廣弘明集 4.18

4.18

The Master said: "If someone like you did not laugh at it, how could it be called the Way? You only cherish that in which things are alike; how could you understand that in which they differ? You merely wish to demolish it, yet you have not harmed the diamond. How could our Way, broad and profound, be taken lightly? I have heard that it is by administering the myriad affairs that a sage emperor is proclaimed great; it is by receiving the hundred rivers that a vast abyss becomes deep. A king does not disconnect himself from common folk, and an ocean does not cast aside minor streams. How much more so the Great Way of my Teacher, which is vast and delivers all, gathers in all who have minds, and makes no distinction between foe and friend! Naturally, it ranks degrees of virtue and precepts according to small and great, blending high and low among all classes. Thus there was an ordinary manure-clearer who nonetheless attained the stage of non-arising, while eminent men eligible for office fell headlong into the Avīci Hell. Inner secrets are hard to fathom; who can know external marks? Why do you presume to be the arbiter? I have never accepted you as a clear mirror. If one takes men merely by outward appearance, one goes far astray. Thus Shuxiang bowed to the words of Zongmie, and the elder was awakened by the discourse of the novice. Moreover, failure and success have their turns; adversity and prosperity have no permanence. Some begin in glory and later suffer humiliation; some start humble and later flourish. Their differing paths and tangled wheels can only be briefly stated. As for having not even enough land to stick an awl into, that did not mean one did not admire the virtues of Yao and Shun; failing to inherit an empire did not mean one lacked the sagehood of Tang and Wu. Who could have known that the lineage of the one who swallowed the six states was originally a groom who bred horses, or that the founder who established the three laws was merely a fugitive precinct chief? Fan and Guan rose from the butcher's stall and peddler's shop; Yi Yin and Lü Shang emerged from between kitchen and fishing line. Through successive ages of custom, illustrious families inherited their status, eventually becoming the powerful clans within the four seas and the noble houses of the five imperial tombs, their caps and carriages soaring to the clouds, their refinement overshadowing their age. Yet when the morning sun dries the dew, they envy the bondservant whose life is hard to cut short; when withered grass is laden with frost, they are mingled indistinguishably with ants and mole-crickets. From this we know that between employment and disuse, tiger and rat have no constant standing. Tracing the branch to the root, human standing is of one single measure. How can one heedlessly disdain someone for riding in a humble wicker cart or look down on one who lives behind a broken jar-window? Even if a man's talent equaled that of the Duke of Zhou, what would there be to admire in such arrogance? Let me attempt to speak of this: the court and market are vain and troublesome, leaving body and mind empty and exhausted; the wise jointly reject them, and worthy men together despise them. Feeling only that this aspiration of renunciation can be entered upon, one flees the worldly place and returns home. I have grown weary of future suffering and realize yesterday's errors; you, on the other hand, indulge in past desires and are misled into taking the present as right. Better to dwell peacefully in poverty, delight in the Way, be humble in youth, and possess many abilities. What use is there in being an ox sacrificial beast for the ancestral temple, or the boy's goose that gets cooked? Now I abide in simple plainness, my silent mindfulness free of distraction. I do not rely on guidance from humaneness and righteousness; how could I entertain turbulent thoughts about worldly splendor? Indeed, like selecting a horse while disregarding whether it is mare or stallion, I forget about sleep and food. Why should I hold fast to the minor abilities of polite conversation, or the petty skills of phonetics and textual glosses? Cultivating the mind suffices to repay kindness; why be confined to rituals of morning and evening inquiries? Broadly transforming beings suffices to guide them; why stop at matters of bowing and scraping? This is what I call the first superiority. My Teacher's delight is in seclusion and quietude, not merely in villages; his gracious acceptance of small offerings is not limited to pearls and necklaces. Therefore, he rested his form upon the five mountains and let his spirit roam within the three abidings. At times he accepted a child's offering of dirt, or dined on horse grain. He praised a small offering made with a pure mind and censured abundant gifts made with defiled marks. He wished thereby to allow beings to establish good roots based on this, and to express their sincere faith through it. This is originally the general framework of self-cultivation and the constant standard of making offerings; how could the Buddha's body need them? It is the fulfilled intention of sentient beings. Yet because worldly mortals are slow to understand and have not eliminated arrogance and jealousy, they vie to present famous treasures, seeking to reap abundant merit. Thus jade vessels and high stūpas block the sun, soaring halfway into the sky; painted rafters and flying eaves, continuous with the clouds, cover the realm. Vying for fame and prestige, where is the goodness in that? Clinging to marks and lacking understanding, they have come to this. Though it runs contrary to the ultimate true principle, it suffices to induce the joys of worldly splendor. Since ordinary