集沙門不應拜俗等事 5.70

5.70

We venture to consider: the three teachings and the five rituals all exhaust sagely thought; though taking different paths to the same goal, they inevitably rely on veneration and dignity. When Śākya and Laozi gave precepts to their times, reverence was their concern; when the Duke of Zhou and Confucius instructed the mundane, solemn respect was foremost. Thus the leaders of the black robes cast off hairpins to uphold the teaching, and the ranks of blue collars reflected snow to transmit fragrant learning, serving as models for a hundred generations and standards for a thousand years. Moreover, the Holy One was born in Śrāvastī and the Way originated with King Śibi; since there is the debt to mother and son (this matter is refuted as in the petition of the Right Palace Guard), how could the etiquette of ruler and minister be severed? Although black and yellow differ, how could the worthy and wise be distinct? Bowing down to ruler and parents admittedly departs from ancient statutes (Refutation: Ordering bowing based on the teachings—is it beneficial, or is it harmful? If beneficial, how could one fail to bow merely because it departs from ancient statutes? If harmful, how could one order bowing merely because it accords with ancient statutes? Now, one should only speak based on benefit and harm; it is unfitting to submit a deliberation merely based on departure or accord). In the absence of a sage, one maintains the old; when a sage appears, the statutes shift. Since the Dharma awaited a sage before flourishing, we also hope that, following this flourishing, the rules may be amended. The unanimous deliberation of our office requests that the bowing ritual be observed. Respectfully submitted.