集沙門不應拜俗等事 1.51

1.51

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.