mortals consider only this as merit, why would the Tathāgata suppress his teaching of it? This is what I call the second superiority. I have heard that discussing a peerless rare treasure is intended to relieve poverty; praising the divine incense of immortality is meant only to heal illness. Yet sentient beings believe in the mad potions of heterodox shamans and abandon the amṛta of true enlightenment; their affliction by poison has deepened, and their delusion has persisted long. When my Teacher appeared in the world, he originally undertook rescue as his work. Since those who understand me are few, there is no place for keeping silent. In enabling beings to recognize the truth and redirect themselves, what fault of self-praise could he incur? For two Buddhas do not appear side by side in the world, just as two suns do not share the sky. His title is 'Incomparable', desiring to propagate the ultimate teaching; he is not like a petty sage among gentlemen who practices the custom of modesty. Although the ultimate principle leads to the same end, different teachings are expounded according to dispositions; each scripture is proclaimed supreme according to what is fitting to be heard. This is what I call the third superiority. I have heard that if one does not pursue the profits of the four classes of people, one will not bring in the gold of a hundred gifts. Yet so long as great distress is not eliminated, one's dependent existence requires maintenance. I am called a mendicant (bhikṣu), so I accept offerings with contentment; you are called a donor, so you lavish them even to the extent of state and city. How can you hold me guilty of greed, rather than examining your own stinginess and blindness? Is this proof that sharing wealth harmoniously was uniquely suitable only to Guan Zhong and Bao Shuya? I have heard that dispensing supplies from the Heavenly King's armory still does not depend upon subordinate ministers; how much less can the offerings of merit dedicated to our Teacher be managed solely by ordinary monks? Though originally coming from the four assemblies, they now belong to the triratna for its use. When offerings are raised for the sake of the Way, the principle is incompatible with applying them to personal charity. Since they belong permanently to the assembly of the ten directions, they cannot be privately appropriated for oneself. Acting on one's own authority is forbidden by the Vinaya; entreating the assembly offers no ground for harmony. What virtue do you have to be worthy of receiving them? What feeling could make me dare to dispense them on my own? I only fear sharing in my own culpability; how could I desire greedy gain? Consider that a single grain weighing seven catties, when cast into water, caused smoke and fire to billow and boil; yet a bowl of leftover rice, given to others, satisfied entire herds of beings. If the Buddha did not begrudge it to a hungry hound, would he begrudge it to a human being? From this we know that unauthorized use naturally incurs blame, while dedicating offerings with permission brings benefit. This is truly due to the meager fortune of sentient beings; it is decidedly not a narrowness of mind in our Teacher. Just as hungry ghosts cannot see flowing streams, and a sick person cannot taste fine delicacies, the fault lies with the hunger and illness; can one say that the flowing streams and the flavors do not exist? I have heard that when a meritorious minister serves his lord, grain and silk are awarded without measure to reward his deeds; when an enlightened king reflects upon himself, the blue heavens effect virtue without speaking. You cannot lament your own lack of spiritual resonance, but solely slander our Teacher for lack of benevolence. Possessing such insatiable greed, how can you conduct yourself as a person? As for Lord Zheng exhausting his property on acquaintances, and Master Tian displaying generosity to guests, they merely sought prestige through extravagant dissipation; how could that compare to cultivating the field of merit and spreading it far and wide? This is what I call the fourth superiority. Although my words may be deficient, the principle is abundant. You are merely startled by what you have never heard, and bewildered by what you have not seen. From what I have said, you ought to be awakened." The young gentleman said: "Although the Master engages in lofty discourse to vindicate himself, in the end it resembles waiting by the stump for a hare. How vague and distant is what you discuss regarding karmic retribution! I have heard that when the primordial chaos opened, the clear and turbid were separated; based on different endowments of the meager and pure, the foolish and sage flowed into separate streams. As for the squareness of the head and roundness of the feet, the scales and feathers of those that swim and soar, the length of life spans, and the glory or disgrace of personal reputation—none of these is not the creation of nature; how could they be produced by past karma? I have seen those whose noble conduct was without flaw suffer early death and encounter calamity, while those who were mad, turbulent, and lacking in propriety lived out their natural span and enjoyed fortune. When encounters and fortunes are like this, what proof is there of cause and effect? Furthermore, when breath gathers, there is life; when it disperses, there is death. The bodily form and spirit return above and sink below; the myriad affairs become desolate, and in a hundred years all is finished. Where is there a heavenly palace? What is a hell? These are what ordinary men believe, but discerning scholars have never spoken of them. The Master is still deluded, trying to tie down the wind. Please reconsider it."