辯偽錄卷第二
Volume 2 of the Treatise on Refuting Falsehoods
元道者山雲峯禪寺沙門祥邁奉 勅實錄撰
偷佛經教偽第七
第三十化云。胡王見太上徒眾甚多。疑見鬼魅。遂積薪焚之。火起衝天。老君放身光明。火中為王說金光明經。胡王益怒。納之大鑊煮之三日。老君鑊湯之中蓮華涌出。坐蓮華上說涅槃經。又云。老君使尹喜為佛。與胡王為師懺悔三業六根五逆十惡。乃說五戒十善并四十二章經。
The thirtieth manifestation states: The barbarian king saw that Taishang had many followers and suspected they were demons and spirits. He therefore piled up firewood to burn them. The fire rose and reached the sky. Laozi released a radiant light from his body and, within the flames, spoke the Golden Light Sutra to the king. The king grew even angrier and cast him into a great cauldron to boil for three days. Within the boiling water, a lotus flower emerged, and Laozi sat upon it, teaching the Nirvana Sutra. It is also said that Laozi made Yin Xi become the Buddha, guiding the barbarian king to repent of the three deeds, six senses, five grave offenses, and ten evil actions. He then expounded the five precepts, the ten wholesome deeds, and the Sutra of Forty-Two Chapters.
辯曰。夫麒麟鬪而日月虧。鯨鯢死而彗星現。銅山崩而洛鐘應。葭灰缺而月暈殘。蓋感應之道交。故機教之相扣。人心渴仰法雨芳菲。沃彼情塵開他蒙昧。故孔子曰。不憤不啟。不悱不發。此明待問而說也。況乎聖人設教權變多方。豈使他人起怒自受焚溺。全無㥏𭟓強與他言。豈知虛往實歸之道哉。剜刻字樣巧合經名。既坐火焰上說金光明經。坐蓮華上說蓮華經。則道德二篇坐於道路而說。洞玄三部元在水洞而談。此既不然。彼云何爾。且金光明性相通顯。法華經破權歸實。涅槃經明佛性真常。四十二章群經集出。不窮根蔕。盜聽妄談。唯口起羞。出何容易。難惑上智。只誑下愚。又上經既是老子所陳。道士應宜依而學佛。何乃合氣為道專。諷靈寶。試問三經文明何義。道藏既不收攝道士又不通明。偷大聖之至詮。為老君之極唱。正符涅槃盜牛之喻。又同瞽者誤入金穴。雖得其寶未知何用。又曰。懺悔三業至年月齋法。若如是者道士應通。且問懺悔是何語言。今此懺悔為事懺耶為理懺耶。約功德門而滅罪耶。約逆生死心而滅罪耶。能懺之心宜有幾種。所懺之罪何處安排。懺悔二字由尚罕知。則三業六根五逆十惡戒善之軌年月齋名決不曉達。若是老子所說。道士應合備知。既然一字不通。顯知偷佛妄談。此同竊賊人物被主認著猶不招承更生拒辯。焚經火板方乃慚惶。君子悔前不至如此。
The reply says: When qilins fight, the sun and moon dim; when whales die, comets appear; when a copper mountain collapses, a bronze bell in Luo responds; when the reeds' ashes are depleted, the moon's halo fades. Such is the way of sympathetic resonance—it is because the principles of stimulus and response interlock that the opportunity for teaching and learning aligns. When people's hearts thirst for the Dharma, the rain of truth blossoms forth, quenching the dust of worldly emotions and clearing away their ignorance. Thus Confucius said, "I do not open the door until the student has struggled with the question; I do not reveal the answer until the student has tried and failed to articulate it." This illustrates that teaching awaits the proper question.
How much more so for the sages, who established their teachings through countless skillful means! Would they ever provoke anger in others and then suffer the consequences themselves—burning and drowning—all while feeling no shame, forcing words upon those unwilling to listen? Such an approach would hardly understand the principle that one who goes empty-handed returns with substance.
Now, you claim that texts were engraved with characters cleverly matching their titles—such as speaking the Golden Light Sutra while sitting in flames, or speaking the Lotus Sutra while sitting on a lotus. If that were the standard, then the two chapters of the Dao De Jing should have been spoken while sitting on a road, and the three parts of the Dongxuan classics while talking in a water cave. Since this is not the case, why should your claim hold?
Moreover, the Golden Light Sutra clearly reveals both the nature and characteristics of reality; the Lotus Sutra breaks down expedient means to reveal the ultimate truth; the Nirvana Sutra illuminates the eternal true nature of Buddha-nature; and the Forty-Two Sections Sutra is a collection drawn from various teachings. You have not traced these to their roots; you merely eavesdrop and speak recklessly. Such words bring shame upon the speaker—how easily they are uttered! They cannot deceive the wise, only fool the ignorant.
Furthermore, since you claim these sutras were composed by Laozi, the Daoist priests should follow them accordingly and study Buddhism. But why do they instead focus on harmonizing vital energy as the core practice and chant the Lingbao scriptures? Let me ask: what meaning do these three sutras actually convey? The Daoist canon does not include them, nor do the priests understand them. They have stolen the supreme teachings of the Great Sage and presented them as the ultimate pronouncements of Lord Lao—this perfectly matches the Nirvana Sutra's parable of the thief who steals a cow, and mirrors the blind man who stumbles into a treasure cave: though he finds the jewels, he knows not their use.
You also mention the practice of repentance of the three deeds and the monthly and yearly fasting rituals. If these were truly Daoist, the priests should understand them. But let me ask: what language is the word "repentance" in? Is this repentance a matter of external deeds or internal principle? Does it erase offenses through the gate of meritorious virtue, or through reversing the mind that clings to birth and death? How many kinds of repenting minds are there? Where do the offenses being repented actually reside? If you can barely grasp the two characters for "repentance," then concepts like the three deeds, the six senses, the five grave offenses, the ten evil acts, the precepts and wholesome practices, and the monthly and yearly fasts are surely beyond your comprehension.
If these were truly teachings of Laozi, the Daoist priests should know them thoroughly. Since you do not understand a single word, it is evident you have stolen Buddhist ideas and speak of them falsely. This is like a thief caught red-handed with stolen goods—even when identified by their owner, he refuses to confess and instead argues in denial. Only when the scripture is burned and the printing blocks broken does he finally feel shame. A gentleman regrets his past mistakes and would never resort to such behavior.