集古今佛道論衡 4.5

4.5

顯慶三年四月下　勅。追僧道士各七人入內論義。時會隱法師竪五蘊義。神泰法師立九斷知義。道士黃𩔦李榮黃壽等次第論義。並以莫識名體。茫如夢海。雖事往返牢落無歸。次下勅。遣道士竪義。李榮立道生萬物義。大慈恩寺僧慧立登論座。先敘云　皇帝皇后神功聖德。遠夷順化宇內肅清。豈直掩映軒羲。亦乃牢籠周漢云云。又嘆仰佛化戡濟黎元。文多不載。便問榮云。先生云。道生萬物。未知此道為是有知為是無知。答曰。道經云。人法地。地法天。天法道。既為天地之法。豈曰無知。難曰。向敘道為萬物之母。今度萬物不由道生。何者若使道是有知則惟生於善。何故亦生於惡。據此善惡昇沈。叢雜總生則無知矣。如不通悟。請廣其類。至如人君之中開闢之時。何不早生今日　聖主子育黔黎與之榮樂。乃先誕共工蚩尤桀紂幽厲之徒而殘酷群生。授以塗炭。人臣之中何不惟生稷偰夔龍之輩。而復生飛廉惡來靳尚新王之侶。諛諂其君令邦國危亂哉。羽族之中何不惟生鸞鳳善鳥。而復生梟鷲惡鳥乎。毛群之中何不惟生騏驥騮馬。而復生豺狼豪蝟乎。草木之中何不惟生松柏梓桂蕙蓀蘭菊。而復生樠櫪樗棘葶艾蒺茨乎。既而混生萬物不蠲善惡。則道是無知不能生物。何得云天地取法而為萬物皆之宗始乎。據我如來大聖窮理盡性之教也。天地萬物是眾生業力所感。善業多者。則瑠璃為地黃金界道。瓊枝蔭陌玉葉垂空。甘露充糧綺衣為座。惡業多者。則沙壤為土瓦礫為衢。稗飯充虛麻衣被體。泥行雨宿霜穫暑耘。日夜驅馳以供公府。皆自業自作。無人使之。吾子心愚不識。橫言道生。道實不生。一何可愍。李榮得此一徵愕然不知何對立。時乘機拂弄。榮亦杜口默然。於是𧹞然下座。次道士黃壽登座。竪老子名義。會隱法師將事整容。與其抗論。立唯論難之體褒貶為先。恐難道名有所觸誤。即奏云。黃壽身預黃冠。不知忌諱。城狐社鼠徒事依憑國家。遠承龍德之後。陛下即李老君之孫。豈有對人之孫。公談祖禰之名字。至如五千文。內大有好義。不能標列而說聖人之名。計罪論刑黃壽死有餘。及於是蒙　勅云。是更竪別義。壽因此挫銳。流汗失圖。雖事言對次序乖越。遞相擊論遂至逼瞑。僧等見將燭來便起辭退　勅曰。向來觀師等兩家論義。宗旨未甚分明立。遂奏云。向來兩家議論。宗旨不明。誠如聖旨。何者眾僧竪義。道士不識其源。既恥無言遂鏜闒漫語。至如僧竪五蘊義。黃賾以蔭名來難。且蔭以覆蓋為宗。蘊以積聚為義。如色有十一聚。在色名之下。識有八種聚。在一名之下。舉統以收稱為蘊義。若以蔭名來難。義理全乖。又神泰竪九斷知義。道士生來未聞此名。雖上論座不知發問之處。無以遮羞遂浪作餘語。真可謂欲適南越而總轡北冥。馬足雖行朔方終非趣越之步。李榮浪語亦復如是。由是宗旨不明。塵黷　聖聽。過在道士。然佛法大宗因緣為義。故論云。未曾有一法不從因緣生。且如眼見殿柱須具五緣。一識心不亂。二眼根不壞。三藉以光明。四有境現前。五中間無障。必具此緣方得見柱。若使羲光已沒龍燭未明。縱有朱楹何由可見。又如禾子穀子陽和之月。遇水土人功則能生芽。夏盛甕裏冬委地中。緣不具故畢竟不生。人亦如是。內則業惑為因。外則父母為緣。身方得生。父母乖各終不得生。如是禽魚鳥獸萬物皆爾。從因緣生。故經云。深入緣起斷諸邪見。有無二邊無復餘習。以佛智慧窮法實相。是故號佛為無等覺。為天人師。外道之輩則不如是。皆悉邪網覆心倒針刺眼。或言。諸法自然而生。即是此方老莊之義。或言。諸法從自在天生。韋紐天生。冥性生。或言無因。或言宿作。此並西方異道之計也。皆不知法本不識因緣。信意放言詿誤蒙俗。致使天人惑其飾詐。又對聖上說三性義。一遍計性。二依他起性。三圓成實性。外道所立遍計性收。事等空花由來非有。廣解三性言多不具。自上起來經過食頃僧及道士陪侍臣僚佐兩行立聽時既夜久息言奉辭　勅云好去。各還宿所經停少時。勅使告云。語師等因緣義大好。何不早論。于時三藏已下莫不欣慶。斯則無勞廟略碎蕩高旗。不藉軍威堅城屠陷。見之今日矣。于時以道士不識蘊蔭斷知等義。莫允　帝情。散席之後承內給事王君德云　勅語。道士等何不學。佛經因斯以言釋李宗人學業優劣辯給通塞實錄如前。貧富之懷亦具瞻矣。

In the fourth month of the third year of the Xianqing reign period (658 CE), an imperial decree was issued summoning seven monks and seven Daoist priests to enter the palace and debate doctrines. At that time, Dharma Master Huiyin established the doctrine of the five aggregates (pañca-skandha). Dharma Master Shentai established the doctrine of the nine objects of knowledge to be abandoned (parijñeyāḥ). The Daoist priests Huang Ze, Li Rong, Huang Shou, and others took turns debating doctrines. However, because they recognized neither the terms nor their essences, they were as bewildered as if adrift upon an ocean of dreams. Although there was an exchange of arguments, they were stranded and reached no conclusion. Next, an imperial decree was issued dispatching the Daoist priests to establish a proposition. Li Rong established the proposition that 'the Dao generates the myriad things.' The monk Huili of the Great Cien Temple mounted the debate seat. First, he stated: 'The spiritual achievements and sage virtues of the Emperor and Empress have caused the distant barbarians to submit to their transforming influence, and the realm is peaceful and purified. How could they merely outshine Xuan[yuan] and [Fu]xi? They also encompass the Zhou and the Han,' and so forth. Furthermore, he extolled with reverence the Buddhist transformation that delivers the common people; the text is lengthy and not recorded here. Then he asked Rong, saying: 'You, Sir, say that the Dao generates the myriad things. We do not know whether this Dao possesses consciousness or lacks consciousness?' Rong replied, saying: 'The Daoist scriptures state: "Man models himself after Earth; Earth models itself after Heaven; Heaven models itself after the Dao." Since it is the model for Heaven and Earth, how could it be said to lack consciousness?' [Huili] objected, saying: 