished to preserve the Daoist teachings and eliminate the Buddhist lineage. But public opinion was unanimous in revering the teachings of Śākya. The Emperor had harbored this desire for a long time, and this was by no means his original plan. When Dharma Master Dao'an submitted the Treatise on the Two Teachings demonstrating that the Daoist teachings were unheard of [in antiquity], his mind was all the more unsubmissive. Unable to overcome the shared sentiment of the multitude, and seeing the logic difficult to retain [Daoism] alone, he abolished both teachings in a fit of internal fury. Before a month had passed, he issued an edict saying: ‘The Supreme Dao is vast and profound, formed chaotically without boundary; its essence encompasses emptiness and existence, its principle reaches the ultimate obscurity. Yet as diverging paths separated, the branching streams grew ever further apart; simplicity parted and uncarved wholeness scattered, so that material vessels conflicted. Consequently, the three Mohist and eight Confucian factions competed like vermilion and purple, while the nine lineages and seven arts vied with differing doctrines. The Dao has been obscured by minor accomplishments for a long time! Without a convergence, contention will never cease. Let there now be established the Abbey of Universal Dao. The subtle words of sages and wise ones, the classic instructions of former worthies, the golden statutes and jade registers, the secret and profound texts—those that succor and nourish the common people, and support and accomplish pedagogical principles—shall all be broadly expounded and unified with a single thread. Let those who play upon earthen mounds recognize the towering height of Mount Song and Mount Tai; let those who keep to gravel and rocks realize the deep clarity of the Bohai Sea. Would this not be fitting? Let the relevant authorities determine the number of personnel, and let their stipends and corvée exemptions deliberately differ from ordinary regulations. Let the directors put this into effect.’

10.7

At that time, an establishment of one hundred and twenty overseers was appointed, with varied staff and labor allotments. Both Buddhist and Daoist disciples who were famous in their day were selected; they wore caps, robes, held tablets, and wore shoes, and were titled Academicians of the Abbey of Universal Dao. There was a former śramaṇa of the capital district named Fan Pukuang, whose belly was swollen and whose demeanor was eccentric, who moved people with his jesting. The Emperor respected him considerably and summoned him to enter the Universal Dao [Abbey]. Although demoted [from the sangha], he always clipped his hair and kept his beard. The Emperor asked him why he shaved one and kept the other. Pukuang said: ‘Your subject emulates Your Majesty: although the two teachings have been abolished, the Universal Dao is still preserved. The beard is a worldly adornment, hence I kept it; the hair is not of worldly teaching, hence I discarded it.’ The Emperor said: ‘In worldly custom, one keeps the hair and tops it with a cap. How can you say it is not of the teaching?’ Pukuang said: ‘Can hairless gentlemen be part of the teaching? Since your subject removed it beforehand, what harm is there in adding a cap?’ The Emperor laughed at this. From then on he kept his head cleanly shaven while wearing a cap, tassels, and collar. When people asked him about it, he said: ‘I suffer from the heat,’ and so forth.

10.8

The Zhou Ancestor Summons Monks upon Pacifying Qi to Discuss Abolition and Establishment, and Defying the Edict

