集沙門不應拜俗等事 5.58

5.58

竊以。光分兩曜。是顯尊卑之容。位辯三才。爰彰父子之性。明乎愛敬之禮。與天地而齊生。君臣之義。將造化而俱立。至若金人啟夢慧日初開。紫氣浮關玄風肇扇。此乃興於中古教始漸移。雖復各設法門津梁庶品。究其所指終會儒宗（事如司更寺議中彈）庇俗既是同方。遵敬何煩異路。必將道體為別。有犯未合繩違（彈曰。有犯非僧繩違事寧不可無愆。守道設禮有累君親）遺教制在國王。設禮寧容不可（事如左春坊議中彈）況三乘之典。無聞傲誕之經。五千之教。詎載矜誇之義。敬親何妨重道。拜主豈廢尋真（事如右戎衛議中彈）且割股捨頭猶無訴苦。尊君愛父詎即辭勞（彈曰。割股捨頭必益。無宜訴苦。敬君拜父慮損。豈敢辭勞）參練是非。拜誠為得。謹議。

We venture to consider: as light is divided into the two luminaries, the appearances of high and low are made manifest; as positions are distinguished among the three powers, the nature of father and son is thereby made clear. It is evident that the rituals of affection and reverence arose simultaneously with Heaven and Earth; the duties of ruler and minister were established alongside Nature itself. As for the golden man inspiring dreams when the Sun of Wisdom first dawned, or the purple vapor floating over the pass when the Mysterious Wind first fanned—these arose in the middle antiquity, when teachings began gradually to shift. Although they respectively established Dharma-gates to ferry across myriad beings, when investigating their ultimate intent, they fundamentally converge with the Confucian lineage (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Sigeng Temple). Since sheltering the mundane belongs to the same sphere, why should compliance and reverence require different paths? If one insists on distinguishing the substance of the Way, then when offenses occur, one should not correct them according to the laws (Refutation: If one offends, one is not a monk, so how could correcting an offense not be without fault? Holding to the Way while establishing rituals brings trouble to rulers and parents). The bequeathed teachings were instituted under the authority of worldly kings; how could establishing rituals not be permissible? (This matter is refuted as in the petition of the Left Spring Palace). Moreover, in the scriptures of the Three Vehicles, no scripture of arrogance and boastfulness has ever been heard of; in the teachings of the Five Thousand Words, how could any doctrine of self-exaltation be recorded? Reverencing parents does not hinder honoring the Way; bowing to the sovereign does not abandon seeking the real (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Right Martial Guard). Furthermore, even when cutting one's flesh or relinquishing one's head, one never complains of suffering; how then could one plead fatigue when honoring the sovereign and loving the father? (Refutation: Cutting flesh and relinquishing head are definitely beneficial, so it is unfitting to complain of suffering; honoring the sovereign and bowing to the father carry risk of harm, so how could one dare plead fatigue?) Examining right and wrong, bowing is truly proper. Respectfully submitted.