'Just now you stated that the Dao is the mother of the myriad things. Now I infer that the myriad things do not arise from the Dao. Why is this? If the Dao were made to possess consciousness, it would generate only good. For what reason does it also generate evil? Based on this rising and falling of good and evil being generated all together in a jumble, it must lack consciousness. If you do not yet understand, please let me broaden the analogies: As for among the rulers of men, at the time the cosmos opened, why did it not generate earlier today's Sage Lord to nurture the black-haired people as children and bestow upon them glory and joy? Instead, it first gave birth to the likes of Gonggong, Chiyou, Jie, Zhou, You, and Li, who were cruel to the multitude of beings and cast them into misery. Among ministers of state, why did it not generate only the likes of Ji, Xie, Kui, and Long, but also generated the cohorts of Feilian, Elai, Jin Shang, and Wang Mang, who flattered their rulers and brought peril and chaos to their states? Among the feathered race, why did it not generate only auspicious birds like the luan and phoenix, but also generated wicked birds like the owl and vulture? Among the furred beasts, why did it not generate only fine steeds like the qiji and liuma, but also generated jackals, wolves, porcupines, and hedgehogs? Among trees and plants, why did it not generate only pines, cypresses, catalpas, cinnamons, huicao, suncao, orchids, and chrysanthemums, but also generated soft pines, scrub oaks, tree-of-heaven, brambles, cockleburs, mugwort, and caltrops? Since it indiscriminately generates the myriad things without eliminating evil, then the Dao lacks consciousness and cannot generate things. How can it be said that Heaven and Earth take it as their model, and that it is the ultimate origin of the myriad things? According to the teaching of our Tathāgata, the Great Sage, which exhausts principle and plumbs nature, Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things are induced by the karmic force of sentient beings. Those with abundant wholesome karma have lapis lazuli for ground, gold dividing the paths, jasper branches shading the roads, and jade leaves hanging in the sky; sweet dew satisfies them as food, and gossamer robes serve as their seats. Those with abundant unwholesome karma have sand and soil for earth, gravel and tiles for thoroughfares, barnyard millet to stave off hunger, and hemp garments covering their bodies; they walk through mud and lodge in the rain, harvest in frost and weed in summer heat, toiling day and night to serve the public office. All this is produced by one's own karma; no one else brings it about. You, Sir, in the foolishness of your mind do not recognize this, and wildly say that the Dao generates them. In truth, the Dao does not generate them. How deeply pitiable! When Li Rong met this challenge, he was stunned and did not know how to reply. Huili then seized the opportunity to mock him, and Rong also kept his mouth shut in silence. Thereupon, he slunk down from his seat in embarrassment. Next, the Daoist priest Huang Shou mounted the seat and established the nominal meaning of Laozi. Dharma Master Huiyin was about to adjust his countenance and contend with him, but Huili, considering that in the essence of debate and refutation, praising and blaming come first, and fearing that refuting the name of the Dao might cause some offense, immediately memorialized: 'Huang Shou belongs to the yellow-caps, yet