廣弘明集 14.18

14.18

In the past, I myself used to cite the Classic of Filial Piety's prohibition against harming [the body] to mock the śramaṇas' shaving of beard and hair, alleging that they opposed the Way of the ancient kings and lost the righteousness of loyalty and filial piety. Today I have awakened to the fact that this is not so. When serving one's lord and parents, if one fulfills devotion, even sacrificing one's body is called benevolence; but if one diminishes loyalty and filial piety to steal survival, merely keeping the skin whole is unrighteous. Discourses praise risking one's life in the face of danger; ritual rules guard against seeking an improper escape in times of hardship. How can one sweepingly reprimand bodily harm, and mindlessly fret over skin and hair? Slicing thigh flesh or offering one's liver: the injury is extreme indeed; clipping the beard and shaving the hair: the harm is very slight. In establishing loyalty without regard for life, none among commentators finds fault; in seeking the Way without cherishing hair, why alone consider it an offense? Tang pitied the multitude and even offered his body to be burned to pray for rain; Mozi promoted universal love and wished to wear himself down from heel to crown. How much more so when one deeply seeks blessings and benefits for sovereign and father above—how could the harm to beard and hair be worth minding? Moreover, the teachings of the sages follow different paths to reach the same destination; the way of the gentleman may turn against the constant code yet accord with righteousness. Taibo was such a man: he renounced the care of parents at home, used gathering medicinal herbs as an excuse not to return, cast off the dress and ornaments of the central lands, and adopted the cutting of hair as adornment. Turning against the constant code and violating the rites could not be more extreme than this. Yet Zhongni praised him, saying: 'Taibo may indeed be said to possess supreme virtue.' What was the reason? Although his outer traces turned away from lord and parents, his heart was loyal to family and state; although his appearance was impaired among the Baiyue, his virtue was fulfilled in the thrice yielding of the throne. Therefore, Taibo cast aside the system of robes and caps without harming supreme virtue; then how does the śramaṇa's renouncing the attire of the gentry injure the wondrous Way? Although they change their dress and alter their appearance, contravening the ordinary conventions of ministers and sons, they place faith in the Way and direct their minds, praying for abundant blessings for sovereign and parents. They pain their bodies and minds, cultivating the multitude of virtues of renunciants, bequeathing to their lords and fathers the deep felicitations of successive kalpas. Is their loyalty and filial piety not abundant? To say that good śramaṇas are disloyal is something I cannot believe.