10.9

Śramaṇa Shi Huiyuan

10.10

In the spring of the second year of Chengguang of the Northern Qi, Emperor Wu of the Northern Zhou pacified the Gao clan in the east. He summoned previous eminent monks of great virtue to assemble at the palace. The Emperor ascended the throne and laid out his reasoning for abolishing and maintaining teachings, saying: "We have received the mandate of Heaven to bring peace and unity to the realm. The three teachings have been propagated in the world, their traditions reaching far and wide. Yet upon examining their ultimate principles, they largely err in transforming and civilizing people. Now We shall abolish them all. However, as for the Confucian teaching of the Six Classics, its writings broaden statecraft, and its propriety, righteousness, loyalty, and filial piety are suitable for the world; hence it must be preserved and maintained. Moreover, the true Buddha has no image; one may venerate him from afar to express one's heart. Buddhist scriptures lavishly praise the construction of images and pagodas, claiming that magnificent construction produces boundless blessings. Yet these are truly inanimate; how could they bestow grace? Foolish people harbor faith in them, exhausting their precious wealth and spending it in vain. Therefore they must be eliminated. Thus, all scriptures and images shall be destroyed. The kindness of parents is profound, yet the śramaṇas do not pay them respect. This is the height of defiance, intolerable to the law of the state. They shall all be returned home to promote governance through filial piety. This is Our intention. What do you, Virtuous Ones, think of this reasoning?" At that time, the Monastic Prefect and more than five hundred others all thought that the royal awe was terrifying and an opposing remonstrance would be hard to heed; since the teaching had already been eliminated in Guannei, it could not survive alone. Everyone fell silent. An imperial decree was issued urging an answer, and they all looked at each other, their faces drained of color, bowing their heads in tears. There was the Dharma Master Huiyuan, renowned for his shining prestige. He reflected to himself: "The custody of the Buddha-dharma relies upon the four assemblies. How could holding one's tongue be considered penetrating the truth?" He then stepped forward to respond, saying: "Your Majesty presides over the great realm and has attained oneness to dwell in the highest seat. Accommodating common customs, you deliver words and take the three teachings as a model. The edict says: 'The true Buddha has no image.' This is truly as Your Majesty decrees. But living beings who rely on ears and eyes depend on the scriptures to hear of the Buddha, and rely on images to manifest the truth. If you abolish them now, there will be no way to arouse veneration." The Emperor said: "The true Buddha of empty space is known naturally by all; he does not depend on scriptures or images." Huiyuan said: "Before Emperor Ming of the Han, scriptures and images had not arrived. Why did the sentient beings of this land not know the true Buddha of empty space?" The Emperor had no answer. Huiyuan said: "If, without relying on the scriptural teachings, people naturally knew that there is the Dharma, then before the Three Sovereigns, when there was no writing, people should have naturally known teachings such as the five constants. Why, then, did the people of that time only know their mothers and not their fathers, being the same as birds and beasts?" The Emperor again had no answer. Huiyuan said: "If, because images are inanimate and serving them yields no blessing, they must be abolished, then are the images of the state's Seven Ancestral Temples animate, that you vainly honor and serve them?" The Emperor did not answer this objection, but merely said: "The Buddhist scriptures are laws of foreign lands; this country has no need of them, so they are abolished and not used. The Seven Ancestral Temples were established by previous ages; We also do not consider them correct, and shall abolish them likewise." Huiyuan said: "If scriptures from foreign lands are not for use here, then what Confucius spoke came from the state of Lu; in the lands of Qin and Jin they should likewise be abolished and not practiced. Furthermore, if you deem the Seven Ancestral Temples wrong and intend to abolish them, then you do not honor your ancestors. If ancestors are not honored, the Zhaomu ancestral order falls into disarray. If the Zhaomu order falls into disarray, the Five Classics are of no use. What then was the meaning of previously preserving the Confucian teaching? If so, then the three teachings would be abolished together. How then will you govern the state?" The Emperor said: "The state of Lu and Qin and Jin were indeed different in territory, but they were all within the single transformation of the ruler. Therefore, they are not comparable to the objection regarding Buddhist scriptures and the Seven Ancestral Temples." The Emperor could not make his point hold. Huiyuan said: "If Qin and Lu both complied with a single transformation and their scriptural teachings were practiced everywhere, then although the borders of Cīnasthāna and India are different, are they not all within the four seas of Jambudvīpa, under the single transformation of the wheel-turning king? Why not equally comply with the Buddhist scriptures instead of now abolishing them alone?" The Emperor again had no answer. Huiyuan said: "The edict says: 'Return the monks home to promote filial care.' Confucius's classic also says: 'To establish oneself and practice the Way so as to make one's parents illustrious is itself filial conduct.' Why must they return home?" The Emperor said: "The kindness of parents is profound, requiring material support and physical care. Abandoning parents to go to strangers does not constitute utmost filial piety." Huiyuan said: "If it is as you say, Your Majesty's attendants all have parents. Why do you not release them, instead of making them serve long terms of five years without seeing their parents?" The Emperor said: "We also let them return to attend to their parents by turns." Huiyuan said: "The Buddha also permits monks to practice the Way according to circumstances in winter and summer, and return home in spring and autumn to care for their parents. Thus Maudgalyāyana begged for food to feed his mother, and the Tathāgata bore the coffin and attended the burial. This principle is widely unobstructed; it must not be abolished alone." The Emperor again had no answer. Huiyuan raised his voice and said: "Your Majesty now relies on royal power to willfully destroy the Triratna; this is the act of a person of wrong views. The Avīci Hell makes no distinction between the noble and the base. How can Your Majesty not be terrified?" The Emperor flared up in anger, looked straight at Huiyuan, and said: "If only the common people can attain happiness, We shall not refuse any of the sufferings of hell." Huiyuan said: "Your Majesty transforms people with wrong teachings, currently planting karmic causes of suffering; you will head together with them straight to Avīci. Where could any happiness be obtained?" The Emperor's reasoning was defeated. His previous ambitious intentions were spent, and he had nothing more to answer; he merely said: "The monks may temporarily return. Let the officials record the names of the monks who debated." The Emperor had already practiced cruelty for three years, and the Buddha-dharma in Guanlong was practically wiped out. Having conquered the territory of Qi, he destroyed it there as well. At that time, the Buddha-dharma was flourishing in the eastern rivers of Wei and Qi, with over forty thousand established temples and monasteries. All were bestowed upon princes and dukes to serve as residences. The monks of the five assemblies were reduced by three million, all being returned to the military and civilian registers. Buddhist images were melted down or scraped, and scriptural teachings burned. The blessed wealth of the Triratna was registered and taken into the treasury, immediately given out as rewards and completely dispersed. The Emperor thought he had accomplished his ambition throughout the world. Yet before a year had passed, pestilential qi boiled within him and sores broke out on his body. The signs of evil karma were already manifest, beyond any repentance to dispel. He then took refuge in Yunyang Palace; after only seven days, he quickly passed away. Tianyuan succeeded to the calendar, establishing the Zhihu Temples in the eastern and western capitals, appointing bodhisattva-monks to inaugurate the Buddhist transformation. Before long that Emperor died, and the dynastic fortune shifted until Emperor Gaozu of the Sui Dynasty, when it finally flourished broadly, as will be shown later. Recently I saw in the Mingbao ji by Tang Lin, Minister of Personnel of the Great Tang: His maternal grandfather, Duke of Qi, Vice Director of the Left under Emperor Wen of the Sui, personally saw Emperor Wen question a deceased person who had returned to life. The person said: "When I first died, I saw Emperor Wu of the Zhou, who said: 'Send word for me to the Son of Heaven of the Great Sui: Formerly we shared food, and the storehouses, jade, and silk were also accumulated by me. Now, because I destroyed the Buddha-dharma, I am enduring immense suffering. Please perform meritorious deeds on my behalf.' Emperor Wen issued an edict to everyone throughout the realm to contribute one coin to seek subsequent blessings for him."

