集沙門不應拜俗等事 5.60

5.60

竊惟。藏史立言。靡替君臣之義。能仁闡教。先崇孝敬之風。縱道致乘鳧。尚委身而降禮。業成捧馬。猶負櫬以追恩（彈曰負櫬教有成文拜伏經無此說）況共踐俗塗同餐聖化。豈有盜名黃服。遂忘亭毒之功。託跡緇門。便遺顧復之德。傲物行己高視王侯。我慢為心長揖父母（事如中臺司列議中彈）求之前代久滯迷方皇家。戶牖百王澄汰千古。事非害政容或可沿。時有虧風理宜革弊（事如祕閣局議中彈）且四大齊德。豈使遵道而不遵王。三教均名（事如左司禦議中彈）何獨崇釋而不崇孔。今若正其儀而教毀。設敬須疑（彈曰。誠哉何煩致惑耶）屈其身而道存。加拜何惑。重以不輕攝行。更符真諦之規（事如同文寺議中彈）持下御情。彌合冲虛之軌式遵璽誥。輕獻蒭言。致拜之禮。實諧僉議。謹議。

We venture to reflect: when the Archivist established his words, he did not displace the duty of ruler and minister; when Śākyamuni expounded the teachings, he first exalted the custom of filial piety and reverence. Even if the Way enabled one to ride wild ducks, one would still yield oneself to lower one's etiquette; even when the practice of holding the horse's reins was achieved, one still carried the coffin to requite grace (Refutation: Carrying the coffin is explicitly recorded in the teachings; kneeling and bowing are never mentioned in the scriptures). How much more so when jointly treading the mundane path and partaking in the sage transformation: how could one steal the name under yellow robes and thereby forget the merit of nurturing and upbringing, or lodge one's presence in the black gates and thus abandon the virtue of parental care? Treating beings with arrogance and carrying oneself proudly, looking down upon princes and marquises; harboring self-conceit in heart, making a deep bow with clasped hands before father and mother (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Bureau of Personnel of the Central Chancellery). Looking back at previous dynasties, they were long stranded in delusion; our Imperial House opens wide the doors and windows of the hundred kings, cleansing and purifying a thousand ages. Matters that do not harm governance may perhaps be continued; when contemporary customs are compromised, the flaws ought rightly to be reformed (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Secretarial Archive Bureau). Moreover, since the Four Great Elements share equal virtues, how could one follow the Way without following the sovereign? The three teachings have equal renown (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Left Palace Guard); why exalt only Śākya without exalting Confucius? If rectifying their etiquette would ruin the teaching, then offering reverence would indeed be questionable (Refutation: How true! Why bother bringing about confusion?); but if bending their bodies preserves the Way, what doubt can there be in adding prostrations? Furthermore, the Sadāparibhūta practices accord even more with the principles of the ultimate truth (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Tongwen Temple). Holding lowliness to govern one's mind harmonizes fully with the tracks of empty serenity. In respectful compliance with the Imperial Edict, we rashly offer our humble words. The ritual of paying reverence truly accords with the unanimous deliberation. Respectfully submitted.