he does not know taboos. Like a fox in the city walls or a rat at the altar, he relies on them in vain. The state has inherited from afar the line of dragon-like virtue; Your Majesty is indeed the descendant of Li, the Old Lord. How could one, in the presence of someone's descendant, publicly debate the personal name of his ancestor? As for the text of the five thousand characters, it contains many noble doctrines; yet he cannot set them forth, and speaks instead of the Sage's personal name. If his offense is weighed according to penal law, Huang Shou deserves more than death!' Upon this, an imperial decree was received, saying: 'Let him establish another proposition instead.' Shou's vigor was thereby crushed; sweating profusely, he lost his composure. Although there were verbal exchanges, their sequence was disordered. As they attacked and argued with each other, it finally approached nightfall. Seeing candles being brought in, the monks arose to take their leave. The Emperor said: 'Observing the debate of doctrines between the two schools just now, their fundamental tenets were not very clear.' Huili thereupon memorialized: 'That the fundamental tenets of the debates between the two schools just now were not clear is truly as the Sage's decree has said. Why is this? When the assembly of monks established a proposition, the Daoist priests did not know its origin. Being ashamed to remain silent, they ended up babbling disorderly words. For instance, when a monk established the doctrine of the five aggregates (skandha), Huang Ze objected using the term "shades" (yin). Now, "shade" takes covering as its primary meaning, whereas "aggregate" takes accumulation as its definition. Just as form has eleven kinds of accumulation under the name of "form", consciousness has eight kinds of accumulation under a single name. Gathering them together under an overarching category is called the doctrine of "aggregates". If he objects using the term "shades", the doctrinal principle is completely contrary. Furthermore, when Shentai established the doctrine of the nine objects of knowledge to be abandoned, the Daoist priests had never heard this term in all their lives; although mounting the debate seat, they did not know where to pose a question. Having no way to cover their shame, they recklessly spoke other words. This can truly be called wishing to go to Nan-Yue while holding the reins toward the Northern Dark; though the horse's hooves travel through the northern regions, they are ultimately not steps toward Yue. Li Rong's reckless talk was also like this. For this reason, the fundamental tenets were unclear, sullying the imperial hearing; the fault lies with the Daoist priests. However, the cardinal tenet of the Buddha-Dharma takes dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) as its meaning. Therefore, a treatise says: "There has never been a single phenomenon that does not arise from causes and conditions." For example, for an eye to see a pillar in the hall, five conditions must be fulfilled: first, the conscious mind is not disturbed; second, the visual faculty is undamaged; third, it relies upon light; fourth, the objective sphere is present before it; fifth, there is no obstruction in between. Only when these conditions are completely fulfilled can the pillar be seen. If the sun's light has already set and the dragon candles are not yet lit, even if there are vermilion pillars, by what means could they be seen? Furthermore, when rice seeds or grain seeds encounter