10.11

When Emperor Gaozu of the Zhou toured Ye to eliminate the Buddha-dharma, the former monk Ren Daolin submitted a memorial requesting the restoration of the Dharma.

10.12

On the fourth day of the eleventh month in the sixth year of the Jiande era of the Zhou, the Emperor arrived at the new palace in Ye. The Grand Secretariat Official Yuwen Ang and the Gentleman Li Delin collected the memorials of petitioners. At that time, Ren Daolin submitted his memorial. The Gentleman examined the memorial and said: "You address the two teachings. The sagely ruler's quick wit and eloquence are exceptionally difficult to answer; you should consider this carefully." Daolin replied: "The sovereign's keen eloquence is renowned in the ten directions; I have also long heard of it. It is precisely because I have heard of his eloquence that I come; meeting eloquence leaves no regrets," and so on. He was then ushered in, ascended the steps, and stood to the west of the imperial throne. The Emperor decreed: "Since you have submitted a memorial to assist in rectifying governance, We commend it highly. You may explain your points individually; do not waste words." Daolin then submitted measures on pacifying the remnants of Qi and reducing taxes and corvée, all of which the Emperor accepted. Daolin also said: "I originally vowed to propagate the Buddha's path. Just now I spoke exclusively of mundane governance, seeming to flatter and curry favor with the ruler of men, but in truth my heavenly heart seeks to protect the Dharma. Ever since the Śākya clan's grand teachings were set forth, their skillful responses have been without limit, their power of wisdom supreme, broadly proclaiming the true Dharma to rescue this world of five defilements and especially deliver beings from the three realms of existence. Among humans, in heaven, in the six realms of rebirth and the four forms of birth, none fail to take refuge, dedicate their merit, and receive their awakening. From the Han until now, more than five hundred years have passed, and princes, dukes, and high ministers have honored and transmitted it. Yet when it came to the Great Zhou, it was suddenly abolished and cut off. Your Majesty's governance inherits previous kings and your transforming influence passes down to future emperors; how can you uniquely fail to emulate antiquity only with regard to the Buddhist teaching? If it were not good, former worthies would have eliminated it long ago. If it is said to be beneficial, Your Majesty may practice it; the rationale for abolishing Buddhism is what your servant does not comprehend." The Emperor decreed: "The Buddha was born in the Western Regions, and his teaching was transmitted to the Eastern Lands. When one investigates its customs and teachings, they differ greatly from the Central Realm. During the Han, Wei, and Jin, it seemed to exist yet hardly did. Only when the Five Barbarians disrupted governance did its influence become prominent. We are not of the Five Barbarians; in Our heart there is no veneration for it. Since it is not an orthodox teaching, We have abolished it." Daolin memorialized: "Buddhism was transmitted eastward over seven dynasties ago. Liu Yuan usurped the Jin; he was fundamentally not of the Central Realm, and because he did not possess the legitimate calendar, they were called the Five Barbarians. But in the Han, Wei, and Jin, the Buddhist transformation was already widespread, and the Song, Zhao, Fu-Qin, and Yan long practiced and honored it. If Your Majesty is ashamed of being like the Five Barbarians who practiced the Buddha-dharma extensively, I request that, as in the Han and Wei, you do not extinguish its lineage."

