鐔津文集 1.10.2

1.10.2

子豈不聞洪範五福六極之謂乎。 五福者。 謂人以其心合乎皇極。 而天用是五者應以嚮勸之。 六極者。 謂人不以其心合乎皇極。 而天用是六者應以威沮之。 夫其形存而善惡之應已然。 其神往則善惡之報豈不然乎。 佛經曰。 一切諸法以意生形。 此之謂也。 曰謂佛道絕情而所為也如此。 豈非情乎。 佛亦有情邪。 曰形象者舉有情。 佛獨無情邪。 佛行情而不情耳。 曰佛之為者既類夫仁義而仁義烏得不謂之情乎。 曰仁者何。 惠愛之謂也。 義者何。 適宜之謂也。 宜與愛皆起於性而形乎用。 非情何乎。 就其情而言之。 則仁義乃情之善者也。 情而為之而其勢近權。 不情而為之而其勢近理。 性相同也情相異也。 異焉而天下鮮不競。 同焉而天下鮮不安。 聖人欲引之其所安。 所以推性而同群生。 聖人欲息之其所競。 所以推懷而在萬物。 謂物也。 無昆蟲無動植。 佛皆概而惠之。 不散損之。 謂生也。 無貴賤無賢鄙。 佛皆一而導之。 使自求之推其性而自同群生。 豈不謂大誠乎。 推其懷而盡在萬物。 豈不謂大慈乎。 大慈故其感人也。 深大誠故其化物也。 易故夫中國之內四夷八蠻之外。 其人聞佛。 之言為善有福為惡有罪。 而鮮不測然收其惡心歡然舉其善意。 守其說拳拳不敢失之。 若嚮之所謂五戒十善云者。 里巷何嘗不相化而為之。 自鄉之邑。 自邑之州。 自州之國。 朝廷之士　天子之宮掖。 其修之至也。 不殺必仁。 不盜必廉。 不淫必正。 不妄必信。 不醉不亂。 不綺語必誠。 不兩舌不讒不惡口不辱。 不恚不讐。 不嫉不爭。 不癡不昧。 有一于此足以誠於身而加於人。 況五戒十善之全也。 豈有為人弟者而不悌其兄。 為人子者而不孝其親。 為人室者而不敬其夫。 為人友者而不以善相致。 為人臣者而不忠其君。 為人君者而不仁其民。 是天下之無有也。 為之者唯恐其過與不及為癖耳。 佛豈苟癖於人焉。 如此者佛之道豈一人之私為乎。 抑亦有意於天下國家矣。 何嘗不存其君臣父子邪。 豈妨人所生養之道邪。 但其所出不自吏而張之。 亦其化之理隱而難見。 故世不得而盡信。 易曰。 默而成之不言而信存乎德行。 孟子曰。 民日遷善而不知為之者。 豈不然乎。 人之惑於情久矣。 情之甚幾至乎敝薄。 古聖人憂之。 為其法交相為治。 謂之帝。 謂之王。 雖其道多方。 而猶不暇救。 以仁恩之。 以義教之。 賞欲進其善。 罰欲沮其惡。 雖罰日益勞賞日益費。 而世俗益薄。 苟聞有不以賞罰而得民遷善而遠惡。 雖聖如堯舜必歡然喜而致之。 豈曰斯人不因吾道而為善吾不取其善。 必吾道而為善乃可善之。 若是是聖人私其道也。 安有聖人之道而私哉。 夫游龍振於江海而雲氣油然四起。 暴虎聲於山林而飈風飂飂而來。 蓋其類自相應也。 故善人非親而善人同之。 惡人非恩而惡人容之。 舜好問而察邇言。 隱惡而揚善。 及聞一善言見一善行。 若決江海沛然莫之能禦也。 禹聞善言則拜。 孔子嘗謂。 善人吾不得而見之。 得見有常者其可矣。 又曰。 三人行必得我師焉。 擇其善者而從之。 其不善者其改之。 顏子得一善。 則拳拳服膺不敢失之。 孟子謂。 好善優於天下。 又謂。 誠身有道。 不明乎善。 不誠其身矣。 此五君子者。 古之大樂善人也。 以其善類固類於佛。 苟其不死見乎吾道之傳。 是必泯然從而推之。 噫亦後世之不幸。 不得其相遇而相證。 尚使兩家之徒猶豫而不相信。 噫人情莫不專己而略人是此而非彼。 非過則爭。 專過則拘。 君子通而已矣。 何必苟專。 君子當而已矣。 何必苟非。 飲食男女人皆能知貴。 而君子不貴。 君子之所貴。 貴其能知道而識理也。 今有大道遠理若是。 而余不知識。

