大正蔵検索


punctuation    Hangul    Eng   

Citation style A:
Citation style B:
()
Citation style C:
()
Citation style D:
()
TextNo.
Vol.
Page

  INBUDS
INBUDS(Bibliographic Database)
  Digital Dictionary of Buddhism
電子佛教辭典
パスワードがない場合は「guest」でログインしてください。
Users who do not have a password can log in with the userID "guest".

本文をドラッグして選択するとDDBの見出し語検索結果が表示されます。

Select a portion of the text by dragging your mouse to view all terms in the text contained in the DDB. ・

Password Access Policies

弘明集 (No. 2102_ 僧祐撰 ) in Vol. 52

[First] [Prev] 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 [Next] [Last] [行番号:/]   [返り点:/] [CITE]

T2102_.52.0054a01:
T2102_.52.0054a02:
T2102_.52.0054a03: 弘明集卷第九
T2102_.52.0054a04:   梁*楊都建初寺釋僧祐*律師撰
T2102_.52.0054a05:   大梁皇帝立神明成佛義記并呉興沈
績作序注
T2102_.52.0054a06: 蕭琛難范縝神滅論
T2102_.52.0054a07: 曹思文難范縝神滅論并二啓
詔答
T2102_.52.0054a08: 大梁皇帝立神明成佛義記呉興沈績
作序注
T2102_.52.0054a09: 夫神道冥默。宣尼固已絶言。心數理妙。柱史
T2102_.52.0054a10: 又所未説。聖非智不周近情難用語遠故也。
T2102_.52.0054a11: 是以先代玄儒談遺宿業。後世通辯亦論滯
T2102_.52.0054a12: 來身。非夫天下之極慮。何得而詳焉。故惑者
T2102_.52.0054a13: 聞識神不斷。而全謂之常。聞心念不常而全
T2102_.52.0054a14: 謂之斷。云斷則迷其性常。云常則惑其用斷。
T2102_.52.0054a15: 其用斷惑。因用疑本謂在本可滅。因本
T2102_.52.0054a16: 疑用謂在用弗移。莫能精求。互起偏執。乃使
T2102_.52.0054a17: 天然覺性自沒。浮談
T2102_.52.0054a18: 主禀以玄符御茲大寶覺。先天垂則觀民
T2102_.52.0054a19: 設化。將恐支離詭辯搆義横流。微敍繁絲伊
T2102_.52.0054a20: 誰能振。釋教遺文其將喪矣。是以著斯雅論。
T2102_.52.0054a21: 以弘至典績。早念身空栖心内教。毎餐法音
T2102_.52.0054a22: 用忘寢食。而闇情難曉觸理多疑。至於佛性
T2102_.52.0054a23: 大義頓迷心路。既天詰遠流預同撫覿。萬
T2102_.52.0054a24: 夜獲開千昏永曙。分除之疑朗然倶徹。竊惟
T2102_.52.0054a25: 事與理亨無物不識。用隨道合奚心不辯。故
T2102_.52.0054a26: 行雲徘徊猶感美音之和。游魚踴躍尚賞清
T2102_.52.0054a27: 絲之韻。況以入神之妙發自天衷。此臣所以
T2102_.52.0054a28: 舞之蹈之而不能自己者也。敢以膚受謹爲
T2102_.52.0054a29: 注釋。豈伊錐管用窮天奧。庶幾固惑所以釋
T2102_.52.0054b01: 焉。夫渉行本乎立信臣績曰。夫愚心闇必發大
明。明不欻起。起必由行。
T2102_.52.0054b02: 不自修。修必由信。信者憑師仗理無違之心也。
故五根以一信爲本。四信以不違爲宗。宗信既立。
T2102_.52.0054b03: 萬善自行。行善
造果。謂之行也
信立由乎正解臣績曰。夫邪正不
辯將何取信。故立
T2102_.52.0054b04: 信之本
乎正解
解正則外邪莫擾臣績曰。一心
萬邪滅矣。是
T2102_.52.0054b05: 知内懷正見
則外邪莫
信立則内識無疑臣績曰識者心也故
成實論云心意識體
T2102_.52.0054b06: 一而異名心既
信矣將何疑乎
然信解所依其宗有在臣績曰。依
者憑也。夫
T2102_.52.0054b07: 安心有本則枝行自從。
有本之言顯乎下
何者源神明以不斷爲
T2102_.52.0054b08: 精。精神必歸妙果臣績曰。神而有盡寧謂神乎。故
經云吾見死者形壞體化而神不
T2102_.52.0054b09: 滅。隨行善惡。禍福自追。此即不滅斷之義也。若
化同草木則豈精乎。以其不斷故終歸妙極。憑心此
T2102_.52.0054b10: 地則觸理皆明。明於衆理何
行不成。信解之宗此之謂也
妙果體極。常住精神
T2102_.52.0054b11: 不免無常臣績曰。妙果明理已足。所以體唯極
常精神。渉行未滿故之不免遷變
T2102_.52.0054b12: 常者。前滅後生刹那不住者也臣績曰。刹那是天
竺國音。迅速之極
T2102_.52.0054b13: 名也。生而即滅寧有住乎。故淨
名歎曰。比丘即時生老滅矣
若心用心於攀縁
T2102_.52.0054b14: 前識必異後者。斯則與境倶往。誰成佛乎
T2102_.52.0054b15: 臣績曰。夫心隨境動是其外用。後雖續前終非實論故
知神識之性湛然不移。湛然不移故終歸於妙果
T2102_.52.0054b16: 經云心爲正因終成佛果臣績曰略語佛因其義有
二。一曰縁因。二曰正
T2102_.52.0054b17: 因。縁者萬善是也。正者神識是也。萬善有助發之功故
曰縁因神識是其正本。故曰正因。既云終成佛果斯驗
T2102_.52.0054b18: 不斷
明矣
又言。若無明轉則變成明。案此經意理
T2102_.52.0054b19: 如可求。何者夫心爲用本。本一而用殊。殊
T2102_.52.0054b20: 用自有興廢。一本之性不移臣績曰陶汰塵穢本
識則明明闇相易謂
T2102_.52.0054b21: 之變也。若前去後
來非之謂
一本者。即無明神明也臣績
曰。
T2102_.52.0054b22: 神明本闇即。故
以無明爲因
尋無明之稱非太虚之目。土石
T2102_.52.0054b23: 無情豈無明之謂臣績曰。夫別了善惡匪心不知。
明審是非。匪情莫識。太虚無情
T2102_.52.0054b24: 故。不明愚智。土石無心寧辯解惑。故知解惑
