廣弘明集 12.26

12.26

I, Gai, have heard that among the eight great practices of awakening, having few desires is foremost; and among the names of the five bhikṣus, mendicant is supreme. Therefore, having few desires and reducing worldly concerns leaves one free from the anxieties of administration. A mendicant entrusts himself to conditions; how could he bear the burden of hoarding? Laozi said: 'Much hoarding is sure to bring heavy loss.' The Rites of Zhou states: 'To amass yet be able to distribute.' Being able to amass yet distribute accords in practice with dāna. 'Much hoarding is sure to bring heavy loss' accords in words with the sage's intent. Examining Laozi, he practiced the Way of non-action (asaṃskṛta), dedicated himself purely to emptiness and clarity, cultivated a quiescent mind, and did not engage in worldly affairs. Yet the Daoists of today do not follow or uphold this at all. Thus, at their great fasts of the two registers and celebratory assemblies of the three primes, they gather foolish factions and dupe bewildered followers. They prepare kitchen feasts to invite guests and set out wine and fish to entertain visitors. Consequently, the masters of the fast divide meat just like Cook Ding, and the abbey directors oversee the fish just like butchers. The meat must be dried and cured, and is swallowed while mingled with blood; the wine is made clear and mellow, or sipped half-fermented with dregs. Their gluttony is hard to sate, their indulgence boundless. Furthermore, they demand large quantities of silk and damask as 'destiny ribbons', and broadly levy millet and wheat as 'Daoist taxes.' Through this, they conduct trade, piling goods until storehouses overflow; and through turn-over, their stores fill granary after granary. How could their ravine-like hearts ever know a limit? As for high gates and official clans, they resolutely refuse to turn to them; only base-born field hands flock together to join them. This is not out of veneration for their Daoist teachings, but solely out of greed for their wine and fish. Their vulgar disorder is too vast to recount in full. Moreover, their followers are low and vulgar, and their human caliber is mediocre and common. Hence, those who leave home as śramaṇas are mostly noble and eminent, whereas Daoists residing in abbeys are generally lowly and obscure. Therefore, after Emperor Wu of Liang ascended the throne, he offered his person to enter the temple and make offerings to the monastic community. In the time of the Sui emperor, the son of King Xiao of Qin relinquished his rank, left home, and practiced the Buddha-dharma. Never has one heard of an emperor offering his person to enter an abbey, nor has one ever seen a prince leave home to serve the Dao. As for other noble houses, scholar clans, and wealthy, powerful families, some husbands and wives have bidden each other farewell and left the secular world together; sons and daughters have encouraged one another to leave home together. What eyes see and ears hear needs no further elaboration! If [Fu Yi] says that terminating the stores of monks and nuns will make the military and common people abundant and affluent: whether one is poor or rich is entirely due to karmic conditions, and nobility or baseness depends wholly on fate. The foolish and the wise cannot trade thoughts; the beautiful and the ugly cannot swap bodies. Thus the sutra says: 'Pleasant and unpleasant retributions are determined by karma.' The classics say: 'Good and bad fortune in one's physiognomy are suspended in Heaven.' Speaking from this, as for soldiers and commoners whose karma is to be poor, even if given [wealth], they cannot keep it; but those whose destiny is to be rich, even if left alone, will always abound. Thus Emperor Wen of Han favored Deng Tong because of a dream, yet a physiognomist predicted that Tong would be impoverished and starve to death. The emperor said, 'Enriching him rests with me; why speak of poverty?' He bestowed on him a copper mountain, granting him exclusive license to cast coin. Later, encountering trouble, he fled and starved to death in another's house. Again, a serving maid of the King of Goguryeo became pregnant; a physiognomist predicted that [the child] would be noble and become a king. The king said, 'He is not my offspring,' and wanted to kill him. The maid said, 'A vapour descended from Heaven; thus I became pregnant.' When the child was born, the king deemed him inauspicious. Cast into a pigpen, pigs breathed warm breath upon him; abandoned in a stable, horses suckled him, so that he did not die. In the end, he became the King of Buyeo. Hence we know that karmic conditions and destiny are determined by unseen signs; what is destined not to be can neither be given nor taken away. The treatise says: According to what the sutras clarify, karmic fruits do not err. Doing good brings blessing; doing evil suffers calamity. This principle is crystal clear; how could it give rise to doubt? If I now cite sutras and rely on principle, it would only deepen his profound delusion. Let us rather rely on the secular texts to point to events and enlighten his shallow understanding. For instance, in the time of Wu Ding, a mulberry and a paper mulberry grew together in the court at Hao. The Grand Astrologer divined: 'Wild weeds growing in the court means the court will perish.' Wu Ding was terrified; he conducted himself modestly and cultivated goodness. The mulberry and paper mulberry withered and died, and the way of the Yin flourished anew. Was this not doing good and obtaining blessings? Again, in the time of Emperor Xin, a sparrow gave birth to a hawk in a corner of the city wall. The Grand Astrologer divined: 'The small giving birth to the great means the state will surely prosper.' Emperor Xin was arrogant and tyrannical, and did not cultivate good governance. The state of Yin subsequently perished. Was this not doing evil and suffering calamity? As Fu Yi said: 'Using the real wealth of this life to buy the vain reputation of the afterlife.' His intention is to allege that while there is giving during life, there is no recompense after death. How could one even converse with such extreme ignorance and darkness? One sees with one's own eyes in spring that sowing seeds empties the storehouses, yet the autumn harvest and winter storage fill the granaries to overflowing. Therefore, giving brings future recompense, as attested by the conception of overlapping coins and the hand-born coins; virtue must meet with present reward, as brought about by the bird bearing pearls and the monkey carrying the deer. These are clearly attested in the scriptures and canonical books; how could they be doubted? Furthermore, he says that bowing to the Buddha brings no nobility, and hosting a vegetarian feast brings no wealth or honor. Examining the state's Great Ancestral Temple, the spirits of the late emperors are attended by the hundred deities, and relied upon by the myriad people; when the Supreme Sovereign kneels and bows, he is thereby able to abide in great rank and occupy an exalted title; when ministers and officials bow low, they receive favors and stipends, and enjoy wealth and honor. How much more so for the Buddha, the Dharma King, whose majestic spirit is lofty and far-reaching, whose virtue surpasses a thousand sages, and whose Way crowns the hundred spirits! Worshipping with sincere prayer should by principle bring wealth and honor; taking refuge with utmost devotion will surely lead to nobility. In ancient times, a man who aided a starving fellow with a single ladle of food was repaid with assistance to his carriage wheels. Now, in offering a single feast to the Great Sage, how could there be no recompense of fortune and emolument? When compared categorically, by principle there is no cause for doubt. In my, Gai's, view, stores are of two kinds: the first is communal, which the Buddha has already permitted; the second is private, which the Tathāgata long ago prohibited. Permitting the communal and prohibiting the private is the clear instruction of the Great Sage. Daoists should be ordered to study these established regulations, prohibit the private and permit the communal, gradually learning the Buddha-dharma. Therefore, the Spring and Autumn Annals says: Duke Huan of Qi inquired about propriety from Zuoshi and Zichan. Zuoshi said: 'Propriety is the warp of Heaven, the righteousness of Earth, and the conduct of the people. Great states use it; small states emulate it.' Now, for the Daoists to emulate the Buddha is of the same category as this.