10.13

The Emperor decreed: "Although Buddhist doctrine is vast, We have also read it. Its words are mostly vacuous and grandiose, and its speech tends toward frivolous extravagance. As for sin, it loves to push it onto the past; as for lack of blessing, it points to the future. These matters have no proof, and practicing them brings much confusion. As for its exhortation to good, it does not differ from the ancient rites; as for its investigation into cutting off evil, how does it differ from mundane laws? Formerly We intended to abolish it, so We studied it temporarily; knowing with certainty that it is of no benefit, We eliminated it." Daolin memorialized: "The principle is profound and the words are grand; they cannot be measured by mundane sentiments. The time is distant and the matters are profound; how could petty capacities debate them? How could one, by the narrow vision of a single generation, reject the long-established consensus of eras? Clinging to delusion and ignoring awakening—is that not an error? Thus the Buddhist principle is consummate across the dharmadhātu, and the essence of the teaching encompasses both the external and internal. Discussing practice, it benefits both oneself and others; debating the fruit, it is eternal, blissful, and asaṃskṛta. Planting virtue, its kindness is vast; conferring the Way, it bestows boundless benefit on heaven and earth. Manifesting wonders, its spiritual penetrations are unhindered; spreading transformation, myriad states converge in return. Delivering beings, it aids enemies and kin alike; loving with compassion, it harms no conscious creature. Precepts eliminate external evils, and concentration halts faults of the mind; wisdom illuminates past and present, its insight penetrating myriad things. If every household practiced this, the people would all be well governed; if every state cultivated it, weapons of war would be useless. Now abandoning and not practicing it, where else will you seek benefit?" He then memorialized again: "Your servant has heard that filial piety is the utmost Way of Heaven, and obedience is the supreme nurture of Earth, by which one connects with the spirits and illuminates the four seas. Of the hundred conducts, what comes before filial piety? Formerly, when the way of the world was about to collapse and the house of Wei disintegrated, Emperor Taizu exerted his might to mend the heavens and quell difficulties, initiating the royal enterprise. Relying on this vast legacy, Your Majesty subsequently ascended the imperial throne, presiding over the four seas and extending your virtue throughout the world. Remembering this greatest debt, one can never repay it in a lifetime. How could you trust your own mind's intellect, stubbornly cleaving to your own interpretation, relying on your claws and fangs, and giving free rein to royal power to ruin and destroy the temples established by Taizu, smash the spiritual images worshipped by Taizu, abolish the scriptural teachings revered by Taizu, and degrade the venerable masters honored by Taizu? Moreover, one would not dare even damage the bed or desk of one's parents, let alone readily destroy what one's father personally served. The length or brevity of a state's mandate does not depend on the Buddha; the rise or fall of political governance has nothing to do with the Dharma. How could you trust a temporary consideration and incur the mockery of myriad generations? Risking death, your foolish servant insists that this must not be done."

10.14

The Emperor decreed: "Is the meaning of the filial way not the utmost? Yet if one exclusively adheres to it, it benefits only oneself. This is why great wisdom uses expedient means to act contrary to the ordinary so as to accord with the Way. When Tang and Wu attacked their sovereigns, their benevolence and wisdom were not blamed; when Weisheng kept his faith, calamity arrived and he met his death. If a matter is beneficial, even if it runs contrary, it must be carried out; if it is not reasonable, even if compliant, it must be cut away. One cannot protect one's single reputation while causing the four seas to harbor doubts, externally going against Taizu while internally benefiting the black-haired people.

10.15

Ordering the śramaṇas to return to secular life to attend to and care for their parents accomplishes filial piety throughout the realm. Each supports themselves without troubling others, causing the entire land to obtain benefit. Abandoning the barbarian and following the Chinese, unifying the six directions—this is precisely spreading fame for myriad generations to make Taizu illustrious, which is the culmination of filial piety. How can you say it is wrong?"

10.16

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "If it is said that destroying the Buddha brings benefit and abolishing the Saṅgha benefits the people, formerly Emperor Taizu Kang possessed profound discernment of myriad principles and his wisdom encompassed a thousand paths. If the Buddha-Dharma had indeed harmed transformation, he would immediately have eradicated it; how could he have respectfully venerated it for accumulated years, causing it to flourish throughout all under Heaven? Furthermore, while the Buddha-Dharma existed, where was the harm? Since it was suppressed, what benefit and profit have been accomplished? If indeed there was no benefit, how would this not be unfilial?"

The edict said: "The flourishing of teachings has its seasons, and the Way is difficult to fix by standard. Decrees proceed from above; the king serves as the model. Even if there were minor benefits, it must still be abandoned, not to mention that the Buddha brings no benefit and in principle cannot be tolerated. Why? Reverent service brings no verification, and invocation achieves no effect. When [a religion] cannot even save itself in distress, how can it benefit the state? Since it was abolished, the corvée of the common people has gradually lessened, taxes and levies have increased year by year, and armies have grown mightier day by day. To the east we pacified the Qi state, and to the west subdued the monstrous barbarians. The realm is secure and the people rejoice; how could this not be beneficial? If this matter is beneficial, then while Taizu was alive he repeatedly campaigned against Qi, so why was he not victorious? When We destroyed the Buddha-Dharma, if this were contrary and harmful, We should also have perished. Having pacified the eastern Xia, We clearly know it is beneficial. Abolishing it accords with reason; in principle it shall not be re-established."

10.17

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Since the state established governance, it has valued only the Way. In regulating, transforming, and nurturing the people, what could be higher than virtue? We have only seen that when the Way declines the state perishes; never has an army's strength alone maintained an enduring dynastic mandate. Thus the tyrant Zhou relied on his multitudes and brought calamity down upon his imperial heritage, while King Wu of Zhou cultivated virtue and blessings gathered upon his royal foundation. Fuchai was haughty in battle and ultimately perished, whereas Goujian relied on the Way and turned danger into peace. Judging by this, what does pacifying the eastern Xia have to do with destroying the Buddha and demoting the monks? It is merely that the destruction of the Buddha coincided with this destined moment of pacification; it was an accidental convergence, and you mistakenly deem that destroying the Dharma was beneficial. If that were so, when Tang attacked the Xia, King Wen destroyed Chong, King Wu executed Zhou, Qin unified all under Heaven, and the Red Han extinguished Xiang [Yu]—did these rulers achieve this through destroying the Buddha?"