存乎有心愚智在乎有識既謂無明則義在矣
T2102_.52.0054b25: 知識慮應明體不免惑。惑慮不知故曰無明
T2102_.52.0054b26: 臣績曰。明爲本性。所以應明識染外塵故内不免
惑惑而不了乃謂無明。因斯致稱。豈旨空也哉
而無
T2102_.52.0054c01: 明體上有生有滅。生滅是其異用。無明心義
T2102_.52.0054c02: 不改臣績曰。既有其體便有其用。語用非
體。論體非用。用有興廢。體無生
將恐見其
T2102_.52.0054c03: 用異。便謂心隨境滅臣績曰惑者迷其體用故不
斷猜。何者夫體之與用不
T2102_.52.0054c04: 離不即離體無用。故云。不離用義非體。故云。不
即見其不離而迷其不即迷其不即。便謂心隨境滅*也
T2102_.52.0054c05: 故繼無明。名下加以住地之目。此顯無明即
T2102_.52.0054c06: 是神明。神明性不遷也臣績曰。無明係以住地。
蓋是斥其迷識。而抱惑
T2102_.52.0054c07: 之徒未
喩也
何以知然。如前心作無間重惡。後識
T2102_.52.0054c08: 起非想妙善。善惡之理大懸。而前後相去甚
T2102_.52.0054c09: 迥。斯用果無一本安得如此相續臣績曰。不有
一本則用無
T2102_.52.0054c10: 所依。而惑者見其類續爲一。
故擧大善斥其相續之迷*也
是知前惡自滅
T2102_.52.0054c11: 惑識不移。後善雖生闇心莫改臣績曰。未嘗以
善惡生滅虧其本
T2102_.52.0054c12: 故經言。若與煩惱諸結倶者。名爲無明。若
T2102_.52.0054c13: 與一切善法倶者。名之爲明。豈非心識性一
T2102_.52.0054c14: 隨縁異乎臣績曰。若善惡互起豈謂倶乎。而恒對
其言而常迷其旨。故擧此要文以曉群惑
T2102_.52.0054c15: *也故知生滅遷變酬於往因。善惡交謝生乎
T2102_.52.0054c16: 現境臣績曰。生滅因於本業非現境使之
然。善惡生於今境非本業令其
而心爲
T2102_.52.0054c17: 其本。未曾異矣臣績曰。雖復用由
不同。其體莫異*也
以其用本不
T2102_.52.0054c18: 斷故。成佛之理皎然。隨境遷謝故。生死可盡
T2102_.52.0054c19: 明矣臣績曰。成佛皎然扶其本也。生死可盡由其用
也。若用而無本則滅而不成。若本而無用則成
T2102_.52.0054c20: 無所
滅矣
T2102_.52.0054c21:   難神滅論       蕭琛
T2102_.52.0054c22: 内兄范子眞著神滅論。以明無佛。自謂辯摧
T2102_.52.0054c23: 衆口日服千人。予意猶有惑焉。聊欲薄其稽
T2102_.52.0054c24: 疑。詢其未悟。論至今所持者形神。所訟者精
T2102_.52.0054c25:
T2102_.52.0054c26:
T2102_.52.0054c27:
T2102_.52.0054c28:
T2102_.52.0054c29:
T2102_.52.0055a01: 理。若乃春秋孝享爲之宗廟。則以爲聖人神
T2102_.52.0055a02: 道設教立禮防愚。杜伯關弓伯有被介。復謂
T2102_.52.0055a03: 天地之間自有怪物。非人死爲鬼。如此便不
T2102_.52.0055a04: 得。詰以詩書校以往事。唯可於形神之中。
T2102_.52.0055a05: *辯其離合。脱形神一體存滅罔異。則范子
T2102_.52.0055a06: 奮揚蹈厲金湯邈然。如靈質分途興毀區別。
T2102_.52.0055a07: 則予剋敵得俊。能事畢矣。又予雖明有佛而
T2102_.52.0055a08: 體佛不與俗同爾。兼陳本意係之論左焉
T2102_.52.0055a09:   神滅論問答者論本客主之
辭也難者今之所
T2102_.52.0055a10: 問曰。子云神滅。何以知其滅
T2102_.52.0055a11: 答曰。神即形也。形即神也。是以形存則神存。
T2102_.52.0055a12: 形謝則神滅也
T2102_.52.0055a13: 問曰。形者。無知之稱。神者。有知之名。知與
T2102_.52.0055a14: 無知即事有異。神之與形理不容。一形神相
T2102_.52.0055a15: 即非所聞也
T2102_.52.0055a16: 答曰。形者。神之質。神者。形之用。是則形稱
T2102_.52.0055a17: 其質。神言其用。形之與神不得相異
T2102_.52.0055a18: 難曰。今論形神合體則應有不離之證。而直
T2102_.52.0055a19: 云神即形形即神。形之與神不得相異。此
T2102_.52.0055a20: 而無徴有乖篤喩矣。子今據夢以驗形神不
T2102_.52.0055a21: 得共體。當人寢時其形是無知之物。而有見
T2102_.52.0055a22: 焉。此神遊之所接也。神不孤立必憑形器。猶
T2102_.52.0055a23: 人不露處須有居室。但形器是穢闇之質。居
T2102_.52.0055a24: 室是蔽塞之地。神反形内則其識微惛惛。故
T2102_.52.0055a25: 以見爲夢。人歸室中則其神暫壅壅。故以明
T2102_.52.0055a26: 爲昧。夫人或夢上騰玄虚遠適萬里。若非神
T2102_.52.0055a27: 行便是形往耶。形既不往神又不離。復焉
T2102_.52.0055a28: 得如此。若謂是想所見者。及其安寐身似僵
T2102_.52.0055a29: 木氣。若寒灰呼之不聞。撫之無覺即云神與
T2102_.52.0055b01: 形均則是表裏倶倦。既不外接聲音。寧能内
T2102_.52.0055b02: 興思想。此即形靜神馳斷可知矣。又疑凡所
T2102_.52.0055b03: 夢者。或反中詭遇趙簡子。夢童子裸歌可呉入鄒。
晋小臣夢負公登天而負公出諸
T2102_.52.0055b04: 厠是
或理所不容呂齮。夢射月中之。呉后。
夢腸出繞閶門之類是
T2102_.52.0055b05: 或先覺未兆呂姜夢天。名其子曰虞。曹人
夢衆君子謀欲士*曹之類
T2102_.52.0055b06: 假借象類茂禾失爲秩。王濬夢
三刀爲州之類是也
或即事所無
T2102_.52.0055b07: 夢舟。越人夢
騎之類是也
或乍驗乍否殷宗夢得傳説。漢文夢獲
鄧通驗也。否事衆多不復
T2102_.52.0055b08: 具載
*也
此皆神化茫眇幽明不。測易以約通難
T2102_.52.0055b09: 用理。檢不許以神遊必宜求諸形。内恐塊爾
T2102_.52.0055b10: 潜靈外絶覲。覿雖復扶以六夢濟以想因。理
T2102_.52.0055b11: 亦不得然也
T2102_.52.0055b12: 問曰。神故非質。形故非用。不得爲異其義安
