---
title: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論 · 周易禪解自序"
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/cmgn46k3s0oo8k104um84a8vb"
---

### 周易禪解自序

> Preface to the Zen Interpretation of the Book of Changes

蕅益子結冬月臺，禪誦之餘，持韋編而箋之。或問曰：「子所解是易邪？」余曰：「然。」復有視而問曰：「子解非易邪？」余曰：「然。」又有視而問曰：「子解亦易亦非易邪？」余曰：「然。」更有視而問曰：「子解非易非非易邪？」余曰：「然。」侍者笑曰：「若是乎，墮在四句中也。」余曰：「汝不聞四句皆不可說，有因緣故，皆可說乎。因緣者，四悉檀也。人謂我釋子也，通儒能解易，則歡喜焉，故謂易者，吾然之，世界悉檀也。或謂釋子何解易以同俗儒，知所解之非易，則善心生焉，故謂非易者，吾然之，為人悉檀也。或謂儒釋殆無分也，若知易與非易必有差別，雖異而同、雖同而異，則儱侗之病不得作焉，故謂亦易亦非易者，吾然之，對治悉檀也。或謂儒釋必有實法也，若知非易則儒非定儒，知非非易則釋非定釋，但有名字而無實性，頓見不思議理焉，故謂非易非非易者，吾然之，第一義悉檀也。」侍者曰：「不然。若所解是易，人謂易可助出世法，成增益謗；若非易，人謂師自說禪，何嘗知易，成減損謗；若亦易亦非易，人謂儒原非禪，禪亦非儒，成相違謗；若非易非非易，人謂儒不成儒，禪不成禪，成戲論謗，烏見其為四悉檀也？」余曰：「是固然。汝不聞人參善補，而氣補者服之立斃乎？大黃最損，而中滿者服之立瘥乎？天之育萬物也，物固有遇春而爛者，夏之長養庶品也，草亦有夏枯者，秋之肅殺也，而菊有花，冬之閉藏也，而松柏青、梅英馥。如必擇有利無害者而後為之，天地不能無憾矣。且佛以慈眼視大千，群機已熟，然後示生，猶有魔波旬亂之，九十五種妒之，提婆達多思中害之，豈惟堯舜稱猶病哉？吾所由解易者無他，以禪入儒，誘儒知禪耳。縱不得四益，起四謗，如從地倒，還從地起，置毒乳中，轉至醍醐，厥毒仍在，遍行為外道師，薩遮為尼犍主，意在斯也。」侍者再拜謝曰：「此非弟子所及也，請筆而存之。」

> In the winter month of retreat, Master Ouyi, amidst meditation and recitation, took up the bamboo slips and annotated them. Someone asked, "What you are explaining—is it the Yi?" I replied, "Yes." Another looked and asked, "What you explain—is it not the Yi?" I replied, "Yes." Yet another looked and asked, "What you explain—is it both the Yi and not the Yi?" I replied, "Yes." Still another looked and asked, "What you explain—is it neither the Yi nor not the Yi?" I replied, "Yes." My attendant laughed and said, "If so, you have fallen into the four propositions." I said, "Have you not heard that all four propositions are inexpressible, yet due to causes and conditions, all may be expressed? The causes and conditions are the four siddhāntas. Some say, 'I am a follower of the Buddha; he is well-versed in Confucian learning and can explain the Yi.' They then feel joy. Therefore, when they say it is the Yi, I affirm it—this is the worldly siddhānta. Others say, 'How can a follower of the Buddha explain the Yi in the same way as a worldly Confucian scholar?' Knowing that what is explained is not the Yi, they give rise to wholesome thoughts. Therefore, when they say it is not the Yi, I affirm it—this is the siddhānta for the sake of individuals. Still others say, 'Confucianism and Buddhism are hardly distinguishable.' If they know that the Yi and not the Yi must have differences—though different, they are the same; though the same, they are different—then the fault of confusion cannot arise. Therefore, when they say it is both the Yi and not the Yi, I affirm it—this is the siddhānta of counteraction. And others say, 'Confucianism and Buddhism must have real dharmas.' If they know that 'not the Yi' means Confucianism is not fixed as Confucianism, and 'not not the Yi' means Buddhism is not fixed as Buddhism, but there are only names without real nature, they suddenly perceive the inconceivable principle. Therefore, when they say it is neither the Yi nor not the Yi, I affirm it—this is the ultimate siddhānta." The attendant said, "Not so. If what you explain is the Yi, people will say the Yi can assist the Dharma of liberation, leading to the slander of addition. If it is not the Yi, people will say the master speaks only of Chan—how could he know the Yi?—leading to the slander of subtraction. If it is both the Yi and not the Yi, people will say Confucianism is originally not Chan, nor is Chan Confucianism, leading to the slander of contradiction. If it is neither the Yi nor not the Yi, people will say Confucianism is not Confucianism, Chan is not Chan, leading to the slander of frivolous debate. How can this be seen as the four siddhāntas?" I said, "This is indeed so. Have you not heard that ginseng greatly nourishes, yet if one with excess qi takes it, it brings immediate death? Rhubarb is most damaging, yet if one with abdominal fullness takes it, it brings immediate relief? Heaven nurtures the myriad things, yet among them there are those that rot upon encountering spring. Summer fosters the growth of all beings, yet some grasses wither in summer. Autumn brings withering and decay, yet chrysanthemums bloom. Winter is a time of closure and storage, yet pines and cypresses remain green, and plum blossoms are fragrant. If one must choose only what is beneficial and without harm before acting, even heaven and earth cannot be without regret. Moreover, the Buddha looks upon the great thousand worlds with compassionate eyes; only when the capacities of beings have matured does he manifest birth. Yet still there is Māra Pāpīyas who disturbs him, ninety-five kinds of heretics who envy him, and Devadatta who seeks to harm him. How could only Yao and Shun be said to have shortcomings? My reason for explaining the Yi is none other than to enter Confucianism through Chan, thereby guiding Confucians to know Chan. Even if I do not attain the four benefits but give rise to the four slanders, it is like falling from the ground and rising again from the ground; like placing poison in milk, which transforms into ghee, yet the poison remains. Pūraṇa Kāśyapa became a teacher of outsiders, and Sañjaya Vairaṭīputra became a leader of the Nirgranthas—the intent lies herein." The attendant bowed again and said, "This is beyond what your disciple can grasp. Please write it down and preserve it."