Thereafter they exchanged arguments, criticizing and maligning persons and teachings: some criticized them for resisting ritual propriety toward ruler and parents, some for falsely claiming a Buddha-nature, some for analyzing form and mind, some for holding that performing actions incurs no karmic consequence, and some for pointing to yin and yang as the origin of the body. Daolin resolved and dissolved them all according to the objections. Although the Emperor constructed layered objections three to five times, exhausting principle and probing nature, Daolin dispelled every doubt and unblocked every difficulty.

The Emperor said: "You say that karma does not conflict with principle, and the ordinary person has the prospect of entering sainthood; nature is not external to karma, and the Way contains the orientation toward accommodating the ordinary. If so, then the Way is nowhere absent, comprehensively penetrating ordinary and holy alike. Thus the teachings need not be emptily venerated as those of Confucius or Śākya. Such words physically bridge the sacred and the profane, rendering the ornament of shaving and tonsuring an empty addition. Know, then, that the sovereign is none other than the Tathāgata; you may dispense with the sixteen-foot statue. The lords and princes are none other than bodhisattvas; omit serving Mañjuśrī. The elders may serve as theras; there is no need for Piṇḍola. Benevolence and kindness are truly the pāramitā of giving; why must one abandon the state? Peace and harmony are the foremost pure saṅgha; why labor over the uposatha? Chastity and prudence constitute the prātimokṣa; why must one receive the precepts? Frugality is truly having few desires; there is no need for dhūta practices. A vegetarian diet is the finest lifelong fast; why bother with abstaining from grains? Letting things take their course is subtly identical to non-self; why rely on understanding emptiness? Forgetting merit wholly converges with the Great Vehicle; why hope for prajñā? Civil and military are simply the two wisdoms, without contemplating emptiness and existence. Expedient stratagems directly constitute skillful means; why await transformation? Conferring offices is truly conferring prediction; it does not yield to realizing the fruits [of arhatship]. Official ranks and emoluments jointly attain the heavenly realms; why wait for the higher spheres? Executions and punishments visibly manifest hell; there is no pointing to Naraka. Taking the people as one's children may be called great compassion. Taking the four seas as one's home is identical to the dharmadhātu. Governing with reason: how is it different from saving living beings? Bringing peace and joy to the hundred surnames: how is it distinct from pulling them out of suffering? Executing and punishing the vicious and harmful in principle constitutes conquering Māra. Ruling over all under Heaven truly amounts to attaining the Way. In its vastness, how does it differ from a pure land? In its splendor, how does it yield to Kapilavastu? You harbor divergent views and give rise to obstinate attachments; in practical terms, what place is not the Way?"

10.18

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Prostrating, I receive the sage's intent: your principles are broad and words profound, fusing the sacred with the profane, shifting exclusivity and dissolving attachments. You cause truth to be mounted at every turn, all sentient beings to share in the Way, self and others to be completely content, and the thousand paths to become unified. Beautiful as it is, this foolish minister still harbors doubt. If the supreme Way were solely one, there would be no duality to fuse. If principles are permanently external and internal, they naturally allow of enduring distinction. If they are one yet not one, then it is half-right and half-wrong; if they are two yet not two, then it is now sacred and now profane. In this case, the black-robed and white-robed become confounded, Confucianism and Buddhism lose their order, the external and internal become mixed, and high and low are brought into parity. This not only causes the pure transformation to sink afar, but also immediately deludes the folkways of the people. Therefore, yin and yang share the same qi, yet generating and killing remain forever distinct; heaven and earth share in form, yet high and low remain ever different. One cannot, because they both possess form, make earth move and heaven stand still; or, seeing that they share qi, make yin give life and yang deal death. In practical affairs such a principle never exists; empty words can hardly be put to use. Thus, form being equal and qi being one may allow one to speak of identity, yet generating and killing, high and low, have no sense in which they are not distinct. Hence they are identical yet not identical, one yet not one. The principles of sacred and profane have parity without commingling; asaṃskṛta naturally has its own distinction. Moreover, though the title of 'king' is one, ordinary and holy are far apart as heaven and earth; though their appearances and matters are slightly similar, their breadth and narrowness are completely different. For this reason, Confucianism and Buddhism arose together from the beginningless, and the sacred and profane transform along with heaven and earth. If you wish to obliterate them into one, it is proper to use the sacred to discard the profane. If both are beneficial to the world, then the two principles—the hidden and the manifest—shine with equal brilliance. Now to promote one and abolish the other is truly unacceptable."

10.19

The edict said: "You say that the sacred and the profane are as far apart as heaven and earth, completely divergent as external and internal. Then the sacred ought to remain sacred by itself without meddling in the profane, and Buddhism ought to remain Buddhism by itself without relying on Confucianism. If the sacred were only the sacred, what benefit would it bring? If the Buddha were solely the Buddha, what efficacy would his transformation have? Therefore the sacred and the profane support one another, and Confucianism and Buddhism make each other more manifest. Had you not relied on Our words, what could you have discussed? Thus the internal and external are suppressed and promoted, abolishing and establishing one another. Now the religious law cannot be practiced; it is cut off by the king's law. Abolition and promotion lie in destined cycles, not conflicting with constant principles. There is no principle of eternal flourishing; what fault is there in abolition?"