T2102_.52.0055b13:
T2102_.52.0055b14: 答曰。名殊而體一也
T2102_.52.0055b15: 問曰。名既已殊。體何得一
T2102_.52.0055b16: 答曰。神之於質猶利之於刀。形之於用猶
T2102_.52.0055b17: 刀之於利。利之名非刀也。刀之名非利也。
T2102_.52.0055b18: 然而捨利無刃捨刀無利。未聞刀沒而利存。
T2102_.52.0055b19: 豈容形亡而神在也
T2102_.52.0055b20: 難曰。夫刀之有利砥礪之功。故能水截蛟
T2102_.52.0055b21: 螭。陸斷兕虎。若窮利盡用必摧其鋒鍔。化成
T2102_.52.0055b22: 鈍刃。如此則利滅而刀存。即是神亡而形
T2102_.52.0055b23: 在。何云捨利無刃。名殊而體一耶。刀利既
T2102_.52.0055b24: 不倶滅。形神則不共亡。雖能近取於譬理實
T2102_.52.0055b25: 乖矣
T2102_.52.0055b26: 問曰。刀之與利或如來説形之與神其義不
T2102_.52.0055b27: 然。何以言之。木之質無知也。人之質有知也。
T2102_.52.0055b28: 人既有如木之質。而有異木之知。豈非木有
T2102_.52.0055c01: 其一人有其二耶
T2102_.52.0055c02: 答曰。異哉言乎。人若有如木之質以爲形。又
T2102_.52.0055c03: 有異木之知以爲神。則可如來論也。今人之
T2102_.52.0055c04: 質質有知也。木之質質無知也。人之質非木
T2102_.52.0055c05: 質也。木之質非人質也。安在有如木之質。
T2102_.52.0055c06: 而復有異木之知
T2102_.52.0055c07: 問曰。人之質所以異木質者。以其有知耳。人
T2102_.52.0055c08: 而無知與木何異
T2102_.52.0055c09: 答曰。人無無知之質。猶木無有知之形
T2102_.52.0055c10: 問曰。死者之形骸豈非無知之質耶
T2102_.52.0055c11: 答曰。是無知之質也
T2102_.52.0055c12: 問曰。若然者人果有如木之質。而有異木之
T2102_.52.0055c13: 知矣
T2102_.52.0055c14: 答曰。死者有如木之質。而無異木之知。生者
T2102_.52.0055c15: 有異木之知。而無如木之質
T2102_.52.0055c16: 問曰。死者之骨骸非生者之形骸耶
T2102_.52.0055c17: 答曰。生形之非死形。死形之非生形。區已革
T2102_.52.0055c18: 矣。安有生人之形骸。而有死人之骨骸哉
T2102_.52.0055c19: 問曰。若生者之形骸非死者之骨骸。死者之
T2102_.52.0055c20: 骨骸則應不由生者之形骸。不由生者之形
T2102_.52.0055c21: 骸。則此骨骸從何而至
T2102_.52.0055c22: 答曰。是生者之形骸變爲死者之骨骸也
T2102_.52.0055c23: 問曰。生者之形骸雖變爲死者之骨骸。豈不
T2102_.52.0055c24: 因生而有死。則知死體猶生體也
T2102_.52.0055c25: 答曰。如因榮木變爲枯木。枯木之質寧是榮
T2102_.52.0055c26: 木之體
T2102_.52.0055c27: 問曰。榮體變爲枯體。枯體即是榮體。如絲體
T2102_.52.0055c28: 變爲縷體。縷體即是絲體。有何咎焉
T2102_.52.0055c29: 答曰。若枯即是榮。榮即是枯。則應榮時
T2102_.52.0056a01: 零枯時結實。又榮木不應變爲枯木。以榮即
T2102_.52.0056a02: 是枯故。枯無所復變也。又榮枯是一何不先
T2102_.52.0056a03: 枯後榮。要先榮後枯何耶。絲縷同時不得爲
T2102_.52.0056a04:
T2102_.52.0056a05: 問曰。生形之謝便應豁然都盡。何故方受死
T2102_.52.0056a06: 形綿歴未已
T2102_.52.0056a07: 答曰。生滅之體要有其次故也。欻而生
T2102_.52.0056a08: 者。必*欻而滅。漸而生者。必漸而滅。*欻而生
T2102_.52.0056a09: 者。飄驟是也。漸而生者。動植是也。有欻有漸
T2102_.52.0056a10: 物之理也
T2102_.52.0056a11: 難曰。論云。人之質有知也。木之質無知也。豈
T2102_.52.0056a12: 不以人識涼燠知痛癢。養之則生。傷之則死
T2102_.52.0056a13: 耶。夫木亦然矣。當春則榮。在秋則悴。樹之
T2102_.52.0056a14: 必生拔之必死。何謂無知。今人之質猶如木
T2102_.52.0056a15: 也。神留則形立。神去則形廢。立也即是榮木。
T2102_.52.0056a16: 廢也即是枯木。子何以*辯。此非神知而謂質
T2102_.52.0056a17: 有知乎。凡萬有皆以神知無以質知者也。但
T2102_.52.0056a18: 草木昆蟲之性。裁覺榮悴生死。生民之識則
T2102_.52.0056a19: 通安危利害。何謂非有如木之質以爲形。又
T2102_.52.0056a20: 有異木之知以爲神耶。此則形神有二居可
T2102_.52.0056a21: 別也。但木禀陰陽之偏風。人含一靈之精
T2102_.52.0056a22: 照。其識或同。其神則異矣。骨骸形骸之論
T2102_.52.0056a23: 死生授受之説。義既前定。事又不經。安用曲
T2102_.52.0056a24: *辯哉
T2102_.52.0056a25: 問曰。形即神者手等亦是神耶
T2102_.52.0056a26: 答曰。皆是神分
T2102_.52.0056a27: 問曰。若皆是神分神應能慮。手等亦應能慮
T2102_.52.0056a28:
T2102_.52.0056a29: 答曰。手等有痛癢之知。而無是非之慮
T2102_.52.0056b01: 問曰。知之與慮爲一爲異
T2102_.52.0056b02: 答曰。知即是慮。淺則爲知。深則爲慮
T2102_.52.0056b03: 問曰。若爾應有二慮。慮既有二。神有二乎
T2102_.52.0056b04: 答曰。人體唯一。神何得二
T2102_.52.0056b05: 問曰。若不得二安有痛癢之知而復有是非
T2102_.52.0056b06: 之慮
T2102_.52.0056b07: 答曰。如手足雖異總爲一人。是非痛癢雖復
T2102_.52.0056b08: 有異。亦總爲一神矣
T2102_.52.0056b09: 問曰。是非之慮不關手足。當關何也
T2102_.52.0056b10: 答曰。是非之慮心器所主
