北山錄 9.2.4

9.2.4

This is indeed identical to the views of the non-Buddhists of the Western Regions (as the svabhāvavāda non-Buddhists say: 'Who made thorns sharp and variegated beasts? Who dug rivers, oceans, and streams' sources? Sudden violent winds arise, yet they naturally settle of themselves. Know that all things are inherently spontaneous'). How could it be called a secondary transformation by Kāśyapa? (The Sutra of the Pure Practice of the Dharma says that Laozi was transformed by Kāśyapa.) Yet, at the gate of the Zhu and Si rivers, benevolence was regarded as the supreme practice; if not the Dao and Virtue, priority must certainly be given to benevolence. Thus, although You could be entrusted with managing the military levies of a state of a thousand chariots (Zi Lu could be made to manage the levies of the feudal lords), and Chi could be made to put on his sash and stand at court (Gongxi Hua could be appointed an envoy to stand at court and converse with guests), Chu's Ziwen showed no sign [of emotion] at thrice being dismissed (the Chief Minister of Chu, whose surname was Dou, given name Gu, and courtesy name Wutu; thrice he served as Chief Minister without joy, and thrice he was dismissed from office without anger, always reporting the old policies of the Chief Minister to the new Chief Minister), and Chen Wenzi abandoned ten teams of horses, seeking a reputation for benevolence (Chen Xuwu; when Cui Zhu assassinated the ruler, Wenzi abandoned forty horses and fled because he detested him)—Zhongni did not grant this to them (Confucius said in each case: 'I do not know whether he was benevolent,' clarifying the difficulty of the way of benevolence). That benevolence pervades the hundred actions and accords with the unified virtue (the dedicated single virtue); never has there been anything that did not become vast and great through benevolence. In the Five Indias it is called a bodhisattva; in the Nine Provinces it is called a benevolent person. For when humans are capable of compassion and wisdom, compassion and wisdom make them benevolent. The bodhisattva practices the ultimate degree of benevolence; the noble man gradually enters its gate. If Emperor Wu of Liang had not drawn upon both teachings, how could he have become a noble Ruist and arrived at the Great Method? (Method means the Dao. If one says Emperor Wu of Liang was narrow-minded and dogmatic, how could he be called a noble Ruist who reached the Great Dao?) Nowadays, disputants inevitably assume the aggressive stance of Sun and Wu (Sun Wu and Wu Qi were both fine generals of the Warring States period, each writing military texts and excelling in battle arrays; nowadays disputants clash with opponents like the battlefield tactics of Sun and Wu); those who study the precepts must foster the integrity of Yan and Liu (Yan Shuzi lived alone, and a young woman sought shelter with him on a night of wind and rain when her house collapsed; Shuzi continuously refused her, stepped outside, and let her enter the house. Liuxia Hui, surname Zhan, given name Qin, fief at Liuxia, posthumous title Hui; on a cold night a woman arrived too late for the city gates, and Liuxia Hui covered her with his robe until dawn without transgressing into a man's unbenevolent conduct); those who dwell in dhyāna inevitably admire the loftiness of Chao and You (Xu You and Chaofu were both lofty scholars of Yao's time; when Yao intended to abdicate the throne, they detested it, washed their ears, and lived in seclusion without serving as officials); those who sustain the order must reflect on the transformations of Qi and Lu (those who uphold the bonds and standards must revise and guide, just as Qi transformed to Lu, and Lu transformed to the Dao). Therefore, to take the external teachings to guide and encourage, and to look into the inner Dharma to stimulate determination—how could this be harmful? ('How' means 'in what way'. First using the external teachings to entice, then using the inner teachings to instruct—how could there be any harm?) Indeed, those who climb trees vie for height, and those who dig springs vie for depth. Without prior timidity, who would display subsequent courage? Yet, although the Liang ruler possessed utmost faith, he did not carefully observe the successes and failures of the past to standardize his undertakings ('standardize' means to employ). He abruptly wished to transform things according to the Dao to exhaust their natures, failing to foresee the fate of Dongye Bi's driving and in the end lapsing into indulgence (when Yan Hui saw Dongye