10.20

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Looking up to receive the sage's intent is like parting the clouds to see the sun. Prostrating to hear the imperial admonition, it is truly as the sage has spoken. The Way cannot remain the Way by itself; without the profane it is not manifested. The Buddha cannot remain the Buddha by himself; only a king can make him flourish. Thus the teaching of Śākya was transmitted eastward over five hundred years, and the propagation of its Dharma transformation depended essentially on royal power. Only now do we know that the Way relies on humanity for its propagation, and spiritual efficacy arises through resonance with living beings. The flourishing and destruction of the Buddha trace their achievement back to the sage's intent. The Way has its flourishing and abolition; in principle it cannot endure forever. The Dharma has its hiding and manifesting; in reason it is difficult to preserve perpetually. Of late it has been abolished, so in principle it cannot be practiced immediately. Having been suspended and severed for long, the time for its flourishing is next in turn. Alternating between abolition and promotion, the principle naturally responds to the capacity of the times. For both to follow worldly cycles—is this not appropriate?"

10.21

The edict said: "The way of emperors and kings is good at deciding what to accept and reject, and clear in severing what to abandon and pursue. They carefully discern identity and difference, and subtly perceive extraordinary matters. As for the teaching of Śākya, We have pondered it deeply within Our palace, weighed it between past and present, tested it against actual events, and calculated it through gain and loss. Its principles are not ordinary yet unnecessary; its texts are lofty and remarkable yet useless. It was not discarded without cause. What fondness or hatred could We have toward Confucianism and Buddhism?"

10.22

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "The basis of propagating the Dharma requires fixing one's mind upon persons of discernment; the head of extending transformation requires keeping one's aspiration upon the correct Way. Do not, seeing someone who opposes you with malice, harbor estrangement toward them; or seeing someone who accommodates you with flattery, happily draw close to them. This is to become deluded by what one sees and confounded by what one hears. One must not, upon repeatedly hearing words that slander the correct, immediately accept them, chime in with the chorus, and thereby generate rights and wrongs, searching out faults and harboring daily resentment and disdain. This is to displace the true with the false, letting the clamor of the crowd confuse the will. Consequently, those who should be kept at a distance are brought closer, and those who should be kept close are sent farther away. This leads discussions to become biased and inconsistent, and acceptances and rejections to be entirely erroneous. Such are the disasters that harm the true and the monstrous encumbrances that ruin virtue."

Thereupon the Emperor did not answer, but opened another avenue to initiate debate. He asked: "We have heard that the gentleman's conduct must accord with ritual propriety, and the wise man's actions must respond to the opportune moment. Recently, We repeatedly bestowed food upon you, but you said you do not drink alcohol or eat meat. Alcohol is a medicine that harmonizes the spirit, and meat is food that fills the belly; their flavors have been the same from antiquity to the present. Why do you alone despise them? If one is in mourning clothes, ritual regulations forbid eating them; but under the present bestowal, you may naturally eat them. To refrain from eating what may be eaten—is this not an error?"

10.23

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Coveting wealth and desiring sex are despised by chaste men; craving fine banquets and rich tastes are abhorred by scrupulous scholars. Cutting off attachments to follow the Way was praised by past sages; suppressing desires to exalt virtue was admired by former wise men. How much more so since meat comes from taking life, and alcohol can derange the spirit. Not consuming them is reasonable; how could it be wrong?"

10.24

The edict said: "Meat comes from harming life, so cutting it off may indeed be so. Alcohol does not harm life; why enact an absolute prohibition? If it causes no harm, and by calculating the offense there is no fault in it, saying it is wrong means that drinking water or eating rice should also incur guilt. Yet in reality they do not. Why prohibit alcohol exclusively?"

10.25

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "The formulation of precepts accords with circumstances; the incurring of guilt is based on the mind. The substance of meat stems from killing; eating it immediately incurs guilt. The nature of alcohol is not harmful, but its fault arises from clouding the spirit. Transgressions arise elsewhere, yet the arising of transgressions stems from alcohol; by cutting off alcohol they are eliminated. Therefore, preventive prohibitions vary; it is not that the substance of alcohol is itself a sin."

10.26

The edict said: "Transgressions are either preventive or intrinsic. The substance of alcohol generates guilt. Now there are people tolerant of alcohol, able to drink without getting drunk, whose spirits are not clouded and who do not give rise to transgressions. Such people who drink alcohol ought not to incur guilt. This means that being able to drink is blameless, while being unable to do so invites fault. What does cutting off alcohol have to do with establishing the goodness of precepts? One could say that those who can drink and tolerate alcohol are perpetually called precept-keepers, while those who get drunk upon drinking little are great sinners."

10.27

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Regulating faults and preventing wrongs originally served to generate goodness. Precepts are the goodness of cessation, with body and speech offering no violation. Ceasing amidst conditions, both preventive and intrinsic [transgressions] are severed; only then is it called the goodness of precepts. Now a person tolerant of alcohol does not derange the spirit, yet before the drinking precept is broken, in real truth it is not a sin. But because drinking gives rise to guilt, alcohol externally violates the preventive prohibition. Transgression is produced amidst conditions, so it is still called having guilt. Because it runs contrary to abstaining from drink, it still does not count as keeping precepts."

