集古今佛道論衡 1.13

1.13

Recently, having found leisure in my retirement, I set down what I have reflected upon, looking up to the dark and subtle depths of the early philosophers and evaluating the great worthies along the spiritual path. Observing their manners and investigating their conduct, the distinction between higher and lower can practically be discerned. Now, the great sagely ones seize their opportune time; hence, their traces follow wherever circumstance leads. The great worthies are slightly inferior to them; hence, they expand or contract in accord with the great sages. Because what they respond to is different, their visible traces diverge—in abdication versus armed conflict. Because their way is second only to the subtle, their course of stepping forth or holding back does not differ [in principle]. This is just like dragons and tigers following wind and clouds, or forms and sounds uniting with their shadows and echoes: the principle is inherently natural, not brought about by summoning. For this reason, the Viscount of Ji and King Wen shared the same portent, yet found primal auspiciousness amid the maws of tigers and rhinos; Yan Hui and Confucius both met with adversity, yet wandered carefree between Kuang and Chen. Tang Yao emulated Heaven, and Ji and Xie aided his transformation; Tang and Wu carried out the mandate of revolution, and Yi Yin and Lü Shang assisted their achievements. Arguing from this, they accord with the thesis of shadows and echoes and the talk of 'only you and I'—how could this not be credible? Why is this? The great worthies draw close to observing the images. In observing the images, they understand the vessel; understanding the vessel, they encompass beforehand; encompassing beforehand good fortune and bad, they thereby maneuver the forms. In this, they are one with governing, responding to and engaging with the myriad quarters; in the end they preserve primal auspiciousness, whether in obstruction or success, hindrance or fluidity—their measure is one. It is only that they delight in the sage and take joy in ease, yet depend on external conditions to flourish; they revere the hidden yet cannot fully unite with the hidden; they rejoice in stillness yet cannot abide entirely in stillness. It is by this that superiority and inferiority are judged. As for the middling worthies, the third class of persons, they are separated from the sages by a gap; thus the way of embodying the hidden is not fully realized, and their natural application cannot attain profound unity. Yet, yearning for antiquity and cherishing excellence, their loftier ideals halt in frustration; looking up in admiration to the pure mores and exclusively chanting of ultimate emptiness, there are some who lodge among forests and gorges like the likes of Chaofu and Xu You, or whose words and deeds hold the reins [of independence] like the fellows of Laozi and Pengzu. This too is not done intentionally; it is of the natural order of things. Now, an agitated disposition loves stillness, and a soft nature cherishes firmness; profaning what is habitually practiced and enjoying what is rarely heard are the common ways of the world. Therefore, when seeing one-sided, contrarian statements, people no longer investigate their suitability to circumstances; seeing discourses of bending and straightening, they no longer realize the error of exceeding straightness. Examining what Laozi wrote that agrees with the sage's teaching: are his metaphors of cutting in place of the master carpenter and of webbed toes and extra fingers absurd? What opposes the sage's teaching goes far from what is suitable for saving the world and contravenes the meaning of 'the bright Way seeming dim.' When do the Six Classics ever lack instruction on emptiness and stillness, or lessons on humility and restraint? Confucius said: 'Transmitting and not creating, trusting in and loving antiquity, I quietly compare myself to Lao Peng.' Examining this intent, the way of Lao Peng is already encompassed within the sage's teaching! Moreover, it merely points to two matters, and was not an absolute claim. How is this clear? The sage is profoundly still—what would he not love? Furthermore, from the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors downward, none did not create. Hence the hexagram images of the Changes and the classic tomb-texts are brilliantly displayed, and rafters, eaves, and clothing arose with the times. Where is there only transmitting and not creating? Therefore the Changes says: 'When the sage creates, the myriad things behold him.' The utterance of these words merely pointed out that the virtues of Lao Peng bore some slight resemblance to the points of his own visible conduct. It is also just like: 'Concealing resentment and befriending the person—Zuoqiuming was ashamed of it; Qiu was also ashamed of it.' How could that compare to 'there is nothing in my words that does not please him' as the utmost in mutual understanding? Furthermore, Yan Hui and Confucius did not make health preservation their concern, while Laozi and Pengzu cultivated it; Confucius and Yan Hui made themselves one with common people, while Laozi and Pengzu set themselves apart. All these several items are not without the traces of those inferior to the sages; and yet their book often contains contradictions, roughly listed as follows. May the men of broad cultivation and noble attire fortunately eliminate their errors! Moreover, I do not understand Lao Dan's intention in soaring away: was it to lay down instruction for the Rong and Di barbarians and guide different domains? If he wished to clearly proclaim and guide different kinds, then 'left-folded lapels' are not the place for dark transformation, and a solitary departure is not an act of laudable retirement. When the Chinese lands were declining, disseminating instruction was the priority. The teachings of the sage proceed from the near to the distant; there has never been a wandering across such distant perils as that. If he feared misfortune and sought to avoid the land, then he could have hidden within the sage's gate: the Shang court and the state of Lu each had those who remained unaffected. If one attains the Dao, then the butchering blade moves with room to spare and whatever ground one touches meets with primal auspiciousness: why go against the mind of Heaven among the Rong and Mo barbarians? If he could not do so, was he not merely of the kind who hides at court to pray for immortality?