T2102_.52.0056b11: 問曰。心器是五藏之心非耶
T2102_.52.0056b12: 答曰。是也
T2102_.52.0056b13: 問曰。五*藏有何殊別。而心獨有是非之慮
T2102_.52.0056b14: 答曰。七竅亦復何殊。而司用不均何也
T2102_.52.0056b15: 問曰。慮思無方。何以知是心器所主
T2102_.52.0056b16: 答曰。心病則思乖。是以知心爲慮本
T2102_.52.0056b17: 問曰。何知不寄在眼等分中耶
T2102_.52.0056b18: 答曰。若慮可寄於眼分。眼何故不寄於耳分
T2102_.52.0056b19: *也
T2102_.52.0056b20: 問曰。慮體無本故可寄之於眼分。眼自有本。
T2102_.52.0056b21: 不假寄於他分
T2102_.52.0056b22: 答曰。眼何故有本而慮無本。苟無本於我形。
T2102_.52.0056b23: 而可遍寄於異地。亦可張甲之情。寄王乙之
T2102_.52.0056b24: 躯。李丙之性。託趙丁之體。然乎哉。不然也」
T2102_.52.0056b25: 難曰。論云。形神不殊手等皆是神分。此則神
T2102_.52.0056b26: 以形爲體。體全即神全。體傷即佛缺矣。神者
T2102_.52.0056b27: 何。識慮也。今人或斷手足殘肌膚。而智思不
T2102_.52.0056b28: 亂。猶孫臏刖趾兵略愈明。盧浮解腕儒道方
T2102_.52.0056b29: 謐。此神與形離。形傷神不害之切證也。但神
T2102_.52.0056c01: 任智以役物。託器以通照。視聽香味各有所
T2102_.52.0056c02: 憑。而思識歸乎心器。譬如人之有宅東閣延
T2102_.52.0056c03: 賢。南軒引景。北牖招風。西櫺映月。主人端
T2102_.52.0056c04: 居中霤以收四事之用焉。若如來論口鼻耳
T2102_.52.0056c05: 目各有神分。一目病即視神毀。二目應倶盲
T2102_.52.0056c06: 矣。一耳疾即聽神傷。兩耳倶應聾矣。今則
T2102_.52.0056c07: 不然。是知神以爲器非以爲體也
T2102_.52.0056c08: 又云。心爲慮本慮不可寄之他分。若在於口
T2102_.52.0056c09: 眼耳鼻。斯論然也。若在於他心則不然矣。耳
T2102_.52.0056c10: 鼻雖共此體。不可以相雜。以其所司不同器。
T2102_.52.0056c11: 器用各異也。他心雖在彼形而可得相渉。以
T2102_.52.0056c12: 其神理均妙識慮齊功也。故書稱。啓爾心沃
T2102_.52.0056c13: 朕心。詩云。他人有心。予忖度之。齊桓師管仲
T2102_.52.0056c14: 之謀。漢祖用張良之策。是皆本之於我形。寄
T2102_.52.0056c15: 之於他分。何云張甲之情不可託王乙之躯。
T2102_.52.0056c16: 李丙之性勿得寄趙丁之體乎
T2102_.52.0056c17: 問曰。聖人之形猶凡人之形。而有凡聖之殊。
T2102_.52.0056c18: 故知形神異矣
T2102_.52.0056c19: 答曰。不然。金之精者能照。穢者不能照。能照
T2102_.52.0056c20: 之精金寧有不照之穢質。又豈有聖人之神。
T2102_.52.0056c21: 而寄凡人之器。亦無凡人之神。而託聖人之
T2102_.52.0056c22: 體。是以八彩重瞳勛華之容。龍顏馬口軒
T2102_.52.0056c23: 之状。此形表之異也。比干之心七竅並列。伯
T2102_.52.0056c24: 約之膽其大如拳。此心器之殊也。是以聖人
T2102_.52.0056c25: 區分毎異常品。非唯道革群生。乃亦形超
T2102_.52.0056c26: 萬有。凡聖均體所未敢安
T2102_.52.0056c27: 問曰。子云。聖人之形必異於凡。敢問。陽貨
T2102_.52.0056c28: 仲尼。項籍似帝舜。舜項孔陽智革形同。
T2102_.52.0056c29: 其故何耶
T2102_.52.0057a01: 答曰。玟似玉而非玉。鶋類鳳而非鳳。物
T2102_.52.0057a02: 有之。人故宜爾。項陽貎似而非實。以心器
T2102_.52.0057a03: 不均雖貎無益也
T2102_.52.0057a04: 問曰。凡聖之殊形器不一可也。聖人員極理
T2102_.52.0057a05: 無有二且殊姿。陽文異状神不係色。於
T2102_.52.0057a06: 此益明
T2102_.52.0057a07: 答曰。聖與聖同。同於聖器而器不必同也。猶
T2102_.52.0057a08: 馬殊毛而齊逸。玉異色而均美。是以晋棘楚
T2102_.52.0057a09: 和等價連城。驎騮盜驪倶致千里
T2102_.52.0057a10: 問曰。形神不二既聞之矣。形謝神滅理固宜
T2102_.52.0057a11: 然。敢問。經云。爲之宗廟以鬼饗之。何謂也
T2102_.52.0057a12: 答曰。聖人之教然也。所以從孝子之心。而厲
T2102_.52.0057a13: 婾薄之意。神而明之。此之謂矣
T2102_.52.0057a14: 問曰。伯有被甲彭生豕見。墳素著其事。寧是
T2102_.52.0057a15: 設教而已耶
T2102_.52.0057a16: 答曰。妖怪茫茫或存或亡理死者衆不皆爲
T2102_.52.0057a17: 鬼。彭生伯有何獨能然。乍人乍豕。未必齊鄭
T2102_.52.0057a18: 之公子也
T2102_.52.0057a19: 問曰。易稱故知鬼神之情状與天地相似而
T2102_.52.0057a20: 不違。又曰。載鬼一車其義云何
T2102_.52.0057a21: 答曰。有禽焉有獸焉。飛走之別也。有人焉有
T2102_.52.0057a22: 鬼焉。幽明之別也。人滅而爲鬼。鬼滅而爲人。
T2102_.52.0057a23: 則吾未知也
T2102_.52.0057a24: 難曰。論云。豈有聖人之神。而寄凡人之器。亦
T2102_.52.0057a25: 無凡人之神。而託聖人之體。今陽貨類仲尼。
T2102_.52.0057a26: 項籍似帝舜。即是凡人之神託聖人之體也。
T2102_.52.0057a27: 玟玉鶋鳳不得爲喩。今玟自名玟玉實名玉。
T2102_.52.0057a28: 鶋號鶢鶋鳳曰神鳳。名既殊稱貎亦爽實。今
T2102_.52.0057a29: 舜重瞳子。項羽亦重瞳子。非有玟玉二名。唯
T2102_.52.0057b01: 覩重瞳相類。又有女媧蛇躯。皐陶馬口。
T2102_.52.0057b02: 直聖神入於凡器。遂乃託乎蟲畜之體。此
T2102_.52.0057b03: 形神殊別明闇不同。茲益昭顯也。若形神爲