10.28

The edict said: "A great being embodies the Way essentially through subtle understanding; a supreme person is elevated and discerning, prizing non-attachment. Fusing the mind to be as broad as the dharma-nature, giving free rein to intent to have the same capacity as empty space—none among the myriad things is not good, and in beauty or ugliness, what is not the Way? Thus, dwelling amid alcohol and lying among meat, how could there be any guilt? Traveling with wife in tow and child in arms, how can one say this gives rise to fault? Thus the Prince took a wife and attained the Way, whereas Cūḍapanthaka renounced his wife and sank into delusion; Vimalakīrti dwelt in the secular world and was elevated and discerning, whereas Śāriputra left home and was foolishly attached. Therefore, what is good cannot yet be deemed good, and what is bad does not suffice to be called bad. The extraordinary claim of prohibiting alcohol and cutting off meat is utterly contrary to the Great Way."

10.29

[Dao]lin presented a memorial, saying: "Dragons and tigers take scales and fangs as their capabilities; monkeys and birds take jumping and soaring as their talents. The gentleman takes understanding and practice as the Way; the worthy and wise take truth and reality to complete virtue. Hence internal and external praise the extraordinary, and the black-robed and white-robed value the lofty. If there is only understanding without practice, it is like a sandy well lacking moisture; if one is solely empty without substance, it is like empty clouds without rain. Therefore, craftsmen of the myriad things take the plumb line and marking cord as correct; those who govern all under Heaven take laws and principles as fundamental. Thus they can properly prevent the sprouting of evil and guard against sedition and treachery. Hence the fault of a single act hurts worse than cutting the flesh, and the goodness of a single word weighs heavier than a thousand pieces of gold. If a subtle understanding in the root of the mind could turn dwelling in evil into good, and an empty and clear spiritual wisdom could turn abiding in guilt into blessing, then my humble substance could be transferred to occupy the heavy responsibility of Heaven, and your sacred, supreme reverence could be shifted to occupy my lowly position. This would throw ruler and ministers into confusion and overturn high and low. In practical terms this is impossible; it has never existed from antiquity to the present. How is this different from speaking words of loyalty and filial piety while one's person is perpetually in rebellion, or discoursing on compassion and renunciation while physically always killing and stealing, or being verbally adept in a hundred skills yet incapable in any affair, or speaking of knowing ten thousand miles without setting foot outside the gate? These are all feelings running ahead while reality falls short, empty elevation without practical use. Therefore, talent may be great yet useless, while a principle may be minor yet bound to be effective. To cling to this as the Way is truly difficult to place faith in."

10.30

The decree said: "One who clings to subjective sentiments cannot yet discuss the Way; one of petty wisdom can hardly converse on truth. Thus, how could a fish in a shallow well know the depth and breadth of the Eastern Sea? When swallows and sparrows flit along hedges, how could they envy the soaring of the peng and the phoenix? All such cases cling stubbornly to the petty and so contravene the great orientation; they keep strictly to the letter and so harm the pervasive path. If I regard things through myself, there is nothing that is not myself. If things regard me through themselves, there is no self that is not a thing. Since I am no different from things, how then could things be different from me? When self and things are both forgotten, self and other are uniform as one. For one whose mind is open and empty, there are no things that are not identical; for one who leaves achievements behind, there is nothing that is inadmissible."

10.31

[Dao]lin memorialized: "Looking up, I receive Your Sagely intention. The names and principles are profound and vast, the source of the lineage boundlessly deep. There is no way to fathom it through investigation. This matter is like peering at the heavens—who can measure their breadth? It is also like gauging the ocean—how could one know its depth?

10.32

If one takes the small to make the great small, there is no great that is not small.

10.33

If one takes the great to make the small great, there is no small that is not great.

10.34

If the great is never not great, then the tip of an autumn hair is not petty and small.

10.35

If the small is never not small, then Mount Tai is not grand and great.

10.36

Therefore, the greatly great is not the greatness of the small; the smallish small is not the smallness of the great.

10.37

Thus, small and great are different within identity; great and small are identical within difference. If there is neither difference nor identity between small and great, how can there be identity and difference between small and great?

10.38

One then realizes that it is not that difference can differentiate identity, nor is there an identity that can identify difference. Without identity that can identify difference, difference is not identity.

10.39

Without difference that can differentiate identity, there is no identity or difference.

10.40

Therefore, having no identity, identity is not identity; having no difference, difference is not difference.

10.41

What identity and difference could differentiate identity? What is not identity and difference could identify difference?" The Emperor thereupon gave no reply. Thereupon, sovereign and minister remained silent, saying nothing for a long while.

10.42

The decree then asked: "Why are you so quiet and solitary? Do you intend to dissolve existence and return to nothingness? Do not cease your clear eloquence just because our conversation does not suit your feelings."

10.43

He memorialized: "The ancients felt trepidation when they had to speak and were anxious when giving voice to words. For this reason, in antiquity there were sovereigns who did not speak, and the world has handed down the memory of scholars who forgot achievement. Thus, halting speech expresses understanding; it is not out of feeling unsuited."