Bi's chariot, he knew he would surely fail, because his horses were not well-trained; once he drove, he indeed suffered defeat and the horses were harmed). I once read his text on abstaining from wine and meat, in which his compassion surpassed that of the Buddha; he debased his own person to ransom the Dharma, going beyond what befits an emperor (three times he renounced his body into a monastery to be a servant to the assembly; his ministers provided hundreds of thousands of cash to ransom him from the saṅgha, and only after their tacit consent did he return; although bending one's body to be a seat does not surpass this, why must it be like this?). Furthermore, he decreed that the patterns on brocades and damasks could not depict the shapes of birds and beasts, lest the act of cutting them arouse thoughts of killing and harming (fearing to harm the way of benevolence and forbearance). Although this followed the art of rearing tigers, it actually taught people the intention to kill (the master of herds Liang Yang under King Xuan of Zhou was skilled at rearing tigers; he did not feed them living creatures because killing them would provoke anger, nor whole carcasses because tearing them apart would provoke anger; feeding them in a timely manner, he understood their angry impulses and did not go against their nature; he did not cause them joy, for joy would again turn to anger; though wishing to extinguish their intention to kill, it instead aroused their murderous thoughts. Silk brocade originally lacks the aspect of killing; now forcefully giving rise to the idea of killing creates something from nothing, and even so it amounts to teaching people the sense of a murderous intention). At the ancestral temples and suburban sacrifices, using flour for the sacrificial beasts—if one does not perform them, one does not, but why deceive the ancestors? Yet one might fail them (making meat out of flour constitutes deceit; not performing it fails the ancestors). From wearing the black robe to rising in rank, [some] fail to distinguish the beautiful from the ugly, openly display arrogance, and write it upon pale walls and plain screens, simply unaware that this invites enemies and incurs bandits (today there are those who, having donned the black robe, attain high honors, fail to distinguish good from evil, indulge in idle pride, and furthermore discard the higher teachings, inscribing their words on plastered walls and plain screens; this can be called inviting cross-examination upon oneself). In the past, Dao'an of the Zhou composed the *Treatise on the Two Teachings*, and Yancong of the Sui composed the *Treatise on Penetrating the Ultimate*; giving full rein to their mind and sight, moving in and out of the profound and abstruse, they posited host and guest, first setting forth extraordinary objections and only afterwards resolving them. They intended to probe the brambles and crooked paths of heterodox factions, serving as an enclosure for the Dharma (first setting up rival traditions to interrogate and object to their own teaching, and then answering them, preparing in advance against the views of rival schools). But later generations such as Li Zhongqing and others stole through walls like thieves, concealing their resolutions and elaborating their objections to compose treatises such as the *Ten Heterodoxies* and *Nine Confusions*, deceiving those who did not know (these were all people of wrong view in the Tang dynasty who deceived shallow students who had not seen the treatises of An and Cong), thus abetting their slanderous words. Is this not a case of the two scholars seeking to tame [a beast] only to be bitten by it? (This is because the treatises composed by the two masters to guard against subtleties were instead stolen as tools to attack them.) Intending to bring security, they instead bought danger. Yet this discussion has not ended, and perverse objections have not ceased. The former kings used steelyards and bushels to eliminate theft, but people used them for theft (the sword was fashioned to kill bandits, yet now bandits turn it to their own use); they used weapons and spears to stop killing, but people used them for killing. Therefore, the more things are guarded against, the further their exploitation spreads. Alas, how difficult it is! Thus, those who preserve their original teaching have an excess of simplicity, while those who combine deviant teachings have an excess of contention. None but a noble man can maintain vigilance to the utmost limit (if one preserves the original tradition...).