T2102_.52.0057b04: 一理絶前因者。則聖應誕聖。賢必産賢。勇
T2102_.52.0057b05: 怯愚智悉類其本。即形神之所陶甄。一氣之
T2102_.52.0057b06: 所孕育。不得有堯睿朱嚚瞍頑舜聖矣。論又
T2102_.52.0057b07: 云。聖同聖氣而器不必同。猶馬殊毛而齊
T2102_.52.0057b08: 逸。今毛復是逸器耶。馬有同毛色而異駑駿
T2102_.52.0057b09: 者如此。則毛非逸相。由體無聖器矣。人形骸
T2102_.52.0057b10: 無凡聖之別。而有貞脆之異。故遐靈栖於遠
T2102_.52.0057b11: 質。促神寓乎近體。則唯斯而已耳。向所云
T2102_.52.0057b12: 聖人之體旨。直語丘舜之形。不言器有聖
T2102_.52.0057b13: 智。非矛盾之説。勿近於此
T2102_.52.0057b14: 問曰。知此神滅有何利用
T2102_.52.0057b15: 答曰。浮屠害政桑門蠹俗風驚霧起馳蕩
T2102_.52.0057b16: 休。吾哀其弊思拯其溺。夫竭財以赴僧。破
T2102_.52.0057b17: 産以趨佛。而不恤親戚不憐窮匱者何耶。良
T2102_.52.0057b18: 由厚我之情深濟物之意淺。是以圭撮渉於
T2102_.52.0057b19: 貧友。吝情動於顏色。千鍾委於富僧歡懷暢
T2102_.52.0057b20: 於容髮。豈不以僧有多稌之期。友無遺秉之
T2102_.52.0057b21: 報。務施不關周急。立徳必於在己。惑以茫
T2102_.52.0057b22: 昧之言。懼以阿鼻之苦。誘以虚誕之詞。欣
T2102_.52.0057b23: 以兜率之樂。故棄縫掖襲横衣。廢俎豆列瓶
T2102_.52.0057b24: 鉢。家家棄其親愛。人人絶其嗣續。至使兵挫
T2102_.52.0057b25: 於行間。吏空於官府。粟罄於惰游。貨殫於土
T2102_.52.0057b26: 木。所以姦宄佛勝頌聲尚權。惟此之故也。其
T2102_.52.0057b27: 流莫已其病無垠。若知陶甄禀於自然。森羅
T2102_.52.0057b28: 均於獨化。忽焉自有恍爾而無。來也不御。
T2102_.52.0057b29: 去也不追。乘夫天理各安其性。小人甘其壟
T2102_.52.0057c01: 畝。君子保其恬素。耕而食。食不可窮也。蠶以
T2102_.52.0057c02: 衣。衣不可盡也。下有餘以奉其上。上無爲以
T2102_.52.0057c03: 待其下。可以全生可以養親。可以爲己可以
T2102_.52.0057c04: 爲人。可以匡國可以覇君用此道也
T2102_.52.0057c05: 難曰。佛之有無寄於神理存滅。既有往論。且
T2102_.52.0057c06: 欲略言。今指*辯其損益語其利害。以弼夫子
T2102_.52.0057c07: 過正之談。子云。釋氏蠹俗傷化費貨損役。
T2102_.52.0057c08: 或者爲之。非佛之尤也。佛之立教本以好生
T2102_.52.0057c09: 惡殺修善務施。好生非正欲繁育鳥獸。以人
T2102_.52.0057c10: 靈爲重。惡殺豈可得緩宥逋逃。以哀矜斷
T2102_.52.0057c11: 察。修善不必瞻丈六之形。以忠信爲上。務
T2102_.52.0057c12: 施不苟使殫財土木。以周*急爲美。若絶嗣
T2102_.52.0057c13: 續則必法種不傳。如並起浮圖。又亦種殖無
T2102_.52.0057c14: 地。凡且猶知之。況我慈氏寧樂爾乎。今守株
T2102_.52.0057c15: 桑門迷瞀俗士。見寒者不施之短褐。遇
T2102_.52.0057c16: 者不錫以糠豆。而競聚無識之僧。爭造衆多
T2102_.52.0057c17: 之佛。親戚棄而不眄。祭祀廢而*不修。良繒
T2102_.52.0057c18: 碎於刹上。丹金縻于塔下。而謂爲福田期以
T2102_.52.0057c19: 報業。此並體佛未深解法不妙。雖呼佛爲佛。
T2102_.52.0057c20: 豈曉歸佛之旨。號僧爲僧寧達依僧之意。此
T2102_.52.0057c21: 亦神不降福。予無取焉。夫六家之術各有流
T2102_.52.0057c22: 弊。儒失於僻。墨失於蔽。法失於峻。名失於
T2102_.52.0057c23: 詐。咸由祖述者。失其傳以致泥溺。今子不
T2102_.52.0057c24: 以僻蔽誅孔墨峻*詐責韓鄧。而獨罪我如
T2102_.52.0057c25: 來貶茲正覺。是忿風濤而毀舟楫也。今逆悖
T2102_.52.0057c26: 之人無頼之子。上罔君親下虚儔類。或不忌
T2102_.52.0057c27: 明憲而乍懼幽司。憚閻羅之猛畏牛頭之酷。
T2102_.52.0057c28: 遂悔其穢惡。化而遷善。此之益也。又罪福
T2102_.52.0057c29: 之理。不應殊於世教背乎人情。若有事君以
T2102_.52.0058a01: 忠。奉親唯孝。與朋友信。如斯人者猶以一眚
T2102_.52.0058a02: 掩徳蔑而棄之。裁犯蟲魚陷于地獄。斯必不
T2102_.52.0058a03: 然矣。夫忠莫踰於伊尹。孝莫尚乎曾參。
T2102_.52.0058a04: 公宰一畜以膳湯。曾子烹隻禽以養點。而皆
T2102_.52.0058a05: 同趨炎&T055114;倶赴鋒樹。是則大功沒於小過。奉
T2102_.52.0058a06: 上反於惠下。昔彌子矯駕猶以義弘免戮。嗚
T2102_.52.0058a07: 呼曾謂靈匠不如衞君乎。故知此爲忍人之
T2102_.52.0058a08: 防。而非仁人之誡也。若能監彼流宕釁不在
T2102_.52.0058a09: 佛。觀此禍福悟教開誘。思息末以尊本。不
T2102_.52.0058a10: 拔本以極末。念忘我以弘法。不後法以利
T2102_.52.0058a11: 我。則雖曰未佛。吾必謂之佛矣
T2102_.52.0058a12:   難范中書神滅論曹思
 難神滅第一并啓
詔答
T2102_.52.0058a13: 范答第一 重難神滅第二重啓
詔答
T2102_.52.0058a14:   難范中書神滅論    曹思文
T2102_.52.0058a15: 論曰。神即形也。形即神也。是以形存則神存。
T2102_.52.0058a16: 形謝則神滅也
T2102_.52.0058a17: 難曰。形非即神也。神非即形也。是合而爲用
T2102_.52.0058a18: 者也。而合非即矣。生則合而爲用。死則形留
T2102_.52.0058a19: 而神逝也。何以言之。昔者趙簡子疾五日不
T2102_.52.0058a20: 知人。秦穆公七日乃寤。並神遊於帝所。帝
T2102_.52.0058a21: 賜之鈞天廣樂。此其形留而神遊者乎。若如