10.44

The decree said: "The ultimate person acts without contrivance (asaṃskṛta) and yet has never not acted. The wise do not speak and yet have never not spoken. There are also parrots whose speech is useless, and phoenixes whose silence sets a standard. A tree survives because it has no use; a wild goose meets death because it cannot honk. How do your present choices suit yourself?" He further said: "There are scholars who recognize a person from a single word, and there are those for whom the Way is present with a mere glance. There are also those who discern feelings upon seeing one's demeanor, and those who distinguish virtue upon hearing one's words. I have conversed with you for many days now; could the purport between us not be roughly understood? You may record for me what has been expounded here, to let the people of the world know our intention. Doing so will assist me—how could you feel ashamed of such loyalty?"

10.45

[Dao]lin, seeing that the Buddhadharma had been ruined and drowned, risked death to present his petition. The Emperor's mind was obstinate and adhered to his position, and did not follow what was argued. Though the debate had been brilliant, it ultimately did not fulfill his original wish. Hearing that in Chang'an, after the teaching had been abolished, the Tongdao Monastery was established separately, where what was studied was only Laozi and Zhuangzi, and they were fond of presenting empty discourses to synthesize and expound the Three Teachings, he hoped to use the prestige of doctrinal debate to make the Buddhist canon shine forth. He then submitted a memorial: ten śramaṇas of doctrinal study from the city of Yecheng, all intelligent, elevated, and luminous, requested to be admitted to the Tongdao Monastery. When the Emperor saw the memorial, he immediately said: "If you enter the Tongdao Monastery, you will study very well; there will be none without ultimate discourses, and it will be of great benefit in remedying your own defects." He then provided a meal, and when it was finished, said: "You may pack your baggage and enter the Pass; the rest of the group should draw back." On the first day of the fifth month, he arrived at the Yanshou Hall in Chang'an and was granted an audience. On the twenty-fourth day, the Emperor went to Yunyang Palace. On the first day of the sixth month, the Emperor died. Emperor Tianyuan ascended the throne in Tongzhou. On the thirteenth day of the ninth month, the Grand Minister of Rites, Duke of Qi, finished presenting a memorial. The Emperor granted it, saying: "The Buddhist principles are vast; the Way is exceedingly subtle and profound. Promoting and implementing them has its principles; the Dharma must be investigated. Submitting repeated memorials like this, however, risks causing delay and transgression." [Dao]lin memorialized: "The matter I originally presented was only for the flourishing of the Dharma. I have repeatedly offered earnest petitions solely wishing for its prompt implementation. Now Your Sagely Majesty has approved it, and the Deliberation Office has memorialized the decision; high and low are harmonious, and there is certainly no discordant intent. Once it is promulgated in a day, the whole world will rejoice. What more would I dare to say?" By the fifteenth day of the first month of the first year of Dacheng [579 CE],

10.46

the decree said: "Vastly establishing the mysterious wind, the Three Jewels (triratna) are revered; it is especially fitting that respect be cultivated. The Dharma transformation is vast and broad, and in principle it should be taken refuge in and venerated. Among the former śramaṇas, seven whose virtuous conduct is pure and lofty are to be settled in the west of the Zhengwu Hall to practice the Way." On the twenty-sixth day of the second month, the reign era was changed to Daxiang. An edict was further issued: "The Buddhadharma is vast and great, revered collectively throughout a thousand ages. How could it be suppressed and hidden, abandoned and not practiced? From this day forward, from princes and dukes down to the common people, all should cultivate its service, so as to know our intention." On that very day, the hall was adorned with revered statues, and devout veneration was fully performed. At that time, the two assemblies of Buddhists and Daoists each selected one Mahābhadanta to ascend the Dharma seat and expound the wondrous scriptures. This caused people to harbor fearlessness and alternately utter subtle words. The Buddhist principles were vast, boundless, profound, and unfathomable; the Daoist tradition was drifing, shallow, and clearly recognizable. Their sharp points were blunted in the assembly, and the princes and dukes sighed in admiration. By the twenty-eighth day of the fourth month, an edict was issued: "The Buddhist meanings are profound, miraculous, and vast. One must broadly open ritual transformations and permit their cultivation. Those who revere and uphold it should examine themselves according to the sūtras. Those who follow the Way need not shave their hair; mutilating the body runs counter to the Great Way. It is appropriate that they retain their beards and hair, and wear solemn clothing to advance toward the lofty orientation. Let there be selected from among the former śramaṇas one hundred and twenty men of fine virtue, chastity, profound and broad learning, whose names and reality are brilliant and whose reputation is commendable, to practice the Way for the state at Zhihu Temple. It is intended that their four requisites be supplied so that there is no deficiency. For the people, meditation and recitation shall not be obstructed in any way. Only in the capital and in Luoyang shall one monastery each be established; throughout the other prefectures and commanderies it is not yet permitted." On the twenty-eighth day of the fifth month of the first year of Daxiang of the Zhou [579 CE], Dharma Master Ren Daolin, at the residence of Wei Daohu in Tongzhou, compiled and recounted these matters and presented them to the throne. The Palace Grand Secretary, Duke of Pei, Yuwen Ze, personally examined it; the Junior Palace Grand Secretary, Duke of Linjing, Yuwen Hong, opened and read it; the Senior Gentleman for Ceremonies, Tuoba Xinggong, investigated it thoroughly; and the Chief Senior Gentleman, Shikou Chen, reviewed and verified it.

First 46 of 69 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

廣弘明集 — Classical Chinese