辯正論 6.54

6.54

內喻曰。夫滅身以懼大患。絕智以避長勞。議生靈於懸疣。齊泯性於王樂。蓋老莊之談也。且綿綿常住。古皇則不死不終。繩繩無名。老氏則復歸無物。然常存非永沒之稱。無物豈長生之化耶。聊復明其淺深。至若保弱守雌之文。虛心實腹之論。審浮生之有量。嗟智水之無涯。語大則局在域中。陶鈞則不出性分。蓋其志也。豈夫大覺開無窮之緣。挺圓極之照。測微則窮乎絕隟。究理則控在無方。美氣與氛氳共和。金軀同太虛比固。語其量也。猶嵩華與培塿殊峻溟渤將坎井異深。爾道之劣二也。

The Buddhist analogy says: Destroying the body out of fear of great afflictions, and cutting off wisdom to avoid perpetual toil; discussing living beings as suspended warts, and equating the annihilation of nature with the joy of a king—such are the discourses of Laozi and Zhuangzi. Moreover, 'continuously enduring,' the ancient sovereigns did not die and did not end; 'unbroken and nameless,' Master Lao 'returns again to nothingness.' Yet 'constantly existing' is not the designation for eternal disappearance, and how could 'nothingness' be the transformation of longevity? Let us briefly clarify their shallowness and depth. As for texts on preserving weakness and holding to the feminine, and discourses on emptying the mind and filling the belly, they recognize that floating life is limited and lament that the waters of wisdom are boundless. In speaking of greatness, they are confined within the mundane realm; in fashioning transformations, they do not exceed their natural allotments. Such is their aspiration! How could they match the Great Enlightened One, who opens infinite conditions and displays all-perfect illumination? In discerning subtlety, he fathoms the finest crevices; in investigating principle, he extends beyond all spatial limits. His fine qi harmonizes with the ethereal vapor; his golden body compares in firmness with the Great Void. To speak of his capacity: it is like the difference in height between Mounts Song and Hua and an ant-heap, or the difference in depth between the vast oceans and a shallow well. This is the second inferiority of your Dao.