集沙門不應拜俗等事 6.10

6.10

沙門玄範。敢致狀於中臺王公侯伯群寮等。但範雖不班預議例。而竊有所聞。前古大德廬山法師遭時數運。遂造沙門不敬王者論五篇。理致幽微問答玄妙。將欲簡白乍尋難曉。今略述內外典記。明證不敬之理。謹以狀上。請懲應拜之議也。夫天雖至玄。必著日月之明。地雖至寂。必固山川之化。聖者雖通聲冥運。亦必假賢俊蕃輔子於百姓者也。君既使臣以禮。臣須事君以忠。若不庭爭於未然。則恐機發於己矣。但佛法是區域之外。逾四大之尊。超寰㝢之表。越在三之義。唱無緣之慈。弘不言之化。冥功潛運。故曰沐而悠漸。但中庸之人以為無益者。良不悟其所舍也。故先朝聖教序云。陰陽之妙難窮者。以其無形也。佛道崇虛乘幽控寂。弘濟萬品典御十方者乎。今既慧日潛暉像教冥運。秉法和敬非僧而誰。故佛告信相菩薩曰。我說三寶唯是一體。無有別相。斯像法傳持當於是矣。若阿恕伽之禮小僧諭邪臣以貿眾首豈非體道之可尚乎。今欲令僧尼鞠躬於禮儀。劬勞於拜揖。是致佛以拜人。非人者以奉法。如弁舃翻加於首足。寔迴換惑亂之甚矣。且王有常不臣者三。暫不臣者五。不名者四。不臣者一。尚書曰。虞賓在位舜不臣朱。詩云。有客有客。亦白其馬。此承二王之後。帝者尚所不臣。況僧當大聖之胤。奚足致敬君主國之賓序胡預失儀。而以不輕禮於四眾。用配敬於一人。此蓋菩薩比丘情亡物我。況今尊卑位別殊非媲偶。又舉淨名而取稽首。引知法而招恭敬。昔函丈於新學不觀機而授藥。以中忘此意。宗半字焉。既宴寂於正念。發宿生而示悟。還得本心。崇滿字矣。於是以亡相稽首無想接足。乃混緇素於一時。泯性相於萬古。斯並大士權誠。未可小機普准。故涅槃經云。我為菩薩說如此偈。今以聲聞持戒臘之至。執威儀之切。非以重傲慢悖君親。良欲崇國家利臣人者也。又順正理論云。諸天神眾不敢悕求受五戒者禮。如國君主亦不求比丘禮拜。以懼損功德及壽命故。今欲行之以周孔之教。抑之以從俗之禮。竊為仁者不取也。又僧尼族非蕃類性簡戎蠻。稟中國而法四夷。承剔割而紹三寶。據其教則有拜君親為損。修其法以資家國有益。恐匿聖言禍鍾自犯。四分律云。使恭敬耆年。不應禮拜白衣者。正以弗縻於爵祿。異俗網於典誨矣。王制曰。宗廟有不順者絀以爵。山川有神祇而不舉者削以地。況僧尼索鬼神之敬。反父母之禮。若使正教淪湑於是污鄙。恐神明所不交泰。福慶所不流潤。災害幾生。禍亂幾作。而含靈廢成俗之化。胄子闕啟蒙之訓。率土臣人順風載靡。不可自新於師戒。有助國於教化者也。梵網經云。不拜君親鬼神明矣。且濡霑不拜。為容節之失。矧乃割截非束帶之儀。髠削無稽首之飾。於庠序之風範朝寀之變怪也。佛是絕域異俗之化。靡中和順動之氣。存亡之際實寄於人矣。大傳曰。正朔所不加。即君子所不臣。未若福其所訓利其所稟。便其勞動而用之。乘其利安而事之。故得百姓之歡心。即一人有慶者也。又介冑不拜慮折其威。師帝不臣恐損其道。況衣忍鎧擐組甲。伏龍怖以袈裟。慴魔威於抖擻。逃隷出家王親降禮波離入道父王致拜。故知道在則貴。不以人為輕重。是以道頗弘人。人蓋弘道者信矣。今遺法所以付於王者。委護持仗流通也。以四眾之微弱。恐三寶之廢壞。藉王者以威伏。假王者以勢逼。今使攝衣屈膝握拳稽顙。則連河之化於茲缺矣。詩云。王赫斯怒。爰整其旅。僧等戰戰兢兢誠惶誠恐。懼虧遺教之本意。辱同功之法服。一拜之勞不必加眾僧之損。一拜之敬不必加　萬乘之尊。頃僧等孜孜而不安其業者。非所以苟為庸庸之軀。深存靡靡之化矣。恐煥乎之美無潤色於盛代。異國之求豈聞於當今者歟。必以經像為蕪穢。不足以崇仰。僧尼為臭腐。不足為福田。覩教籍者目焦。修揖拜者攣傴。襲緇服則轉筋。談典禮而齒齲。於是嫌而棄之。變天竺之風。暢中華之禮。以萬物為更始。策三大而自新。則取善之基。徒使修立。不若隔教網於區外。放容儀於物表。臣而子之。足盡忠孝之節也。即而史傳不必為長夜。經子未必為太陽。司成雖學而無倦。猶將闕焉於大訓。況助國之美無聞亂矣。不繁禁而獲安。不革情而得志。雖文王至聖也。猶學於虢叔。孔子至明也。尚師於郯子。王者至尊也。猶父事三老兄事五更。及其釋奠。躬執爵而跪之曰。穆穆焉恂恂焉。雖至孝之事。嚴親罔以加也。是以大易蠱爻不事王侯。大禮儒行不臣天子。故知道以貴之為貴。不以輕貶為輕。伏想寮寀談誚正士為之蠧害將生螟螣而議為拜者。非朝庭之上策也。原夫正法西基。迄于茲日已過千載有太半焉。自大教東流方七百歲。雖歷變市朝隆之莫替。其中聖主賢臣計餘可數。未嘗拘檢意。況銑削僧尼。