鐔津文集 1.15

1.15

天下之教化者善而已矣。佛之法非善乎。而諸君必排之。是必以其與己教不同而然也。此豈非莊子所謂人同於己則可。不同於己雖善不善謂之矜。吾欲諸君為公而不為矜也。語曰。多聞擇其善者而從之。又曰。君子之於天下也。無適也無莫也義之與比。聖人抑亦酌其善而取之。何嘗以與己不同而棄人之善也。自三代其政既衰而世俗之惡滋甚。禮義將不暇獨治。而佛之法乃播於諸夏。遂與儒並勸。而世亦翕然化之。其遷善遠罪者有矣。自得以正乎性命者有矣。而民至於今賴之。故吾謂佛教者乃相資而善世也。但在冥數自然。人不可得而輒見。以理而陰校之無不然也。故佛之法為益於天下。抑亦至矣。今曰。佛為害於中國。斯言甚矣。君子何未之思也。大凡害事無大小者。不誅於人必誅於天。鮮得久存於世也。今佛法入中國垂千年矣。果為害則天人安能久容之如此也。若其三廢於中國而三益起之。是亦可疑其必有大合乎天人者也。君子謂其廢天常而不近人情而惡之。然其遺情當絕有陰德乎君親者也。而其意甚遠不可遽說。且以天道而與子質之。父子夫婦天常也。今佛導人割常情而務其修潔者。蓋反常而合道也。夫大道亦恐其有所至於常情耳。不然則天厭之久矣。若古之聖賢之人事於佛而相贊之者繁乎。此不可悉數。姑以唐而明其大略。夫為天下而至於王道者孰與太宗。當玄奘出其眾經。而太宗父子文之曰大唐聖教序。相天下而最賢者孰與房杜姚宋邪。若房梁公玄齡則相與玄奘譯經。杜萊公如晦則以法尊於京兆玄琬。逮其垂薨乃命琬為世世之師。宋丞相璟則以佛法師於曇一。裴晉公勳業於唐為高。丞相崔群德重當時。天下服其為人。而天下孰賢於二公。裴則執弟子禮於徑山法欽。崔則師於道人如會惟儼。抱大節忠於國家天下死而不變者。孰與顏魯公。魯公嘗以戒稱弟子於湖州慧明。問道於江西嚴峻。純孝而清正孰與於魯山元紫芝。紫芝以母喪則刺血寫佛之經像（已上之事見於劉煦唐書及本朝所撰高僧傳）自太宗逮乎元德秀者。皆其君臣之甚聖賢者也。借使佛之法不正而善惑。亦烏能必惑乎如此之聖賢邪。至乃儒者文者。若隋之文中子。若唐之元結李華梁肅。若權文公。若裴相國休。若柳子厚李元賓。此八君子者但不詬佛為不賢耳。不可謂其盡不知古今治亂成敗與其邪正之是非也。而八君子亦未始謂佛為非是而不推之。如此諸君益宜思之。今吾人之所以為人者。特資乎神明而然也。神明之傳於人。亦猶人之移易其屋廬耳。舊說羊祜前為李氏之子。崔咸乃盧老後身。若斯之類古今頗有。諸君故亦嘗聞之也。以此而推之。則諸君之賢豪出當治世。是亦乘昔之神明而致然也。又烏知其昔不以佛之法而治乎神明邪。於此吾益欲諸君審其形始而姑求其中。不必徒以外物而自繆。今為書而必欲勸之者。非直為其法也。重與諸君皆稟靈為人殊貴於萬物之中。而萬物變化芒乎紛綸。唯人為難得。諸君人傑愈難得也。然此亦死生鬼神之惚恍。不足擅以為諭。請即以人事而言之。幸諸君少取焉。夫立言者所以勸善而沮惡也。及其善之惡之當與不當。則損益歸乎陰德。今閭巷之人欲以言而辱人。必亦思之曰。彼福德人也。不可辱之。辱則折吾福矣。然佛縱不足預世聖賢。豈不若其閭巷之福德人邪。今詆訶一出則後生末學百世效之。其損益陰德亦少宜慎思之。昔韓退之不肯為史。蓋懼其褒貶不當而損乎陰德也。故與書乎劉生曰。不有人禍則有天刑。又曰。若有鬼神將不福人。彼史氏之褒貶但在乎世人耳。若佛者其道德神奇。恐不啻於世之人也。此又未可多貶也。列禦寇稱孔子嘗曰。丘聞西方之有大聖人。不治而不亂。不言而自信。不化而自行。蕩蕩乎民無能名焉。使列子妄言即已。如其稱誠則聖人固不可侮也。

The transforming education of all under Heaven is simply goodness. Is the Dharma of the Buddha not good? Yet you gentlemen insist on rejecting it. This must be because it differs from your own teachings. Is this not what Zhuangzi meant when he said that if someone agrees with oneself, one deems it right, but if someone differs from oneself, even if they are good, one calls it bad out of pride? I desire that you gentlemen be fair-minded and not boastful. The Analects say: 'Hear much, select what is good and follow it.' It also says: 'The gentleman in the world is neither set for nor against anything; what is right, that he will follow.' The sage likewise weighed what was good and adopted it. How could he ever abandon the good of others merely because it differed from himself? Since the government of the Three Dynasties declined, the evils of worldly custom have grown ever more severe. Ritual and propriety could no longer bring order on their own, and so the Dharma of the Buddha was propagated throughout the Chinese realms. It thereupon encouraged people side by side with Confucianism, and the world harmoniously embraced its transformation. There were those who turned toward good and kept distant from transgressions, and there were those who independently attained rectitude in their inner nature and destiny. To this very day, the common people rely upon it. Thus I say that the Buddhist teaching aids [Confucianism] in benefiting the world. It is only that this operates naturally within the unseen order, such that people cannot immediately perceive it; but if one covertly examines it with principle, nothing is otherwise. Therefore, the benefit the Buddha's Dharma brings to all under Heaven is indeed consummate. Now people say: 'Buddhism is a harm to China.' These words go too far! Why have you gentlemen not reflected on this? In general, concerning harmful matters, whether great or small: if not punished by humanity, they are inevitably punished by Heaven, and they seldom endure long in the world. Now the Buddha's Dharma