廣弘明集 7.9

7.9

[Ji] also remarked: 'Moreover, examining Śākya's emergence among the Rong, he was born from the splitting of the flank, and Māyā thereupon perished. This affair accords with the owl and the jing-beast. When he grew older he contended for succession, feeling internally insecure; he turned his back on his father and rebelled against his sovereign, his treasonous insolence becoming ever greater. Devadatta threw rocks at him and Nanda drew his bow against him. He changed and subverted the constant way, starving his own physical frame—how could he save living beings? Gathering together villainous followers, he altered their garments and shaved their hair, setting forth empty falsehoods unworthy of obedience. Among the ninety-six paths, this path is the most avaricious, matching their lewdness and stupidity, so that the masses revere and believe it. As for when King Virūḍhaka slaughtered the Śākyas, Gautama stood by the roadside and merely watched; while alive he did not even preserve his kin, so how could he save those distant [from him] after death? This indeed is failing to practice loyalty and filial piety. If all under Heaven emulate this, Your Majesty will have nowhere to establish yourself. This is the second reason why I do not accept it.'

[Daoxuan's rebuttal:] We examine the scriptures: being born from the splitting of the flank is a meaning that appears in earlier scriptures. Because carrying the Heavenly Teacher possesses great merit, it is not something that human offerings can sustain. Furthermore, knowing that his mother's lifespan was nearing its end, after seven days he was born, and later reported back to the heavens to repay her. Thus, birth from the flank or incision of the back did indeed occur; it is not the same as the owl and jing-beast. Why slanderously conflate them? The matters of drawing the bow and throwing rocks arose from expedient conduct; how slanderous to call it rebelling against one's sovereign and treasonous insolence! He starved himself to convert the non-Buddhists, and altered customs to quiet the gate of greed. Yet to say that among all paths the Buddhist path is the most avaricious is entirely defamatory. The state was punished without his defending it so as to demonstrate that karma is difficult to escape. The various scriptures expound this broadly; the path of principle is never obscured. Ji was skillful at stitching together fragments to compose his essay; this shows that being talented does not preclude being unprincipled.