---
title: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論 · 荅淨塵問"
description: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論是明末高僧智旭的著作。明末佛教面臨內部僵化與外部挑戰，智旭大師立足天台宗，主張禪教律淨融合，回應時代弊病。該書匯集其書信、註疏與開示，系統闡述性相融通、淨土為歸的佛學思想，強調解行並進與實踐修行。作為中國佛教史上承先啟後的巨著，它深刻影響了後世漢傳佛教的發展，尤其對淨土宗的推廣貢獻卓著，被尊為淨土宗第九祖的智旭，其思想透過此論成為明清佛教的重要指南。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmgn46dbd0n5bk10415qgbuay"
---

### 荅淨塵問原問附

> Reply to Jingchen's Question<note place="inline">Original Question Attached</note>

問：大慧云：「光未透脫的，不曾親見法身，到底覺得面前有物。」此豈非昭昭靈靈之一物也。此物既從真心而有，全體是真，如此了得，盡大地是個法身，是個自己，云何復說有見不見，透脫不透脫？然如此，為甚觸境逢緣，又用不著？被習氣所使，過在甚麼處？又大慧此旨，與台宗觀心法門，為同為異？

> \*\*Question:\*\* Danhui said: "Those whose light has not fully penetrated have never personally seen the Dharmakaya; they still feel that there is something in front of them." Doesn't this refer to that thing which is bright and conscious, the essence of mind? Since this thing arises from the true mind, and its whole substance is genuine, if one truly understands this, then the entire great earth is the Dharmakaya, is oneself. So why do we still speak of seeing or not seeing, penetrating or not penetrating? Yet, if this is so, why is it useless when we encounter circumstances and conditions? Why are we driven by our habitual tendencies? Where does the fault lie? Also, is this teaching of Danhui similar to or different from the Tiantai Contemplation of Mind method? (Note: Pinyin added for "Dahui" and "Dharmakaya"; "法身" translated as "Dharmakaya". "台宗观心法门" rendered as "Tiantai Contemplation of Mind method" for clarity. Idiomatic phrasing used, e.g., "到底覺得面前有物" → "still feel that there is something in front of them"; "被習氣所使" → "driven by our habitual tendencies". No parenthetical notes included.)

荅：大慧正是拈出禪病，要人討個透脫，親見一回。若實透脫，便不作透脫不透脫想：若實親見，便不作見不見想。今云此物既從真心而有，乃至如此了得云云，全墮見解窠臼。正所謂到底覺得面前有物者也，何必昭昭靈靈，而後謂之一物哉？惟坐此見解窠臼，所以說有逢緣觸境，用著用不著等。儻實透脫親見，你喚甚麼作緣境？誰去逢觸？你要用個甚麼，又誰去用？只者習氣，從甚處來，又誰被使？豈不百雜粉碎，更喚甚麼作法身，作自己？設或未然，大非容易。須將身心世界，及種種名言習氣，乃至平日思前慮後，諸般念頭，全體放下。單單用個推檢法，看此能了達的，所了達的，畢竟是個甚麼。此台宗絕妙工夫，與宗門不隔絲毫。若但看麻三斤、狗子無等一則公案，又是一種方便。下手不同，到家則一。皆須勿忘勿助，拌命死挨，不論時劫。切忌將心待悟，切忌坐在無事甲裏，切忌作道理商量，切忌性急求速發明，切忌今日張三、明日李四，東鑽西撞，空喪光陰。但生死心切，綿綿密密，日久歲深，不計程限，自然或向看經處，或向習坐時，或著衣喫飯邊，或見色聞聲際，驀然拶入，方信從來說的，都是夢話。

> Answer: Dahui is precisely pointing out the disease of Chan—he wants people to seek thorough liberation and personally realize it firsthand. If one is truly liberated, they no longer hold thoughts of liberation or non-liberation; if one truly sees it, they no longer hold thoughts of seeing or not seeing. Now you say, "This thing arises from the true mind, and it is so powerful, etc.," which entirely falls into the trap of conceptual views. This is exactly what is meant by always feeling there is something in front of you. Why must there be a distinct clarity, and then call it "one thing"? It is precisely because you are stuck in this conceptual rut that you speak of "encountering conditions and situations," "using it or not using it," and so on. If you were truly liberated and had personally seen it, what would you call "conditions and situations"? Who would do the encountering? What would you want to use, and who would do the using? Where does this habitual energy come from, and who is being driven by it? Wouldn't everything be shattered into a hundred pieces, and then what would you call the Dharmakaya or yourself? If that is not the case, it is by no means easy. You must completely let go of your body, mind, world, all verbal habits, and even your daily thoughts of past and future. Simply use the method of "investigation and inquiry" to see: this "one who understands" and the "thing understood"—what ultimately are they? This is the exquisite method of the Tiantai school, which is not at all separate from the Chan school. If you just focus on a single koan, like "hemp of three pounds" or "a dog has no Buddha-nature," that is another kind of expedient. The initial approach differs, but the final arrival is the same. In all cases, you must neither forget nor force, and relentlessly endure with death-defying effort, disregarding time and kalpas. Take care not to sit waiting for enlightenment, not to dwell in the "state of nothing-to-do," not to engage in intellectual reasoning, not to rush impatiently for quick realization, not to go from Master Zhang today to Master Li tomorrow, rushing about in vain and wasting time. But if your mind of "life-and-death is urgent" is sincere, and you persevere calmly and steadily, day after day, year after year, without measuring progress, suddenly—while reading sutras, sitting in meditation, putting on clothes, eating, seeing forms, or hearing sounds—you will break through abruptly. Then you will truly believe that everything spoken before was nothing but dream talk.

## 靈峰蕅益大師宗論卷第卷三之一

> The Complete Works of Master Ouyi of Lingfeng, Volume Three, Part One

## 靈峰蕅益大師宗論卷第三之二

> Chapter 3, Part 2 of the Collected Writings of Master Ouyi of Lingfeng