集沙門不應拜俗等事 1.51

1.51

詳省別告及八座書。問沙門所以不敬王者。意義在尊主崇上。遠存名體徵引老氏。同王侯於三大。以資生運通之道故宜重其神器。若推其本以尋其源。咸稟氣於兩儀。受形於父母。則以生生通運之道為弘。資存日用之理為大。故不宜受其德而遺其禮。霑其惠而廢其敬。此檀越立意之所據。貧道亦不異於高懷。求之於佛教。以尋沙門之道。理則不然。何者佛經所明凡有二科。一者處俗弘教。二者出家修道。處俗則奉上之禮。尊親之敬。忠孝之義。表於經文。在三之訓彰乎聖典。斯與王制同命有若符契。此一條全是檀越所明。理不容異也。出家則是方外之賓。迹絕於物。其為教也。達患累緣於有身。不存身以息患。知生生由於稟化。不順化以求宗。求宗不由於順化。故不重運通之資。息患不由於存身。故不貴厚生之益。此理之與世乖。道之與俗反者也。是故凡在出家。皆隱居以求其志。變俗以達其道。變俗服章不得與世典同禮。隱居則宜高尚其迹。夫然。故能拯溺族於沈流。拔幽根於重劫。遠通三乘之津。廣開天人之路。是故內乖天屬之重而不違其孝。外闕奉主之恭而不失其敬。若斯人者自誓始於落簪。立志成於暮歲。如令一夫全德。則道洽六親澤流天下。雖不處王侯之位。固已協契皇極大庇生民矣。如此豈坐受其德虛霑其惠。與夫尸祿之賢同其素飡者哉。檀越頃者。以有其服而無其人故。澄清簡練容而不雜。此命既宣。皆人百其誠。遂之彌深。非言所喻。若復開出處之迹。以弘方外之道。則虛襟者挹其遺風。漱流者味其餘津矣。若澄簡之後猶不允情。其中或真偽相冐。涇渭未分。則可以道廢人。固不應以人廢道。以道廢人則宜去其服。以人廢道則宜存其禮。禮存則制教之旨可尋。跡廢則遂志之歡莫由。何以明其然。夫沙門服章法用。雖非六代之典。自是道家之殊俗。表之名器。名器相涉則事乖其本。事乖其本則禮失其用。是故愛夫禮者必不虧其名器。得之不可虧。亦有自來矣。夫遠遵古典者。猶存告朔之餼羊。餼羊猶可以存禮。豈況如來之法服耶。推此而言。雖無其道必宜存其禮。禮存則法可弘。法可弘則道可尋。此古今所同不易之大法也。又袈裟非朝宗之服。鉢盂非廊廟之器。軍國異容戎華不雜。剔髮毀形之人。忽廁諸侯之禮。則是異類相涉之像。亦竊所未安。檀越奇韻挺於弱年。風流邁於季俗。猶參究時賢以求其中。此而推之。必不以人廢言。貧道西垂之年。假日月以待盡。情之所惜豈存一己。苟吝所執。蓋欲令三寶中興於命世之運。明德流芳於百代之下耳。若一旦行此佛教長淪。如來大法於茲泯滅。天人感歎道俗革心矣。貧道幽誠所期。復將安寄。緣眷遇之隆。故坦其所懷。執筆悲懣。不覺涕泗橫流矣。

