辯正論 6.83

6.83

外論曰。老教容止威儀拜伏揖讓。玄巾黃褐持笏曳履。法象表明。蓋華夏之古制也。注曰。道士元來本著儒服不異俗人。至周武世始有橫披。刺二十四縫。以應陰陽二十四氣。出自人情亦無典據也。釋訓袈裟左鉉偏袒右肩。全幅橫縵之裙。半片奇支之服。禿髮露頂狗踞狐蹲。非預人倫。寔戎狄之風也。豈獨用茲形制匹我威儀。此容服之異九也。

The External Argument says: In the teaching of Laozi, demeanor and deportment consist of bowing, prostrating, yielding, and saluting; wearing black caps and yellow coarse robes, holding the tablet, and trailing shoes. These symbols and attire are indeed the ancient institutions of the Chinese. (Commentary note: Daoist masters originally wore Confucian robes, not differing from secular folk. In the Northern Zhou reign of Emperor Wu, they first began to wear the cross-over cloak, stitched with twenty-four seams to correspond to the twenty-four qi of yin and yang; this originated from human whims and had no canonical basis.) The Buddhist teaching prescribes the kāṣāya, with the left shoulder covered and the right shoulder bared, skirts made of full-width unadorned cloth, and the garment of half-pieced qizhi; with shaved heads and exposed craniums, squatting like dogs and crouching like foxes, they do not participate in human relationships and truly follow barbarian customs. How can this attire alone be used to match our deportment? This is the ninth difference, regarding appearance and dress.