信知闊達之資為日久矣。閒者有執權少主謨篡微君。私佞自媚陷墜家國。又一二蕃小雄雌互舉。雖暫誅除尋革前弊。夫若此者可以攘袂鼓肘怒目切齒大視而叱之。豈不忠烈之壯觀也。今我大唐應九五之期。四三皇之位。八紘共軌四海同文。百辟守法度於有司。三寶暢微言於汲引。則道俗資勳家國延祚。可不盛歟。可不盛歟。勅以宋朝暫革此風少選還遵舊貫。良為爽其恒情。議在不失常理。幸儼而思之弘而護之。家國之政若隆。忠孝之誠必著。冥功潛潤根條盤蔚。好爵自縻祿祑優竉。花蕚繼胤蘭菊緒芳。感福慶之內資。思弘益而外護。豈不居生勿墜常保勝期者歟。今謹疏內外典禮。請循照察。沙門釋範敬白。

The śramaṇa Xuanfan ventures to submit this memorial to the royal princes, dukes, marquises, earls, and all officials of the Department of State Affairs (Zhongtai). Although I, Fan, am not ranked among those included in the deliberation, I have nevertheless heard of these matters. In antiquity, the venerable Master of Mount Lu encountered the vicissitudes of the times and thereupon composed the five essays of the Discourse on Śramaṇas Not Paying Homage to Kings. Its principles and reasoning are profound and subtle, and its questions and answers are abstruse and marvelous; yet because one seeks to clarify them succinctly, they are difficult to comprehend at first reading. I now briefly recount the records of the inner and outer scriptures to demonstrate and prove the principle of not paying homage, and reverently submit this memorial, requesting that the discussion requiring them to bow be quelled.
Now, though Heaven is supremely profound, it must manifest the brilliance of the sun and moon; though Earth is supremely tranquil, it must firmly maintain the transforming power of mountains and rivers. Though the sagely ruler communicates with unseen forces and operates in secret, he also must employ the worthy and talented to assist and govern the common people as his children. When the sovereign employs his ministers with ritual propriety, the ministers must serve the sovereign with loyalty. If one does not remonstrate at court before matters take shape, one fears that the critical moment will arise from oneself.
