三教平心論 2.13

2.13

In *Origins of the Way*, he says: 'Laozi spoke of what he called the Way, which is not what I call the Way.' Yet in his 'On Teachers', he claims: 'Confucius took Lao Dan as a teacher.' If it were truly like this, then Confucius's Way originated from Laozi's Way, and can also be called speaking of what he called the Way! In his letter to Meng Jian, he says: 'The Way of the flock of sages fell into great ruin, and the disaster originated from Yang [Zhu] and Mo [Di].' Yet in his 'Reading Mozi', he claims: 'Confucius and Mozi complemented each other.' If it were truly like this, then Confucius's Way was originally the same as Mozi's Way, and could also be said to have ruined the Way of the flock of sages! Now Lao[zi] and Mo[zi] are the ways of heterodox traditions; Yu already denounced and rejected them, yet he then identified Confucius with Laozi and also identified Confucius with Mozi. Is this not an extreme betrayal of Confucius? To learn from Confucius and yet betray Confucius is like Chen Xiang turning his back on his master, or Feng Meng shooting Yi. When later classical scholars and men of letters take Yu's denunciation of Buddhism as something worthy of imitation, is Yu's betrayal of Confucius also worthy of imitation? Furthermore, although Yu denounced Buddhism, he also drew upon Buddhism. In his association with Dadian, he drew upon his intelligence and understanding of principle; in seeing off Gaoxian, he drew upon his viewing life and death as one and freeing himself from external entanglements; in composing the biographical account for Ma Hui, he drew upon his pricking his blood to write Buddhist sūtras. He both denounced it and drew upon it; he both condemned it and affirmed it—Yu can indeed be called one whose virtue was inconstant! Truly, in Yu's heart, there was originally no settled view; between right and wrong, accepting and rejecting, he did not know what to follow. Thus, whatever he let out from his mouth compromised according to the moment, with the front not looking to the back and the back not looking to the front, no longer caring whether he would leave a foul reputation for myriad generations. Men of discernment, in evaluating this, must not judge with private partiality, nor judge with feelings of love and hatred; try to evaluate him with an impartial mind: as for Yu's character, was he ultimately a gentleman or a petty man? Was he ultimately a Confucian or not a true Confucian?