has entered China for nearly a thousand years. If it were truly harmful, how could Heaven and humans have tolerated it for so long like this? If it was abolished three times in China and yet rose again three times with even greater vigor, this suggests that it must have a great accord with Heaven and humans. Gentlemen say that it abolishes the heavenly constants and runs counter to human feelings, and so they detest it. Yet its renunciation of worldly feelings surely yields hidden merit for rulers and parents. Its meaning is profound and cannot be explained in haste. Let me examine it with you from the perspective of the Way of Heaven. Father and son, husband and wife—these are heavenly constants. Now when the Buddha guides people to sever ordinary attachments and devote themselves to cultivating purity, it is because turning away from the ordinary accords with the Way. The Great Way indeed fears that one may merely settle within ordinary feelings. If it were not so, Heaven would have detested it long ago. If we speak of the ancient sages and worthies who served the Buddha and praised him, they are countless; they cannot all be enumerated. Let us take the Tang dynasty to illustrate the broad outline. As for ruling all under Heaven and attaining the Kingly Way, who could compare to Taizong? When Xuanzang brought forth his many scriptures, Taizong and his son composed for them the 'Preface to the Holy Teaching of the Great Tang'. As for the most worthy ministers who assisted all under Heaven, who could compare to Fang [Xuanling], Du [Ruhui], Yao [Chong], and Song [Jing]? Duke Liang, Fang Xuanling, assisted Xuanzang in translating scriptures. Duke Lai, Du Ruhui, revered Xuanwan of the capital with the Dharma, and when he was on the verge of passing away, he ordered that Xuanwan be their family's teacher generation after generation. Prime Minister Song Jing took Danyi as his master in the Buddha's Dharma. Duke Jin, Pei [Du]'s, meritorious achievements were preeminent in the Tang, and Prime Minister Cui Qun's virtue was weighty in his day, with all under Heaven admiring his character; who in the realm was worthier than these two dukes? Pei acted as a disciple to Fachin of Mount Jing, and Cui took the monks Ruhui and Weiyan as his teachers. As for those upholding great integrity, loyal to the state and realm, dying without wavering, who could compare to Duke Lu, Yan [Zhenqing]? Duke Lu once claimed the title of disciple under Huiming of Huzhou regarding the precepts, and questioned Yanjun of Jiangxi about the Way. In terms of pure filial piety and upright integrity, who could compare to Yuan Zizhi of Lushan? When Zizhi lost his mother, he pricked his blood to write Buddhist scriptures and paint images. (The above matters appear in Liu Xu's Tang History and the Biographies of Eminent Monks compiled in our present dynasty.) From Taizong down to Yuan Dexiu, all were exceedingly sage and worthy rulers and ministers. Supposing the Buddha's Dharma were unorthdox and skilled at deceiving, how could it have deceived such sages and worthies? Coming down to the Confucian scholars and men of letters, such as Wenzhongzi of the Sui, or Yuan Jie, Li Hua, and Liang Su of the Tang, Duke Quan Wen, Prime Minister Pei Xiu, and Liu Zihou and Li Yuanbin—these eight gentlemen did not vilify the Buddha as unworthy; it cannot be said that they were entirely ignorant of order and chaos, success and failure in past and present, or the truth and falsehood of