大正蔵検索 INBUDS
|
弘明集 (No. 2102_ 僧祐撰 ) in Vol. 52 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE]
T2102_.52.0054a01: T2102_.52.0054a02: T2102_.52.0054a03: T2102_.52.0054a04: 梁*楊都建初寺釋僧祐*律師撰
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: 惑其用斷惑。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: 聖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_.52.0054c23: 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_.52.0055a11: 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。此辯 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_.52.0055b10: 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: 在 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。則應榮時凋 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: 喩 T2102_.52.0056a05: 問曰。生形之謝便應豁然都盡。何故方受死 T2102_.52.0056a06: 形綿歴未已耶 T2102_.52.0056a07: 答曰。生滅之體要有其次故也。夫欻而生 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: 也 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。龍顏馬口軒皐 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: 類仲尼。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。物誠 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: 無有二而且殊姿。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。非 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。勿近於此惑 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不 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。遇飢 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。伊 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_.52.0058a15: 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。斯即形止 T2102_.52.0058b01: 而神不止也。然經史明證灼灼也。如此寧是 T2102_.52.0058b02: 形止而神滅者乎 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。且無臣 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 右詔答 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_.52.0058c23: 分也。其覺也形開*遽遽然周也。即形與神合 T2102_.52.0058c24: 也 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: 配天明堂之享。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。是殺 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。近寫此條小恨未周也 T2102_.52.0059b24: 思文啓。始得范縝答神滅論。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: 重難范中書神滅論 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。夫 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。爻 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: 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_.52.0060b08: 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書 T2102_.52.0060b22: 主上答臣下審神滅論。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: 南 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: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE] |