Now, the Buddha's teaching lies beyond the worldly realm: it surpasses the dignity of the four great elements, transcends the boundaries of the universe, goes beyond the duties owed to the three [father, teacher, and sovereign], proclaims compassion without conditions, and spreads a transformation that works without words. Its unseen merits operate in secret; thus it is said that one is bathed and gradually permeated by it. It is only people of middling capacity who regard it as useless, truly failing to realize what it lets go.
Therefore, the late emperor's Preface to the Sagely Teaching states: 'The subtleties of yin and yang are difficult to exhaust because they are formless. Does not the Buddhist Way hold emptiness in esteem, ride upon the unseen, master tranquility, broadly deliver the myriad beings, and govern the ten directions?' Now that the sun of wisdom has hidden its radiance and the semblance teaching operates unseen, who else but the monks can uphold the Dharma with harmony and reverence? Thus the Buddha told the Bodhisattva *Faith-Mark* (Xinxiang): 'I say that the Three Jewels are solely one single body, having no separate characteristics.' The transmission and preservation of this semblance Dharma must rest upon this.
If King Aśoka bowed to a novice monk and instructed his heterodox ministers by trading various heads, was this not an admirable embodiment of the Way? Now, to wish monks and nuns to bend their bodies in worldly ceremonial and toil at bowing and making deep bows is to cause the Buddha to bow to humans, rather than having humans pay homage to the Dharma. This is like turning the ceremonial cap and shoes upside down upon head and feet; indeed, it is an extreme reversal and confusion!
Moreover, the king has three classes of persons who are permanently treated as not being subjects, five who are temporarily not treated as subjects, four who are not called by their personal names, and one who does not act as a subject. The Classic of Documents says: 'When the guest of Yu was in his place, Shun did not treat Zhu as a subject.' The Classic of Poetry says: 'There is a guest, there is a guest; his horses also are white.' Since these were heirs to the two preceding royal dynasties, even emperors did not treat them as subjects. How much less should monks, who are the descendants of the Great Sage, pay homage to the ruler of men? Why should the guest protocol of the state lose its proper decorum by inappropriately applying the reverence shown by Never-Disparaging to the fourfold assembly to the single person of a ruler? This was because that bodhisattva-monk had eliminated the concept of self and other; how much less should it apply today when the stations of noble and base are distinct and entirely non-comparable?
Furthermore, citing Vimalakīrti to require bowing, and quoting 'knowing the Dharma' to summon respect: in antiquity, when teaching novices within the ten-foot room, medicine was prescribed without examining the capacity, thereby forgetting this inner meaning midway and adhering to the incomplete teaching (ardhākṣara). Once they rested peacefully in correct mindfulness, brought forth their past lives, and manifested awakening, they returned to their original minds and revered the complete teaching (pūrṇākṣara). Thereupon, with signless bowing of the head and thoughtless touching of the feet, they confounded the black and white robes for a time and obliterated nature and characteristics for myriad kalpas. These were the expedient, sincere actions of great beings (mahāsattvas); they cannot be universally standardized for those of lesser capacities. Therefore, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'I spoke such a verse for bodhisattvas.' Now, as śrāvakas uphold the utmost of precept-seniority and strictly maintain solemn deportment, this is not out of arrogance or defiance toward sovereign and parents; rather, it is truly out of a desire to exalt the state and benefit ministers and subjects.
Furthermore, the Abhidharmakośanyāyānusāra Śāstra says: 'The hosts of devas and spirits dare not hope for or seek the bows of those who observe the five precepts, just as the ruler of a state does not seek the bows of bhikṣus, for fear of diminishing their merit and lifespan.' Now, to wish to impose the teachings of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius upon them and suppress them with secular rituals—I privately consider that benevolent men should not adopt this.