Have you not heard of what the *Hongfan* calls the 'five blessings' and 'six extremities'? The five blessings mean that when people conform in their minds with the sovereign's ultimate (*huangji*), Heaven uses these five to respond by encouraging them forward. The six extremities mean that when people do not conform in their minds with the sovereign's ultimate, Heaven uses these six to respond by deterring them through dread. Now, when their physical forms are present, the resonance of good and evil is already like this; when their spirits depart, how could the retribution for good and evil not be likewise? A Buddhist scripture says: 'All phenomena take form generated by the mind.' This is what it refers to. [One might] ask: 'It is said that the Buddhist Path severs passions, yet what it does is like this—how is that not passion? Does the Buddha also have passions?' I say: Whatever possesses form and image universally has passions; could the Buddha alone have no passion? The Buddha merely practices passion while being without passion. [The interlocutor] asks: 'Since what the Buddha does resembles benevolence and righteousness, how could benevolence and righteousness not be called passions?' I say: What is benevolence? It means kindness and love. What is righteousness? It means fittingness. Fittingness and love both arise from nature and take form in application—if not passions, what are they? Speaking in terms of passions, benevolence and righteousness are the good among passions. If one acts from passion, the tendency borders on expediency; if one acts without passion, the tendency borders on principle. Natures are alike; passions differ. When they differ, the world rarely fails to contend; when they are alike, the world rarely fails to be at peace. The sages wished to guide them to where they would find peace, and therefore extended nature to make it identical with all living beings. The sages wished to quell their contentions, and therefore extended their bosom to encompass all things. Speaking of things, whether insects, motile fauna, or flora, the Buddha universally benefits them all, never scattering or harming them. Speaking of living beings, whether noble or base, worthy or ignoble, the Buddha guides them all equally, causing them to seek it for themselves, extending their nature so as to identify themselves with all living beings—could this not be called Great Sincerity? Extending his bosom to encompass all things entirely—could this not be called Great Compassion? Because of Great Compassion, his moving of people is deep; because of Great Sincerity, his transforming of things is easy. Therefore, within the Central Realms and beyond the four border tribes and eight barbarian peoples, when their people hear the words of the Buddha that doing good brings blessings and doing evil brings guilt, few fail to soberly withdraw their evil intentions and joyfully bring forth their good purposes, holding fast to his teachings with earnest devotion, not daring to let them go. As for what was previously spoken of as the five precepts and ten virtuous actions, how could neighborhood lanes ever fail to transform each other in practicing them? From village to town, from town to prefecture, from prefecture to state, among the scholars of the court and within the imperial palaces of the Son of Heaven: when their cultivation reaches its utmost, not killing must be benevolence; not stealing must be integrity; not engaging in misconduct must be rectitude; not lying must be trustworthiness; not becoming intoxicated avoids confusion; not using frivolous speech must be sincere; not being double-tongued avoids slander; not speaking harshly avoids causing humiliation; not harboring wrath avoids enmity; not being jealous avoids contention; not being foolish avoids delusion. Having even one among these is enough to make oneself sincere and extend it to others; how much more so the completeness of the five precepts and ten virtuous actions! How could there be a younger brother who is not fraternal toward his elder brother, a son who is not filial toward his parents, a wife who does not respect her husband, friends who do not bring goodness to one another, a minister who is not loyal to his sovereign, or a sovereign who is not benevolent toward his people? There are none such in the world! Those who practice them fear only that excessive or deficient practice will become a fixation; how could the Buddha casually foster fixations in people? In this manner, how could the Buddha's Path be merely the private practice of a single person? Rather, it also holds regard for the world, the state, and the family! How could it ever fail to preserve ruler and minister, father and son? How could it hinder the way of giving life and nurturing people? It is only that its origination did not spread forth from magistrates, and the principle behind its transformation is hidden and difficult to see; thus worldly people are unable to believe it completely. The *Changes* says: 'Silently completing it, achieving trust without speaking: this resides in virtuous conduct.' Mencius says: 'The people daily shift toward goodness without knowing who brings it about.' Is it not so? People have long been deluded by passions; when passions become extreme, they nearly lead to ruin and depravity. The ancient sages grieved over this, and established their laws to govern sequentially, being called Emperors or being called Kings. Though their ways were varied, they still had not enough time to save them. They showed kindness to them through benevolence; they instructed them through righteousness. Rewards sought to advance their goodness; punishments sought to deter their evil. Yet while punishments grew daily more burdensome and rewards grew daily more costly, worldly customs only grew more depraved. If they had heard that without rewards and punishments one could obtain the people's shifting toward goodness and keeping far from evil, even sages like Yao and Shun would surely have rejoiced and welcomed it happily. Would they say: 'This person does not do good according to our way, so we will not accept his goodness; it must be through our way that one does good before it can be considered good'? If it were like this, then the sages would be appropriating the Way as their private property. How could the Way of the sages ever be private? When a swimming dragon stirs in the rivers and seas, clouds gather luxuriantly on all sides; when a fierce tiger roars in the mountain forests, gusting winds whistle forth. This is because like kinds naturally respond to one another. Thus the good person associates with good people without need of kinship; the evil person accommodates evil people without need of favor. Shun was fond of asking questions and examining ordinary remarks; he concealed evil and brought forward goodness. When he heard a single good word or saw a single good deed, it was like breaching the rivers and seas—a rushing torrent that nothing could check. When Yu heard a good word, he bowed. Confucius once remarked: 'A good person I have not been able to meet; if I could meet someone with constancy, that would suffice.' He also said: 'When three people walk together, there will surely be a teacher for me among them. I select what is good in them and follow it, and what is not good in them I correct.' When Yanzi attained a single good thing, he clasped it earnestly to his bosom and did not dare lose it. Mencius remarked: 'Delighting in goodness surpasses the whole world.' He also remarked: 'Making oneself sincere has a way: if one is not clear about goodness, one cannot make oneself sincere.' These five gentlemen were the ancient people who took great delight in goodness. Since their category of goodness was fundamentally of the same kind as the Buddha's, had they not died and could have seen the transmission of our Path, they would surely have followed and promoted it without hesitation. Alas, it is also the misfortune of later generations that they could not meet and verify each other, still causing the followers of the two traditions to hesitate and mistrust one another. Alas, it is human nature to always be devoted to oneself and slight others, affirming oneself and denying the other! When denying is excessive, contention arises; when devotion is excessive, narrowness arises. The gentleman merely understands comprehensively—why must he be arbitrarily devoted? The gentleman merely acts appropriately—why must he be arbitrarily dismissive? Eating, drinking, and sex—all people can know to value these, yet the gentleman does not value them. What the gentleman values is that he can know the Way and recognize principle. Now, when there is a Great Path and a profound principle like this, can I fail to know and recognize it?