辯正論 2.12

2.12

儒生曰。顏光祿云。道者流出於仙法。佛者本在於神教。道也者必就深曠友飛靈精丹石粒芝精。所以還年却老延華駐彩也。佛也者必辭親偶閑身性師淨覺信緣命反一無生克成聖業。智邈大明志挾恒劫。雖殊塗而同歸。亦何異而獨往哉。向聞其異。未知所以為異。請示其門。冀同歸也。開士喻曰。顏氏知一不知其二。夫道體無名無為。天地之始。乾坤有質有為。萬物之母。此則道不出於始無物而資於今有。便是本無今有。已有還無。拘限有無之間。生成始母之內矣。請吾言之。真諦故無。無為天地之始。世諦故有。有為萬物之母。母能生也。故為世諦。始為本也。故為真諦。世諦說有。非無而有。真諦說無。非有而無。非無而有。不有有也。非有而無。不無無也。非無而有常見自消。非有而無斷見便息。不有有者。非有非不有也。不無無者。非無非不無也。言其有者言非是有。既非是有非謂非有。是則執者失之為者敗之者也。子知異之為異。未知異之所以異。未知異之所異。焉知同異之所以異。未知異同之所以異。焉知異異之所以異。未知異異之所以異。焉知同同之所以異。未知同同之所以異。焉知非同非異之所以異。未知非同非異之所以異。焉知非非同非非異之所以異。未知非非同非非異之所以異。焉知非非不同非非不異之所以異。未知非非不同非非不異之所以異。焉知異同同異無異不異之所以異哉。是以如來說法常依二諦。起慈悲以救物。行喜捨以濟人。無念而成就眾生。不動而淨佛國土。雖有所作實無所為。子其詳焉。無自誤也。儒生問曰。初列三教各陳其美。後將道教判入儒流。棄太史之正言。從班生之曲說。君子不黨何若是歟。

The Confucian scholar said: "Yan Yanzhi stated: 'The Dao flows forth from the methods of the immortals; the Buddha fundamentally resides in the teachings of the divine. As for the Dao, one must draw near to the deep and vast, befriend flying spirits, refine cinnabar and minerals, and ingest mushrooms and essences; through this one restores youth, wards off old age, prolongs luster, and preserves vigor. As for the Buddha, one must renounce kin, dwell in seclusion, train the nature of body and mind in pure enlightenment, believe in causes and conditions, return to oneness and non-arising, and successfully achieve the holy enterprise. Its wisdom surpasses the great light; its resolve spans eternal kalpas. Though they travel different paths, they arrive at the same destination; how are they different that one should proceed alone?' Just now I heard of their difference, but do not know why they are different. Please show me their gates, hoping that they arrive at the same destination." The bodhisattva instructed: "Yan knew one aspect, but did not know the second. The substance of the Dao is nameless and wuwei, the beginning of heaven and earth. Qian and Kun (heaven and earth) have substance and are saṃskṛta, the mother of the myriad things. This means the Dao does not go beyond beginning as nothing, while things depend on existing now; this is fundamentally non-existence that exists now, and once existing, it returns to non-existence. It is restricted between existence and non-existence, within the production and completion of beginning and mother. Allow me to speak on it: according to the ultimate truth, it is non-existent; non-action is the beginning of heaven and earth. According to conventional truth, it is existent; existence is the mother of the myriad things. The mother is able to generate; therefore it is conventional truth. The beginning is the foundation; therefore it is ultimate truth. In conventional truth, existence is taught, but it is not that it exists out of non-existence. In ultimate truth, non-existence is taught, but it is not that it is non-existent out of existence. Existing not out of non-existence, existence does not exist as real existence. Non-existing not out of existence, non-existence does not exist as real non-existence. Because it exists not out of non-existence, eternalist views naturally dissolve. Because it is non-existent not out of existence, annihilationist views immediately cease. 'Not having real existence' means it is neither existent nor non-existent. 'Not having real non-existence' means it is neither non-existent nor not non-existent. To speak of its existence is to say it is not real existence; since it is not real existence, it cannot be called non-existent. Thus, those who grasp it lose it, and those who act upon it spoil it. You know difference as difference, but do not know why difference is different. Not knowing what difference differs from, how can you know why sameness and difference differ? Not knowing why difference and sameness differ, how can you know why difference of difference differs? Not knowing why difference of difference differs, how can you know why sameness of sameness differs? Not knowing why sameness of sameness differs, how can you know why neither sameness nor difference differs? Not knowing why neither sameness nor difference differs, how can you know why neither non-sameness nor non-difference differs? Not knowing why neither non-sameness nor non-difference differs, how can you know why neither non-non-sameness nor non-non-difference differs? Not knowing why neither non-non-sameness nor non-non-difference differs, how can you know why difference and sameness, sameness and difference, non-difference and not-non-difference differ? For this reason, the Tathāgata, when expounding the Dharma, always relies on the two truths. He arouses loving-kindness and compassion to rescue beings; he practices sympathetic joy and equanimity to deliver people. Free of thoughts, he matures sentient beings; motionless, he purifies the Buddha lands. Though he acts, he is truly without action. Examine this carefully and do not mislead yourself." The Confucian scholar asked: "At first, the three teachings were listed and each of their merits was presented. Later, the Daoist teaching was categorized into the Confucian stream, abandoning the upright words of the Grand Historian and following the distorted sayings of Ban Gu. A gentleman is not partisan; why are you like this?"