鐔津文集 10.6

10.6

月日沙門某。謹奉書祕校茹君足下。近辱示手筆。稱美甚盛。謙謙以未相識為恨。愚何人也。當此大惠幸甚幸甚。愚本庸陋自度無以處心。因求聖人之說以之為善。既治吾道復探儒術。兩有所得則竊用文詞發之。而當世賢豪不以其僭竊狂斐相拒。尚以為可語引之與游。雖然接其游處綢繆至如朋友者。而未嘗軒豁以盡乎心。蓋以人黨於教罕不齟齬。雖欲道之自顧。其言豈能必信於世。故常嗟咨悒怏。頗不自得。及觀祕校送瑩上人序。亦謂佛教教人為善有益於世。不隨時輩訩訩以相詆訶。此非疎達知遠窺見聖人之深心。則何能如是之至論耶。不待相識固信祕校識度卓卓遠出時輩。而宜吾傾懷盡心相與語之。況又辱書。惟道與文屈節肯相愛慕。雖盛有道德如古高世之僧。亦宜大進其說以廣祕書之志。況吾區區當此。寧可默默自祕耶。夫佛道大至。推而行之無所不可。以之窮理盡性。則能使人全神乎死生變化之外。雖三皇五帝之道。未始及之。此誠非經營世間者所可擬議也。以之治世導俗。則能使人慈心潔身遷善遠罪止諍不殺平國家天下。其五戒十善之教與夫五常仁義者。一體而異名。此又有為者之所宜守也。古今之儒辯之者多矣。皆不揣其本以齊其末。徒以佛為者謂過與不及。而因之云云其相訾百端。嗟乎舜樂取於人以為善。禹聞善言則拜。孔子擇其善者而從之。顏子得一善言則拳拳服膺而不敢失之。古聖賢人如此以帥于後世。而後之人尚不能從之。至有悖亂喪性滅身破家亡國者也。況復妄斥善道沮人。為之如此。則何以勸于後世邪。嗚呼使後世之人不盡為善。亦妄辯者之罪也。祕校方為國家為政。果能推之以廣堯舜之道。則為之政為之治。不亦愈大愈遠乎。臨風且布所懷為答。以謝厚意。不宣。某謹白。

On such a month and day, the śramaṇa [Qisong] respectfully presents this letter to Collator of the Secretarial Court Lord Ru. Recently I was graced with your handwritten letter, praising me most generously, and modestly regretting that we had not yet met. What kind of man am I to receive such great kindness? Most fortunate! Most fortunate! Being originally mediocre and vulgar, I considered myself without means to settle my mind; thus I sought the teachings of the sages to do good. Having cultivated our Way, I also explored the arts of Confucianism. Having attained something in both, I privately used literary expressions to set them forth, and the worthy heroes of the present age did not reject me for my presumption or wild extravagance, but still regarded me as someone to speak with, taking me in to associate with them. Nevertheless, though I have associated with them in close intimacy just like friends, I have never been openly unreserved so as to pour out my heart entirely. This is because people are partisan toward their teachings and rarely avoid discord; though I wished to speak of it, considering myself, how could my words be certain to be trusted by the world? Therefore I often sighed in dejection, quite dissatisfied with myself. But when I read your preface seeing off the Superior Ying, which also stated that the Buddhist teaching instructs people to do good and is beneficial to the world, not following the clamour of contemporary peers who revile it, I knew: if one were not broad-minded, far-sighted, and able to glimpse the deep mind of the Sage, how could one formulate such an ultimate discourse? Even without having met in person, I truly believed that your insight and caliber were preeminent, far surpassing the peers of the age, and that I should pour out my feelings and heart to converse with you. Moreover, I have been honoured by your letter, where you bowed your status solely out of love and admiration for the Way and literature; even a monk of abundant virtue like those of ancient lofty renown ought to advance his discourse greatly to broaden your aspirations, Secretary, let alone a petty person like me facing this—how could I remain silently concealed? The Buddhist Way is great and ultimate; if promoted and practiced, there is nowhere it cannot reach. Using it to fathom principle and exhaust nature, it can cause people to preserve their spirit completely beyond birth, death, and transformation; even the Way of the Three Sovereigns and Five Thearchs never reached this. This is truly not something that those engaged in worldly affairs can evaluate. Using it to govern the world and guide customs, it can cause people to possess compassionate hearts and clean bodies, to move toward goodness and distance themselves from offenses, to cease disputes, abstain from killing, and bring peace to the state and realm. Its teachings of the five precepts and ten virtuous deeds are one in substance with different names when compared to the five constant virtues and benevolence and righteousness. This is also what men of action ought to maintain. Confucians past and present who have debated this are many; all failed to measure the root when attempting to regulate the branches, merely claiming that what the Buddhists do is either excessive or deficient, and based on this made all manner of criticisms. Alas! Shun took joy in adopting goodness from others to practice good; Yu bowed upon hearing good words; Confucius chose what was good and followed it; Yan Hui, upon obtaining a single good word, clasped it firmly to his chest and dared not lose it. When ancient sages and worthies thus led later generations, people of later times were still unable to follow them, even reaching the point of rebellion, losing their nature, destroying their lives, ruining their families, and bringing downfall to their states. How much more when they falsely denounce the good Way and obstruct people from doing it like this—how then can later generations be encouraged? Alas! That people of later generations do not entirely do good is also the fault of these reckless debaters. You are presently engaged in governance for the state; if you can truly promote this to broaden the Way of Yao and Shun, will your governance and rule not become even greater and further reaching? Facing the wind, I briefly unfold my feelings in reply, to thank you for your generous intent. Respectfully submitted.