I have carefully perused your separate letter and the letter to the Eight Ministers inquiring why śramaṇas do not revere kings. Their intent lies in honoring the sovereign and exalting the superior; reaching back to name and essence, you cited Laozi, placing kings and lords on par with the Three Greats, holding that because of their way of sustaining life and fostering harmony, one should venerate their divine vessel. Tracing the origin to find the source, all receive breath from Heaven and Earth and receive form from father and mother; hence the way of generating life and fostering harmony is supreme, and the principle of sustaining daily existence is paramount. Therefore one should not receive their virtue while neglecting ritual, nor partake of their bounty while abandoning reverence. This is the premise upon which you, the Dānapati, base your position, and I in my humble mind do not disagree with your lofty conception. But seeking it in the Buddha's teachings to trace the way of the śramaṇa, the principle is not so. Why? What the Buddhist scriptures explain falls under two categories: first, living in the world to propagate the teaching; second, leaving household life to cultivate the Way. Living in the world, the etiquette of serving superiors, the reverence of honoring parents, and the righteousness of loyalty and filial piety are all set forth in the scripture text; the instructions on the 'Three Reverences' are prominent in the sacred canon. These share the same mandate as the royal regulations, aligning like matching tallies. This single category is entirely what you have clarified, leaving no room for divergence in principle. Renunciation, however, means being a guest beyond the realm, severing ties with worldly things. As for its teaching: realizing that afflictions stem from possessing a body, one does not preserve the body to extinguish affliction; knowing that continuous rebirth comes from conforming to transformation, one does not comply with transformation to seek the ultimate. Because seeking the ultimate does not come from complying with transformation, one does not esteem the resources that sustain harmony. Because extinguishing affliction does not come from preserving the body, one does not prize the benefits of enriching life. This is where the principle departs from the world, and the Way opposes the vulgar. For this reason, all who leave the household dwell in retirement to seek their aspirations, altering worldly ways to realize their Way. Altering worldly dress and regalia, they cannot share the rituals of worldly canons; dwelling in retirement, they ought to hold their conduct aloof. Being so, they can rescue drowning clans from the plunging current and uproot hidden roots over repeated kalpas, opening the ford of the Three Vehicles from afar and broadly opening the path for gods and humans. Therefore, inwardly they depart from the gravity of natural kin without violating filial piety; outwardly they lack the humility of serving the sovereign without losing reverence. For such people, their vow begins when their hairpins fall, and their aspiration is fulfilled in their final years. If a single person perfects virtue, the Way permeates the six relations and grace flows through the realm. Though they do not occupy the seat of kings and lords, they already harmonize with the imperial ultimate and broadly shelter the living people. How could this be sitting idly to receive virtue and vainly partaking of bounty, like those ministers who enjoy salary without service and eat the bread of idleness? Recently, because there were those who wore the robes without possessing the character, you purified and selected them, tolerating no corruption. Once this order was issued, everyone increased their sincerity a hundredfold, advancing ever deeper beyond what words can convey. If you further open the paths of leaving and staying to promote the way beyond the realm, then those of open mind will draw from this legacy, and those who rinse their mouths in streams will savor its lingering essence. If after this purification doubts still linger, and genuine and false remain mingled like the Jing and Wei rivers, one may dismiss the person for the sake of the Way, but surely one should not abandon the Way on account of the person. Dismissing the person for the sake of the Way means stripping their robes; abandoning the Way on account of the person means retaining their ritual. If the ritual is preserved, the purpose of formulating the teaching can be traced; if the outward practice is abandoned, the joy of fulfilling one's aspiration will have no path. How is this clear? The vestments and implements of a śramaṇa, though not rituals of the Six Dynasties, are distinctive customs of the Daoist household, serving as symbolic vessels. When symbolic vessels are confused, matters depart from their essence; when matters depart from their essence, ritual loses its function. Therefore, those who cherish ritual never compromise symbolic vessels; that they must not be compromised has ancient roots. Those who reverently followed ancient models still preserved the sacrificial sheep for the new moon; if a sacrificial sheep could preserve ritual, how much more so the Dharma robe of the Tathāgata? Deducing from this, even if there is no realization of the Way, one must preserve the ritual. If the ritual is preserved, the Dharma can be promoted; if the Dharma can be promoted, the Way can be sought. This is the immutable great law shared by past and present. Furthermore, the kāṣāya is not court attire, and the alms bowl is not an implement of imperial halls. Military and civil attire differ; barbarians and Chinese do not mix. For a person of shaven head and altered appearance to suddenly participate in the rites of feudal lords is a scene of mismatched categories, which in my humble view is unsettling. Your extraordinary grace stood out in your youth; your elegance surpasses late customs, yet you still consult contemporary worthies to find the proper mean. Deducing from this, you will surely not reject the words on account of the speaker. In my twilight years, borrowing days and months to await the end, how could what I cherish concern myself alone? If I cling tenaciously to what I hold, it is only out of a desire that the Three Jewels may flourish again in this epochal era, and that your illustrious virtue may spread fragrance for a hundred generations. If this policy is enacted, the Buddhist teaching will sink forever, the great Dharma of the Tathāgata will be annihilated, gods and humans will lament, and both monks and laypeople will undergo a change of heart. Where then could my humble sincerity turn for reliance? Relying on the depth of your favor, I lay bare my feelings. Holding this brush in sorrow, I find tears streaming down my face unawares.