---
title: "雲棲淨土彙語 · 答餘姚韓清泰居士廣梵"
description: "雲棲淨土彙語由清代虞執西和嚴培西共同錄編，成書於淨土宗興盛的清初時期。該書輯錄了蓮池大師（雲棲祩宏）的淨土法門開示、語錄及修行要義，集中闡述念佛往生、淨業三福等核心思想。作為淨土宗重要典籍，它系統傳承了雲棲大師的淨土教法，對清代淨土信仰的普及與實踐產生了深遠影響，是研究中國佛教淨土宗思想和修行的重要文獻。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcywaqn506bwlb049slivsno"
---

### 答餘姚韓清泰居士廣梵

> Reply to Layman Han Qingtai of Yuyao: On Vastness and Purity

來問一門深入之旨。彼葢為門庭各別者言。今念佛者。即在念佛上參。依舊是一門。非二事也。若參究不便。則驀直念去。亦得復說一喻。如習舉業者。易與詩等二門也。則誠不可兼。以無雙經入試故。只易一經。或讀文或解理。可云二門否。未聞解理之悖於讀文。而不可兼也。

> You ask about the principle of "focused practice in a single method." This teaching is meant for those whose approaches differ as widely as separate traditions. For those who practice mindfulness of the Buddha, the practice remains within the recitation itself; it is still a single path, not two separate endeavors. If deeper investigation through recitation feels unsuitable, then simply reciting directly with faith is also acceptable. Let me offer another analogy: Consider someone studying for the civil examinations. The Book of Changes and the Book of Poetry are two distinct subjects, clearly unsuited for simultaneous study, since no one takes both for the exam. Yet, if you choose only the \*Book of Changes\*, you might both read its text and contemplate its principles—can these truly be called two separate subjects? No one claims that studying principles contradicts reading the text, or that they are incompatible.