[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) › [集沙門不應拜俗等事](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108) › 5.23 # 集沙門不應拜俗等事 5.23 集沙門不應拜俗等事 5.23 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.23) 竊以。釋門垂範。義在沖虛。道家立言。理歸損挹。豈自矜尚。然後為高（事如祕閣局議中彈）若乃君臣父子之儀。尊卑貴賤之序。與夫儒教分路同趨。但緇服黃冠未通正法。真言淨戒莫能堅受。唯憑衣鉢以自尊崇（彈曰。經稱袈裟者。諸佛幢相。又言同於佛塔鉢盂應法之器。自古諸佛皆同此器。故十輪經云。象王見獵師著袈裟。敬故自拔其牙與此獵師。又四分律云。大德娑伽陀伏毒龍於鉢中。是知應器法衣其功不小。服之自貴何事深疑。且負板冕衣仲尼猶敬。矧茲器服而不尊乎）。謙撝之道既虧。熏修之行彌失。然則尊嚴之極本屬君親。資敬所歸道俗何別。上動皇鑒下擇芻詞。改而更張。請遵拜禮。謹議。 > We reflect that the models bequeathed by the Buddhist gate have their significance in quietude and emptiness, and the teachings established by the Daoist school find their principle in diminishment and humility. How could self-exaltation and esteem be considered nobility? (The matter is as critiqued in the deliberation of the Department of the Palace Library.) As for the decorum between sovereign and minister, father and son, and the ranks of the honored and humble, the noble and base, they share the same trajectory along different paths with the Confucian teachings. However, those of black robes and yellow caps have not penetrated the true Dharma; they cannot steadfastly uphold true words and pure precepts, but merely rely on robes and bowls to elevate and honor themselves. (Critique: The sūtras state that the kāṣāya is the banner-form of all buddhas, and also state that it is equivalent to a buddha's stūpa. The alms bowl is a vessel conforming to Dharma; from ancient times all buddhas have shared this vessel. Thus the Daśacakra Sūtra states: "An elephant king saw a hunter wearing a kāṣāya; out of reverence, he pulled out his own tusks and gave them to this hunter." Moreover, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says: "The venerable Sāgata subdued a poisonous dragon within his bowl." Hence we know that the compliant vessel and the Dharma robe possess no small power. To wear them is inherently noble; why harbor deep doubts about it? Furthermore, Zhongni (Confucius) still showed reverence toward those carrying register tablets or wearing ceremonial robes; how much more should this vessel and robe not be revered?) The path of humility being deficient, the practice of perfumed cultivation is all the more lost. Thus, supreme majesty and reverence inherently belong to the sovereign and parents; in the return of reverence and homage, what distinction can there be between monastic and secular? May it move the imperial reflection above, while gathering these humble words below: by overhauling and renewing \[the regulations\], we request that the ritual of bowing be observed. We respectfully submit our deliberation. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.22) - [Next: 5.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.24) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108~en-mt.5.23) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2108.5.23) · Pramāṇa