right and wrong. And these eight gentlemen never considered the Buddha wrong or failed to promote him. In light of this, you gentlemen ought all the more to reflect upon it. Now that which makes us human relies uniquely upon the spiritual consciousness. The transmission of spiritual consciousness in humans is just like a person moving their dwelling. An old account says that Yang Hu had previously been a son of the Li clan, and Cui Xian was the rebirth of Old Man Lu. Instances of this kind have been quite common from past to present; you gentlemen must surely have heard of them. Inferring from this, that you worthy and heroic gentlemen emerge in an era of good governance is likewise due to relying upon past spiritual consciousness. How can you know that in the past you did not cultivate your spiritual consciousness through the Buddha's Dharma? At this point, I all the more desire that you gentlemen examine the origin of your form and provisionally seek its inner reality, without needlessly misleading yourselves by external things alone. Now in writing this book with the resolute desire to exhort you, it is not solely for the sake of his Dharma. It is because I value that you gentlemen and I have all received spiritual endowment to become humans, exceptionally noble among the ten thousand things; yet the transformations of the ten thousand things are vast and tangled, and human existence alone is hard to obtain. You gentlemen are heroes among men, which is even harder to obtain. However, these matters are dim and elusive regarding birth and death, ghosts and spirits, and are not enough to rely on as a sole illustration. Please let me speak in terms of human affairs, and I hope you gentlemen will adopt just a little of it. Now, establishing words is that by which one encourages good and discourages evil. When it comes to whether praising good and condemning evil is appropriate or inappropriate, the loss or gain reverts to unseen merit. Today, when a commoner in an alley wishes to insult someone with words, he will surely reflect: 'He is a person of blessed virtue; I must not insult him. If I insult him, it will diminish my own blessings.' Now, even if the Buddha were not sufficient to rank among worldly sages and worthies, is he not at least like that person of blessed virtue in the alley? Today, once disparagement and ridicule are uttered, later students and epigones will imitate them for a hundred generations. You should also consider carefully the loss or gain to unseen merit. Formerly, Han Tuizhi was unwilling to write history, because he feared that improper praise and blame would diminish unseen merit. Therefore, in his letter to Scholar Liu, he said: 'If there is no human calamity, then there will be heavenly punishment.' He also said: 'If there are ghosts and spirits, they will not bestow blessings on a person.' The praise and blame of historians merely concern worldly people. As for the Buddha, his virtue and spiritual wonders are far more than those of worldly people. This too must not be excessively disparaged. Lie Yukou recorded that Confucius once said: 'Qiu has heard that in the west there is a Great Sage: he does not govern, yet there is no disorder; he does not speak, yet he is naturally trusted; he does not transform, yet [the Way] naturally operates. Vast and boundless, the people cannot find a name for him.' If Liezi spoke falsely, then let it rest; but if what he said is true, then the sage surely cannot be insulted.