辯正論 8.56

8.56

按九流百氏之書。羽虫三百六十。鳳為其上。毛蟲三百六十。麟為其上。甲蟲三百六十。龍為其上。春秋云。麟鳳五靈王者之嘉瑞。未論師子不道辟邪在此典墳無所不述。自漢已還。唯傳西域曾有獻者。以今驗昔。即事可知。若言道家先來有者。甚大河漢不近人情。彼三天神仙大道儀有金剛力士。度人經有五色師子。本相經有七色師子。本相經云。天尊門內有師子猛虎守門左右。拒天力士威赫前後者。案漢魏及晉三都兩京江南淮北諸道士觀。唯以瓠𤬛成經本。無天尊形像及金剛神。今日作者悉是修靜張賓等偽經所說。然金剛師子乃是護法善神。自晉已前。道士觀內亦未曾有。乃至碑頌贊詠皆所不論。史籍文典之所不載。請問多識前古即世。通儒考校正典自知虛實。若依度人本相經等。天尊須乘師子。不坐蓮花。

According to the books of the nine philosophical schools and the hundred lineages: of the three hundred and sixty feathered creatures, the phoenix is supreme; of the three hundred and sixty furred creatures, the qilin is supreme; of the three hundred and sixty shelled creatures, the dragon is supreme. The Chunqiu says: 'The qilin and phoenix are the five numinous beings, auspicious portents of kings.' It does not mention lions, nor does it speak of pixiu; yet in these classical records, there is nothing that is not related. Since the Han dynasty, it has only been recorded that the Western Regions once presented them as tribute. Testing the past by the present, the matter can be known immediately. If one says that the Daoists possessed them from the beginning, it is vastly far-fetched and contrary to common sense. Their Rites of the Great Dao of the Divine Immortals of the Three Heavens has vajra mighty athletes; the Scripture of Salvation has five-coloured lions; the Scripture of Original Marks has seven-coloured lions. The Scripture of Original Marks says: 'Inside the gate of the Heavenly Worthy, there are lions and ferocious tigers guarding the gate on the left and right, and mighty athletes who ward off heaven showing their terrifying majesty in front and behind.' Yet examining the Daoist abbeys in the Three Capitals, the Two Capitals, Jiangnan, and Huaibei during the Han, Wei, and Jin dynasties, they only had texts written on dried gourds; originally they had no images of the Heavenly Worthy nor vajra spirits. Those crafted today are all spoken of in the forged scriptures of Lu Xiujing, Zhang Bin, and others. Furthermore, vajra [warriors] and lions are benevolent spirits who protect the Dharma. Before the Jin dynasty, they were never found within the abbeys of Daoist masters, nor are they discussed in any stele inscriptions, eulogies, or panegyrics, nor recorded in historical records or literary canons. I invite widely learned scholars of antiquity and the present age, who are versatile Ruists, to collate the correct canons; they will naturally know what is false and what is real. If one relies on the Scripture of Salvation, the Scripture of Original Marks, and the like, the Heavenly Worthy ought to ride a lion and not sit upon a lotus flower.