T2102_.52.0058a22: 論言形滅則神滅者。斯形之與神。應如影響
T2102_.52.0058a23: 之必倶也。然形既病焉則神亦病也。何以形
T2102_.52.0058a24: 不知人神獨遊帝。而欣歡於鈞天廣樂乎。斯
T2102_.52.0058a25: 其寐也魂交故。神遊於胡蝶。即形與神分
T2102_.52.0058a26: 也。其覺也形開。遽遽然周也。即形與神合
T2102_.52.0058a27: 也。神之與形有分有合。合則共爲一體。分
T2102_.52.0058a28: 則形亡而神逝也。是以延陵喪子而言曰。
T2102_.52.0058a29: 骨肉歸復于土。而魂氣無不之也。斯即形
T2102_.52.0058b01: 而神不止也。然經史明證灼灼也。如此寧是
T2102_.52.0058b02: 形止而神滅者
T2102_.52.0058b03: 論曰。問者曰。經云。爲之宗廟以鬼饗之。通
T2102_.52.0058b04: 云。非有鬼也。斯是聖人之教然也。所以達孝
T2102_.52.0058b05: 子之心。而厲婾薄之意也
T2102_.52.0058b06: 難曰。今論所云皆情言也。而非聖旨。請擧經
T2102_.52.0058b07: 記以證聖人之教。孝經云。昔者周公郊祀后
T2102_.52.0058b08: 稷以配天。宗祀文王於明堂。以配上帝。若形
T2102_.52.0058b09: 神倶滅。復誰配天乎。復誰配帝乎。且無
T2102_.52.0058b10: 而爲有臣。宣尼云。天可欺乎。今稷無神矣。
T2102_.52.0058b11: 而以稷配斯是周旦其欺天乎。果其無稷也。
T2102_.52.0058b12: 而空以配天者。*即其欺天矣。又其欺人也。
T2102_.52.0058b13: 斯是人之教。教以欺妄也。設欺妄以立教
T2102_.52.0058b14: 者。復何達孝子之心。厲*婾薄之意哉。原尋
T2102_.52.0058b15: 論旨。以無鬼爲義。試重詰之曰。孔子菜羹
T2102_.52.0058b16: 苽祭祀其祖禰也。禮云。樂以迎來哀以送
T2102_.52.0058b17: 往。神既無矣迎何所迎。神既無矣送何所送。
T2102_.52.0058b18: 迎來而樂。斯假欣於孔貎。途往而哀。又虚涙
T2102_.52.0058b19: 於丘體。斯則夫子之祭祀也。欺僞滿於方
T2102_.52.0058b20: 寸虚假盈於廟堂。聖人之教其若是乎。而云
T2102_.52.0058b21: 聖人之教然也何哉
T2102_.52.0058b22: 思文啓。竊見范縝神滅論。自爲賓主。遂有三
T2102_.52.0058b23: 十餘條。思文不惟闇蔽聊難論大旨二條而
T2102_.52.0058b24: 已。庶欲以傾其根本。謹冐上聞。但思文情
T2102_.52.0058b25: 用淺匱。懼不能徴折詭經。仰黷天煦伏追
T2102_.52.0058b26: 震悸。謹啓
T2102_.52.0058b27: 所難二條。當別詳覽也 右詔
T2102_.52.0058b28:   答曹録事難神滅論
T2102_.52.0058b29: 難曰。形非即神也。神非即形也。是合而爲
T2102_.52.0058c01: 用者也。而合非即也
T2102_.52.0058c02: 答曰。若合而爲用者。明不合則無用。如蛩
T2102_.52.0058c03: 巨相資廢一則不可。此乃是滅神之精據。而
T2102_.52.0058c04: 非存神之雅決。子意本欲請戰。而定爲我援
T2102_.52.0058c05: 兵耶
T2102_.52.0058c06: 難曰。昔趙簡子疾五日不知人。秦穆公七日
T2102_.52.0058c07: 乃寤。並神遊於帝所。帝賜之鈞天廣樂。此形
T2102_.52.0058c08: 留而神逝者乎
T2102_.52.0058c09: 答曰。趙簡子之上賓秦穆之上遊帝。既云耳
T2102_.52.0058c10: 聽鈞天。居然口嘗百味。亦可身安廣厦。目悦
T2102_.52.0058c11: 玄黄。或復披文繍之衣。控如龍之轡。故知神
T2102_.52.0058c12: 之須待既不殊人。四肢七竅毎與形等。隻翼
T2102_.52.0058c13: 不可以適遠。故不比不飛。神無所闕。何故
T2102_.52.0058c14: 憑形以自立
T2102_.52.0058c15: 難曰。若如論旨形滅。即神滅者。斯形之與
T2102_.52.0058c16: 神應。如影之必倶也。然形既病焉。則神亦
T2102_.52.0058c17: 病也。何以形不知人。神獨遊帝。答曰。若如
T2102_.52.0058c18: 來意便是形病而神不病也。今傷之則病是
T2102_.52.0058c19: 形痛而神不痛也。惱之則憂是形憂而神不
T2102_.52.0058c20: 憂也。憂慮痛形已得之如此。何用勞神於無
T2102_.52.0058c21: 事耶曹以爲生則合而爲用則*病廢同也。死
則形留而神遊。則故遊帝與形不
T2102_.52.0058c22: 難曰。其寐也魂交故。神遊於胡蝶。即形與神
T2102_.52.0058c23: 分也。其覺也形開*遽遽然周也。即形與神合
T2102_.52.0058c24:
T2102_.52.0058c25: 答曰。此難可謂窮辯。未可謂窮理也。子謂神
T2102_.52.0058c26:
T2102_.52.0058c27:
T2102_.52.0058c28:
T2102_.52.0058c29:
T2102_.52.0059a01: 遊胡蝶是眞作飛蟲耶。若然者或夢爲牛則
T2102_.52.0059a02: 負人轅輈。或夢爲馬則入人跨下。明旦應有
T2102_.52.0059a03: 死牛死馬。而無其物何*耶。又腸繞*昌門此
T2102_.52.0059a04: 人即死。豈有遺其肝肺而可以生哉。又日月
T2102_.52.0059a05: 麗天廣輪千里。無容下從返婦近入懷袖。夢
T2102_.52.0059a06: 幻虚假無有自來矣。一旦實之良足偉也。明
T2102_.52.0059a07: 結想霄坐周天海。神昏於内妄見異物。豈莊
T2102_.52.0059a08: 生實亂南園。趙簡眞登閶闔。郢外弟蕭琛亦
T2102_.52.0059a09: 以夢爲文句甚悉。想孰取視也
T2102_.52.0059a10: 難曰。延陵*喪子而言曰。骨肉歸于上。而
T2102_.52.0059a11: 魂氣無不之也。斯即形止而神不止也
T2102_.52.0059a12: 答曰。人之生也。資氣於天禀形於地。是以形
T2102_.52.0059a13: 銷於下。氣滅於上。氣滅於上。故言無不之。無
T2102_.52.0059a14: 不之者。不測之辭耳。豈必其神興知耶
T2102_.52.0059a15: 難曰。今論所云皆情言也。而非聖旨。請擧經
