辯正論 6.126

6.126

注曰。浮圖經者。魏略及西域傳云。臨猊國有神人。名曰沙律之所傳也。沙律年老髮白。常教人為浮圖。人有災禍及無子者。勸行浮圖。齋戒令捨財贖愆。臨猊王久無太子。其妃莫耶。因祀浮圖而生太子。遂名其子為浮圖焉。前漢哀帝時秦景使月氏。國王令太子口授於景。所以浮圖經教前漢早行。六十三年之後明帝方感瑞夢也。考秦景傳。經不云老說。案晉世道士王浮。改西域傳為明威化胡經。乃稱老子渡流沙教胡王為浮圖。變身作佛方有佛興。蓋誣誷之甚極也。但罽賓去此萬里已還。秦漢至今商人蕃使相繼不絕。莫傳老子在彼化胡。況浮圖經。及變身作佛未之聞也。縱使老子為浮圖。始是報恩供養舍利方顯聖德。何名誕哉。袁宏漢後紀云。老子入胡分身作佛。道家經誥。其說甚多。檢袁宏漢紀。本無老子作佛之文。即日朝廷博識者多。豈可塞耳。偷鈴指鹿為馬。何愚之甚也。

The commentary says: As for the sūtra of the Buddha, the *Weilüe* and the *Account of the Western Regions* state: 'In the country of Lin'er, there was a spiritual person named Shalü who transmitted it. Shalü was elderly with white hair and constantly taught people to follow the Buddha. When people suffered calamities or were childless, he exhorted them to practice the way of the Buddha, observing precepts and fasting, and bidding them give away wealth to redeem their transgressions. The King of Lin'er had long lacked a crown prince; his consort Moya, through worshipping the Buddha, gave birth to a prince, and consequently named her son Buddha.' During the reign of Emperor Ai of the Former Han, Qin Jing was sent on a mission to the Yuezhi, and the king ordered the crown prince to orally transmit [the scripture] to Jing. Thus, the teachings of the Buddha's sūtra were already circulating early in the Former Han; it was only sixty-three years later that Emperor Ming was moved by the auspicious dream. Examining the biography of Qin Jing, the sūtra does not say it was spoken by Laozi. According to records, the Jin-dynasty Daoist master Wang Fu altered the *Account of the Western Regions* to forge the *Mingwei huahu jing*, whereupon he claimed that Laozi crossed the shifting sands to teach the barbarian king to become a Buddha, and that only after he transformed his body into a Buddha did the Buddha arise. This is an extreme fabrication! But Jibin is less than ten thousand li from here, and from the Qin and Han down to the present day, merchants and foreign envoys have continued without interruption; none of them ever transmitted that Laozi converted the barbarians there, let alone the sūtra of the Buddha or his transformation into a Buddha, which has never been heard of. Even if Laozi had become the Buddha, it would only be in repaying kindness and making offerings to śarīras that his sage-virtue was manifested; how could it be called preposterous? Yuan Hong's *Hou Han ji* states that Laozi entered among the barbarians and divided his body to become the Buddha; Daoist scriptures and pronouncements contain many such claims. But on checking Yuan Hong's *Han ji*, there is originally no text saying Laozi became the Buddha. Today at court, there are many broadly learned scholars; how could one cover one's ears to steal a bell, or point to a deer and call it a horse? What extreme foolishness!