---
title: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論 · 維摩經提唱略論序"
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/cmgn46k3s0opfk1040wppt29x"
---

### 維摩經提唱略論序

> Preface to a Brief Treatise on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

經云「諸佛解脫，當於眾生心行中求。」顧眾生心行，萬別千差。心行多，解脫亦多，解脫不可思議，心行亦不可思議。乃世之求解脫者，罔不墮在思議窟中，釋迦安得不示生，維摩安得不示疾哉？示生示疾，至《法華》而權實始融。乃正法既遠，像季學者，各師其心，各安所習，視不二法門若冰炭然，縱有證悟，法執未忘，猶將性相分河、南北異幟，況依通者乎。嘗觀古來註述，有得大綱似漢者，有得萬目似唐者，至欲追成周禮樂，捨智者大師一人，指未易屈。似漢者，能提醒人，使直下受用，其弊狂。似唐者，能軌範人，使平易穩當，其弊支。是故兩家著述，合則雙美，執則無非病耳。明神廟年閒，維揚真一道人，號無用者，居武林法華山，名其菴曰西方。法嗣未詳，種種著述，大似方山手筆。儻無夙根及悟門，斷不能湊泊一字，惜未遇本色鉗錘，不免為漢雜霸道。然痛快直捷，較近世著述，什伯過之。維時一二大老，並矜細行，能令推崇者眾，如紫陽及門士，反以象山為禪學而排斥之。嗟嗟！象山不可泯，於後世無用，何可沒其生平哉？試平心易氣，勿主先入之言，讀此《維摩提唱略論》，謂非方山法脈，吾不信也。白璧不以微瑕掩，合抱不以尺朽廢，大醇小疵，非諓諓文字之學可比也。感深今昔，歎息為之序。

> The sutra says, "The liberation of all Buddhas is to be sought within the minds and actions of sentient beings." Yet the minds and actions of sentient beings are infinitely varied. As mental activities are many, so are the ways of liberation. Liberation is inconceivable, and mental activities are also inconceivable. Yet those in the world who seek liberation all fall into the trap of conceptual thought. How could Shakyamuni not manifest birth, and how could Vimalakirti not manifest illness? He manifested birth and illness. It was not until the Lotus Sutra that the provisional and the ultimate were harmonized. But as the True Dharma faded and scholars of the latter age each followed their own minds and clung to their own practices, they saw the non-dual Dharma as incompatible as ice and fire. Even if they had realization, their attachment to Dharma remained, and they still divided nature and characteristics like separate rivers, or raised different flags for the Southern and Northern Schools. How much worse was it for those who merely relied on intellectual understanding? I have observed ancient commentaries: some captured the great outline like the Han dynasty, others mastered all the details like the Tang. To pursue the perfection of Zhou dynasty rites and music, there is hardly anyone besides Master Zhiyi. Those resembling the Han could awaken people, allowing them to directly experience the truth—but their flaw was arrogance. Those resembling the Tang could guide people, making things smooth and secure—but their flaw was fragmentation. Thus, the works of these two schools complement each other when combined, yet cause problems when clung to rigidly. During the Wanli era of the Ming dynasty, a monk named Zhenyi of Yangzhou, who styled himself "Wuyong" (Useless), lived at Fahua Mountain in Wulin and named his hut "Western." His Dharma lineage is unclear, but his various writings closely resemble the style of Fangshan. Without deep karmic roots and awakening, one could not even grasp a single word of his. Unfortunately, he never met a true master's forge and hammer, so he inevitably mixed Han pragmatism with it. Yet his works are straightforward and direct, surpassing recent writings by a hundredfold. At the time, a few great elders valued meticulous conduct and attracted many followers. Like Zhu Xi's disciples rejecting Lu Xiangshan's teachings as Zen—alas! Xiangshan's teachings cannot be erased. Why, then, should Wuyong's life's work be forgotten? With an impartial mind and gentle spirit, setting aside preconceived notions, if you read this \*Brief Treatise on Vimalakirti\*, I would not believe it if you said it is not the Dharma lineage of Fangshan. A white jade is not rejected because of a slight flaw; a tree thick enough to embrace is not discarded because of a foot of rot. Great purity with minor flaws is far beyond the petty literary disputes of \*jianjjian\* scholars. Reflecting deeply on past and present, I sigh and write this preface.