Moreover, the lineages of monks and nuns are not of barbarian clans, and their natures are clear of the Rong and Man tribes. Born in the Central Plains, they are models for the four barbarian tribes; having received the tonsure, they carry on the Three Jewels. According to their teaching, bowing to sovereign and parents brings harm; practicing their Dharma to assist family and state brings benefit. One fears that if the holy words are concealed, disaster will strike those who transgress them. The Dharmagupta Vinaya states that it causes people to revere the elderly and that one should not bow to white-robed laymen, precisely because they are not tethered to titles and stipends and are distinguished from the secular net by their canonical instructions.
The Royal Regulations state: 'If there are those who do not act harmoniously in the ancestral temple, they are demoted in rank; if there are spiritual beings of the mountains and rivers who are not sacrificed to, their lands are stripped.' How much more so when monks and nuns seek reverence from ghosts and spirits, yet reverse their rites toward parents! If the correct teaching is allowed to drown in such defilement and vulgarity, I fear that the bright spirits will not bring peace and prosperity, good fortune and celebration will not flow and moisten the land, calamities will frequently arise, and disasters will constantly occur. Sentient beings would abandon the transformative influence that establishes customs, and aristocratic youths would lack instruction to enlighten their ignorance. The ministers and subjects of the entire land would bend before the wind, unable to renew themselves through teachers and precepts, and there would be nothing to assist the state in moral transformation. The Brahmājāla Sūtra clearly states that one should not bow to sovereign, parents, ghosts, or spirits.
Furthermore, one who is wet with rain does not bow down, as it is a loss of decorum; how much more so with shaved heads and cut garments, which are not the attire of girdles and sashes, and tonsured hair, which lacks the ornament of hairpins for bowing! In the standards of schools, this would be regarded as an abnormality at court. The Buddha's teaching is the transformation of distant lands and different customs; it does not share the climate of the central harmony and compliant movement. Its survival or demise truly rests upon human agency. The Great Commentary says: 'Where the calendar does not reach, the gentleman does not treat as a subject.' It is better to bring good fortune through what they teach, benefit through what they receive, employ them through their labor, and serve them by availing of their peace and profit. Thus, winning the joyful hearts of the common people means that the One Man has cause for celebration.
Furthermore, those clad in armor do not bow down, lest it break their martial dignity; an emperor does not treat his teacher as a subject, lest it diminish his Way. How much more so for those who wear the armor of forbearance and don the woven mail, who subdue dragons by frightening them with their kāṣāya, and terrify the might of Māra with dhūta practices! When an escaped slave renounced worldly life, the king in person descended to pay him homage; when Upāli entered the Way, his royal father offered bows. Thus we know that wherever the Way resides, it is noble, and it does not derive its weight from the person. Hence it is true that the Way greatly magnifies humanity, and humanity can magnify the Way.
Now, the reason the bequeathed Dharma was entrusted to kings was to rely on them for protection and depend on them for its circulation. Because the fourfold assembly is weak, and out of fear that the Three Jewels might fall into ruin, they rely on the king's majestic power to subdue opposition and make use of the king's authority to ward off pressure. If they are now made to gather their robes, bend their knees, clasp their hands, and knock their foreheads on the ground, then the transformation of the River [Gaṅgā] will be broken from here on. The Classic of Poetry says: 'The king rose in his fury, and marshaled his forces.' The monks are trembling with fear and apprehension, terrified of compromising the original intent of the bequeathed teaching and humiliating the Dharma robes of shared merit. The toil of a single bow will not necessarily add to the loss of the saṃgha, and the respect of a single bow will not necessarily enhance the majesty of the Ruler of Ten Thousand Chariots. The reason the monks have recently been anxious and unsettled in their vocations is not merely for the sake of their ordinary physical bodies, but out of deep concern for the flourishing transformation.