T2102_.52.0059a16: 記以證聖人之教。孝經云。昔者周公郊祀后
T2102_.52.0059a17: 稷。以配天。宗祀文王於明堂以配上帝。若形
T2102_.52.0059a18: 神倶滅誰配天乎。復誰配帝乎
T2102_.52.0059a19: 答曰。若均是聖達本自無教。教之所設實在
T2102_.52.0059a20: 黔首。黔首之情常貴生而賤死。死而有靈則
T2102_.52.0059a21: 長畏敬之心。死而無知則生慢易之意。聖人
T2102_.52.0059a22: 知其若此。故廟祧壇墠以篤其誠心。肆筵授
T2102_.52.0059a23: 几以全其罔己。尊祖以窮郊天之敬。嚴父以
T2102_.52.0059a24: 天明堂之享。且忠信之寄心有地強梁
T2102_.52.0059a25: 之子茲焉是懼。所以聲教*煦於上風俗淳于
T2102_.52.0059a26: 下。周此道也。故經云。爲之宗廟以鬼享之。
T2102_.52.0059a27: 言用鬼神之道。致茲孝享也。春秋祭祀以時
T2102_.52.0059a28: 思之。明厲其追遠。不可朝死夕亡也。子貢問
T2102_.52.0059a29: 死而有知。仲尼云。吾欲言死而有知。則孝子
T2102_.52.0059b01: 輕生以殉死。吾欲言死而無知。則不孝之子
T2102_.52.0059b02: 棄而不葬。子路問事鬼神。夫子云。未能事人。
T2102_.52.0059b03: 焉能事鬼。適言以鬼享之。何故不許其事耶。
T2102_.52.0059b04: 死而有知輕生以殉是也。何故不明言其有。
T2102_.52.0059b05: 而作此悠漫以答耶。研求其義死而無知。亦
T2102_.52.0059b06: 已審矣。宗廟郊社皆聖人之教迹。彝倫之道。
T2102_.52.0059b07: 不可得而廢耳
T2102_.52.0059b08: 難曰。且無臣而爲有臣。宣尼云。天可欺乎。今
T2102_.52.0059b09: 稷無神矣。而以稷配斯。是周旦其欺天乎。既
T2102_.52.0059b10: 其欺天。又其欺人。斯是聖人之教以欺妄。
T2102_.52.0059b11: 欺妄以教。何達孝子之心。厲*婾薄之意哉」
T2102_.52.0059b12: 答曰。夫聖人者顯仁藏用窮神盡變。故曰聖
T2102_.52.0059b13: 達節而賢守節也。寧可求之蹄筌局以言教。
T2102_.52.0059b14: 夫欺者。謂傷化敗俗導人非道耳。苟可以安
T2102_.52.0059b15: 上治民移風易俗。三光明於上。黔黎悦於下。
T2102_.52.0059b16: 何欺妄之有乎。請問。湯放桀武伐紂。是
T2102_.52.0059b17: 君非耶。而孟子云。聞誅獨夫紂。未聞殺君也。
T2102_.52.0059b18: 子不責聖人放殺之迹。而勤勤於郊稷之妄
T2102_.52.0059b19: 乎。郊丘明堂乃是儒家之淵府也。而非形神
T2102_.52.0059b20: 之滯義。當如此何耶
T2102_.52.0059b21: 難曰。樂以迎來哀以送往。云云
T2102_.52.0059b22: 答曰。此義未通而自釋。不復費辭於無用。禮
T2102_.52.0059b23: 記有斯言多矣。近寫此條小恨未周
T2102_.52.0059b24: 思文啓。始得答神滅論。猶執先迷。思
T2102_.52.0059b25: 文試料其理致。衝其四證。謹冐奏聞。但思文
T2102_.52.0059b26: 情識愚淺。無以折其鋒鋭。仰塵
T2102_.52.0059b27: 聖鑒伏追震悚。謹啓
T2102_.52.0059b28: 具一二縝既背經以起義。乖理以致談。滅聖
T2102_.52.0059b29: 難以聖責。乖理難以理詰。如此則言語之論
T2102_.52.0059c01: 略成可息  *右詔*答
T2102_.52.0059c02:   重難范中書神滅
T2102_.52.0059c03: 論曰。若合而爲用者明。不合則無用。如蛩巨
T2102_.52.0059c04: 之相資廢一則不可。此乃是滅神之精據。而
T2102_.52.0059c05: 非存神之雅決。子意本欲請戰。而定爲我援
T2102_.52.0059c06: 兵也。論又云。形之於神猶*刀之於利。未聞
T2102_.52.0059c07: *刀沒而利存。豈形止而神在。又申延陵之
T2102_.52.0059c08: 言。即形消於下神滅於上。故云無之也。又
T2102_.52.0059c09: 云。以稷配天非欺天也。猶湯放武伐非殺君
T2102_.52.0059c10: 也。子不責聖人放殺之迹。而勤勤於郊稷之
T2102_.52.0059c11: 妄耶。難曰。蛩蛩巨虚是合用之證耳。而非
T2102_.52.0059c12: 形滅即神滅之據也。何以言之。蛩非*虚也
T2102_.52.0059c13: *虚非蛩也。今滅蛩蛩而駏驉不死。斬駏驉而
T2102_.52.0059c14: 蛩蛩不亡。非相即也。今引此以爲形神倶滅
T2102_.52.0059c15: 之精據。又爲救兵之良援。斯倒戈授人而欲
T2102_.52.0059c16: 求長存也。悲夫。斯*即形滅而神不滅之證一
T2102_.52.0059c17: 也。論云。形之與神猶*刀之於利。未聞*刀沒
T2102_.52.0059c18: 而利存。豈容形亡而神在。雅論據形神之倶
T2102_.52.0059c19: 滅。唯此一證而已。愚有惑焉。何者。神之與形
T2102_.52.0059c20: 是二物之合用。即論所引蛩巨相資也。是
T2102_.52.0059c21: 今*刀之於利是一物之兩名耳。然一物兩名
T2102_.52.0059c22: 者。故捨*刀則無利也。二物之合用者。故形
T2102_.52.0059c23: 亡則神逝也。今引一物之二名。徴二物之合
T2102_.52.0059c24: 用。斯差若毫釐者何千里之遠也。斯又是形
T2102_.52.0059c25: 滅而神不滅之證二也。又申延陵之言曰。即
T2102_.52.0059c26: 是形消於下神滅於上。論云。形神是一體之
T2102_.52.0059c27: 相即。即今形滅於此。即應神滅於形中。何
T2102_.52.0059c28: 得云形消於下。神滅於上。而云無不之乎。斯
T2102_.52.0059c29: 又是形滅而神不滅之證三也。又云。以稷配
T2102_.52.0060a01: 天非欺天也。猶湯放桀武伐紂非殺君也。即
T2102_.52.0060a02: 是權假以除惡乎。然唐虞之君無放伐之患
T2102_.52.0060a03: 矣。若乃運非太平世値三季權假立教以救
T2102_.52.0060a04: 一時。故權稷以配天假父以配帝。則可也。
