[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [集古今佛道論衡](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104) › 3.12 # 集古今佛道論衡 3.12 集古今佛道論衡 3.12 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3.12) 答曰。天上天下唯道至極。最大更無大於道者　難曰。道是至極最大更無大於道者。亦可道是至極之法。更無法於道者。答曰。道是至極之法。更無法於道者　難曰。老經自云。人法地。地法天。天法道。道法自然。何意自違本宗。乃云更無法於道者。若道是至極之法。遂更有法於道者。何意道法最大。不得更有大於道者　答曰。道只是自然。自然即是道。所以更無別法能法於道者　難曰。道法自然。自然即是道。亦得自然還法道不　答曰。道法自然。自然不法道　難曰。道法自然。自然不法道。亦可道法自然。自然不即道　答曰。道法自然。自然即是道。所以不相法　難曰。道法自然。自然即是道。亦可地法於天。天即是地。然地法於天。天不即地。故知道法自然。自然不即道。若自然即是道。天應即是地。 > \[The Daoist\] replied, "Above heaven and below heaven, only the Dao is ultimate and paramount; it is the greatest, and none is greater than the Dao." > \[Huicheng\] challenged him, saying, "If the Dao is ultimate and paramount, the greatest with none greater than the Dao, might one also say that the Dao is the ultimate principle, and no principle models itself on the Dao?" > \[The Daoist\] replied, "The Dao is the ultimate principle, and no principle models itself on the Dao." > \[Huicheng\] challenged him, saying, "The scripture of Lao\[zi\] itself states: 'Man models himself on Earth; Earth models itself on Heaven; Heaven models itself on the Dao; the Dao models itself on Naturalness.' For what reason do you contradict your own school, then asserting that no principle models itself on the Dao? If the Dao is the ultimate principle, yet there is further a principle upon which the Dao models itself, why then should the principle of the Dao be the greatest, and there can be none greater than the Dao?" > \[The Daoist\] replied, "The Dao is simply Naturalness, and Naturalness is precisely the Dao. Therefore there is no separate principle that can model itself on the Dao." > \[Huicheng\] challenged him, saying, "If 'the Dao models itself on Naturalness' and 'Naturalness is precisely the Dao,' then can Naturalness in turn model itself on the Dao, or not?" > \[The Daoist\] replied, "The Dao models itself on Naturalness, but Naturalness does not model itself on the Dao." > \[Huicheng\] challenged him, saying, "If the Dao models itself on Naturalness, but Naturalness does not model itself on the Dao, then it must also be that though the Dao models itself on Naturalness, Naturalness is not identical to the Dao." > \[The Daoist\] replied, "The Dao models itself on Naturalness, and Naturalness is precisely the Dao; thus they do not model themselves on one another." > \[Huicheng\] challenged him, saying, "If 'the Dao models itself on Naturalness' and 'Naturalness is precisely the Dao,' then might Earth also model itself on Heaven, and Heaven be precisely Earth? Yet Earth models itself on Heaven, while Heaven is not Earth. Therefore one knows that though the Dao models itself on Naturalness, Naturalness is not identical to the Dao. If Naturalness were precisely the Dao, then Heaven ought to be precisely Earth!" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3.11) - [Next: 3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3.13) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104~en-mt.3.12) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2104.3.12) · Pramāṇa