One fears that the radiant beauty of the Dharma will not grace this prosperous era, and how could inquiries from foreign lands be heard in our present day? If one definitely considers the scriptures and images to be weeds and rubbish unworthy of veneration, and monks and nuns to be rot and decay unworthy of being fields of merit—so that those who look at religious texts scorch their eyes, those who practice bows become stooped and crippled, those who put on dark robes suffer cramps, and those who discuss canonical rites get tooth decay—and thereupon disdains and discards them, alters the customs of Tianzhu, expands the rituals of China, starts afresh with all things, and spurs the three great ones to self-renewal: then the foundation for adopting goodness will merely be established in vain! It would be far better to keep the net of teaching outside worldly bounds and release their decorum beyond mundane things, while treating them as ministers and sons would suffice to fulfill the virtue of loyalty and filial piety.
Thus, historical records need not be an endless night, and the classics and masters are not necessarily the sun. Though the Minister of Education learns without weariness, there will still be omissions in the Great Instruction; how much worse would it be if the beauty that aids the state were lost in disorder? Securing peace without multiplying prohibitions, and achieving one's aim without altering human feelings—even King Wen, a supreme sage, still studied under Guo Shu; Confucius, most enlightened, still took Tanzi as his teacher. The king is supremely exalted, yet he treats the Sanlao as a father and the Wugeng as an elder brother; when it comes to the Shakuden ceremony, he personally holds the wine goblet, kneels down, and acts with solemnity and circumspection. Even in the utmost of filial service, nothing could exceed what is shown to a strict father. For this reason, the Gu hexagram of the Great Changes teaches not serving kings and princes, and the 'Conduct of the Scholar' in the Great Rites speaks of not treating [the scholar] as a subject of the Son of Heaven. Therefore we know that the Way is noble because it is held to be noble, and is not degraded merely because someone belittles it.
I humbly imagine that when court officials mock the correct scholars, regarding them as destructive pests about to spawn caterpillars and locusts, and debate requiring them to bow, this is no grand strategy for the imperial court.
Now, since the True Dharma laid its foundation in the west down to this day, more than a millennium and a half has already passed. Since the Great Teaching flowed east, it has been barely seven hundred years. Although dynasties and markets have undergone transitions, its flourishing has never been interrupted. Among them, sagely rulers and worthy ministers were more than could be counted, yet they never restrained or restricted it, much less degraded monks and nuns. Truly we know that such broad-minded generosity has lasted for a long time. In recent times, there were minor rulers who seized power, and petty sovereigns who plotted usurpation, flattering themselves to curdle favor and causing their families and states to collapse; there were also one or two small barbarian states where rulers struggled against one another, and though they briefly eradicated [the Dharma], their earlier errors were soon corrected. Toward such as these, one might well roll up one's sleeves, pump one's elbows, glare with furious eyes, gnash one's teeth, stare wide, and shout in condemnation—would that not be a magnificent sight of loyalty and valor?
Now our Great Tang has answered the destiny of the 'Nine and Five' and succeeded to the station of the Three Sovereigns. The eight extremities share the same track, and the four seas have a common script. The hundred officials uphold the laws in their departments, and the Three Jewels expound subtle words to guide and save. Thus both the religious and secular build merit, and family and state extend their blessings; is this not magnificent? Is this not magnificent?
The imperial decree noted that the Song dynasty briefly changed this custom, but after a short while returned to the old practice; this was truly because it violated their constant sentiments. The current deliberation lies in not losing the constant principle. We hope you will reflect on this with solemnity, and broadly protect it. If the governance of the family and state flourishes, the sincerity of loyalty and filial piety will surely be manifest; unseen merits will quietly moisten the land, roots and branches will grow luxuriant, fine offices will naturally be bestowed, emoluments and honors will be abundantly granted, blossoms and calyxes will succeed in lineage, and orchids and chrysanthemums will transmit their fragrance. Moved by the inner support of blessings and good fortune, and mindful of outer protection for broad benefit, how could one fail to preserve this supreme era forever without decline during one's lifetime?
I now respectfully list the inner and outer canonical rites, and request that you look into and examine them. The śramaṇa Shi Xuanfan respectfully speaks.