T2102_.52.0060a05: 然有虞氏之王天下也。禘黄而郊嚳。祖顓而
T2102_.52.0060a06: 宗堯。既淳風未殄。時非權假而今欺天罔帝
T2102_.52.0060a07: 也何乎。引證若斯。斯又是形滅而神不滅之
T2102_.52.0060a08: 證四也。斯四證既立而根本自傾。餘枝葉庶
T2102_.52.0060a09: 不待風而靡也
T2102_.52.0060a10: 論曰。樂以迎來哀以送往。此義不假通而自
T2102_.52.0060a11: 釋。不復費於無用。禮記有言多矣。又云。
T2102_.52.0060a12: 言欺者。謂傷化敗俗耳。苟可以安上治民。復
T2102_.52.0060a13: 何欺妄之有乎
T2102_.52.0060a14: 難曰。前難云。迎來而樂。是假欣於孔貎。送往
T2102_.52.0060a15: 而哀。又虚涙於丘體。斯實鄙難之雲梯。弱義
T2102_.52.0060a16: 之鋒的。在此言也。而答者曾不惠解。唯云
T2102_.52.0060a17: 不假通而自釋。請重之曰。依如論旨既已許
T2102_.52.0060a18: 孔是假欣而虚涙也。又許稷之配天。是指無
T2102_.52.0060a19: 以爲有也。宣尼云。亡而爲有虚而爲盈。
T2102_.52.0060a20: 象之所不占。而格言之所攸棄。用此風以扇
T2102_.52.0060a21: 也。何得不傷。茲俗於何不敗。而云可以安
T2102_.52.0060a22: 上治民也。慈化何哉。論云。已通而昧者未
T2102_.52.0060a23: 悟。聊重往諮側聞提耳
T2102_.52.0060a24: 弘明集卷第九
T2102_.52.0060a25:
T2102_.52.0060a26:
T2102_.52.0060a27:
T2102_.52.0060a28:
T2102_.52.0060a29:
T2102_.52.0060b01:
T2102_.52.0060b02:
T2102_.52.0060b03: 弘明集卷第十
T2102_.52.0060b04:   梁*楊都建初寺釋僧祐*律師撰
T2102_.52.0060b05:   大梁皇帝勅答臣下神滅論
T2102_.52.0060b06: 莊嚴寺法雲法師與公王朝貴書并公王
朝貴答
T2102_.52.0060b07:   大梁皇帝勅答臣下神滅
T2102_.52.0060b08: 位現致論要當有體。欲談無佛應設賓主。標
T2102_.52.0060b09: 其宗旨辯其短長。來就佛理以屈佛理。則有
T2102_.52.0060b10: 佛之義既躓。神滅之論自行。豈有不求他意。
T2102_.52.0060b11: 妄作異端。運其隔心鼓其騰口。虚畫瘡疣空
T2102_.52.0060b12: 致詆呵。篤時之蟲驚疑於往來。滯甃之蛙河
T2102_.52.0060b13: 漢於遠大。其故何也。淪蒙怠而爭一息。抱
T2102_.52.0060b14: 孤陋而守井幹。豈知天地之長久溟海之壯
T2102_.52.0060b15: 闊。孟軻有云。人之所知不如人之所不知。信
T2102_.52.0060b16: 哉。觀三聖設教。皆云不滅。其文浩博難可具
T2102_.52.0060b17: 載。止擧二事試以爲言。祭義云。惟孝子爲
T2102_.52.0060b18: 能饗親。禮運云。三日齋必見所祭。若謂饗
T2102_.52.0060b19: 非所饗。見非所見。違經背親言誠可息。神
T2102_.52.0060b20: 滅之論朕所未詳
T2102_.52.0060b21:   莊嚴寺法雲法師與公王朝貴
T2102_.52.0060b22: 上答臣下審神滅論。今遣相呈。夫神妙寂
T2102_.52.0060b23: 寥可知而不可説。義經丘而未曉。理渉旦而
T2102_.52.0060b24: 猶昏
T2102_.52.0060b25: 主上凝天照本襲道赴機。垂答臣下。旨訓周
T2102_.52.0060b26: 審。孝享之禮既彰。桀懷曾史之慕。三世之
T2102_.52.0060b27: 言復闡。紂協波崙之情。預非草木。誰不歌歎。
T2102_.52.0060b28: 希同挹風猷共加讃也。釋法雲呈
T2102_.52.0060b29:   臨川王答
T2102_.52.0060c01: 得所送勅答神滅論。伏覽淵旨理精辭詣。二
T2102_.52.0060c02: 教道協於當年。三世棟梁於今日。足使迷途
T2102_.52.0060c03: 自反。妙趣愈光。遲近寫對更具披析。蕭宏和
T2102_.52.0060c04:
T2102_.52.0060c05:   建安王答
T2102_.52.0060c06: 辱告惠示。勅答臣下審神滅論。天識昭遠聖
T2102_.52.0060c07: 情淵發。伏覽玄微實曉庸昧。猥能存示深
T2102_.52.0060c08: 承篤顧。偉和南
T2102_.52.0060c09:   長沙王答
T2102_.52.0060c10: 惠示勅答臣下審神滅論。睿旨淵凝機照深
T2102_.52.0060c11: 邈。可以筌蹄惑見訓誘蒙心。鑚仰周環洗滌
T2102_.52.0060c12: 塵慮。遂能存示戢眷良深。蕭淵業和南
T2102_.52.0060c13:   尚書令沈約答
T2102_.52.0060c14: 神本不滅久所伏膺。神滅之談良用駭惕。近
T2102_.52.0060c15: 約法師殿内出。亦蒙勅答臣下一本歡受頂
T2102_.52.0060c16: 戴尋覽忘疲。豈徒伏斯外道。可以永摧魔衆。
T2102_.52.0060c17: 孔釋兼弘。於是乎在。實不刊之妙旨。萬代之
T2102_.52.0060c18: 舟航。弟子亦即彼論。微歴疑覈比展具以呈
T2102_.52.0060c19: 也。沈約和南
T2102_.52.0060c20:   光祿領太子右率范岫答
T2102_.52.0060c21: 岫和南。伏見詔旨答臣下審神滅論。叡照
T2102_.52.0060c22: 淵深動鑒機切。敷引外典弘茲内教。發蒙啓
T2102_.52.0060c23: 滯訓誘未悟。方使四海禀仰十方讃抃。異見
T2102_.52.0060c24: 杜口道俗同欣。謹加習誦寤寐書紳。惠以逮
T2102_.52.0060c25: 示深承眷憶。范岫和南
T2102_.52.0060c26:
T2102_.52.0060c27:
T2102_.52.0060c28:
T2102_.52.0060c29:
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 

[First] [Prev] 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 [Next] [Last] [行番号:/]   [返り点:/] [CITE]