鐔津文集 3.22

3.22

養不足以報父母。而聖人以德報之。德不足以達父母。而聖人以道達之。道也者非世之所謂道也。妙神明出死生。聖人之至道者也。德也者非世之所謂德也。備萬善被幽被明。聖人之至德者也。儒不曰乎。君子之所謂孝者先意承志諭父母於道。參直養者也。安能為孝乎。曰君子之所謂孝也。國人稱願然曰。幸哉有子如此。所謂孝也。已雖然。蓋意同而義異也。夫天下之報恩者。吾聖人可謂至報恩者也。天下之為孝者。吾聖人可謂純孝者也。經曰。不如以三尊之教度其一世二親。書曰。黍稷非馨明德惟馨。不其然哉。不其然哉。吾從聖人之後。而其德不修其道不明。吾徒負父母而媿於聖人也夫。

Material support is insufficient to requite one's parents, so the Sage requited them with virtue. Virtue is insufficient to bring parents to ultimate realization, so the Sage brought them to realization through the Way. This 'Way' is not what the world calls the Way: it is wondrously attuned to the divine spirits and transcends life and death; it is the ultimate Way of the Sage. This 'virtue' is not what the world calls virtue: it encompasses all myriad goods and cloaks the unseen and the manifest; it is the ultimate virtue of the Sage. Do not the Confucians say: 'What the noble person calls filial piety is anticipating [their parents'] intentions, supporting their will, and guiding parents to the Way. Shen merely provides direct material support; how can that be considered filial piety?' It is said: 'What the noble person calls filial piety is when the people of the state sigh with admiration, saying: "How fortunate to have such a son!" This is what is called filial piety.' That may be so, but while the intention is similar, the meaning is different. As for those in the world who requite kindness, our Sage may be called the ultimate requiter of kindness; as for those in the world who practice filial piety, our Sage may be called purely filial. The sutra says: 'It is better to deliver one's parents in this single life through the teachings of the Three Venerable Ones.' The Book of Documents says: 'The millet and sacrificial grains are not fragrant; it is luminous virtue alone that is fragrant.' Is it not so? Is it not so? If I follow after the Sage, yet my virtue is uncultivated and my Way is not clarified, I will merely fail my parents and bring shame before the Sage!