water, soil, and human labor during the warm spring months, they can sprout. If stored in a jar during the summer or cast upon the ground in winter, they will ultimately never sprout because conditions are lacking. Human beings are also like this: internally, karma and delusion serve as the cause, and externally, father and mother serve as conditions; only then can a body be born. If father and mother are parted, it can never be born. Birds, fish, and the myriad creatures are all like this: they arise from causes and conditions. Therefore, a sūtra says: "Deeply entering dependent origination, one cuts off all heterodox views, so that neither the extreme of existence nor of non-existence leaves any remaining trace." Through the Buddha's wisdom, one plumbs the true mark of phenomena; for this reason, the Buddha is called the Incomparably Awakened One, the Teacher of Gods and Humans. The cohorts of outsiders are not like this: the net of heresy entirely covers their minds, and an inverted needle pricks their eyes. Some say that phenomena arise naturally (ziran)—this is the doctrine of Laozi and Zhuangzi in this land. Some say that phenomena arise from Īśvara, arise from Viṣṇu, or arise from primordial matter (prakṛti); some say there is no cause (ahetuka); some say it is past deeds (kṛta). These are all the tenets of heterodox paths in the Western Regions. None of them knows the root of phenomena, nor do they recognize causes and conditions; indulging their whims, they utter reckless words that deceive and mislead the ignorant worldly folk, causing gods and humans to be confused by their false pretenses.' Huili also spoke to the Emperor about the doctrine of the three natures (trisvabhāva): first, the nature of conceptual fabrication (parikalpita-svabhāva); second, the nature of dependence on others (paratantra-svabhāva); third, the nature of absolute consummation (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva). 'What is established by outsiders is subsumed under the nature of conceptual fabrication; like flowers in the sky, it has never truly existed.' His detailed exposition of the three natures was voluminous and is not recorded in full. From Huili's arrival at the seat, the time of a meal passed; the monks and Daoist priests, together with the attendant ministers and officials, stood in two rows listening. As it had grown late in the night, they ceased speaking and took their leave. The Emperor said: 'Farewell.' Each returned to their lodgings. After a short while, an imperial messenger arrived and announced: 'Tell the masters that your doctrine of causes and conditions was excellent! Why did you not debate it earlier?' At that time, from the Tripiṭaka Master Xuanzang on down, all rejoiced. This was truly a case of crushing high banners without laboring temple strategies, and taking strongholds without relying on military might, witnessed on this very day! At that time, because the Daoist priests did not understand the doctrines of aggregates, shades, objects of knowledge to be abandoned, and so forth, none satisfied the Emperor's mind. After the assembly dispersed, according to the Palace Attendant Wang Junde, an imperial decree was issued saying: 'Why do the Daoist priests not study Buddhist scriptures?' From this, the superiority and inferiority in learning and the proficiency or obstruction in debate between the followers of the Buddha and Li [Laozi] were truly recorded as above; the contrast between poverty and wealth is plain for all to see.