(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)
As well as pursuing the practices associated with genuine Dharma teaching, the Ch’an masters also formulated distinct methods for assisting each of their individual students to attain enlightenment ‘outside’ of those generally found with the written Buddhist texts. It was understood that each student was an individual who needed extra-assistance when the time was right to realise the empty mind ground. In the ‘Altar Sutra of the 6th Patriarch’ (六祖坛经 - Liu Zu Tan Jing), it is obvious that Hui Neng (慧能) - the 6th Patriarch – employed various expedient methods to directly ‘point’ to the empty mind ground of each of his students. This was how Hui Neng enlightened each of his disciples including ‘Zhi Cheng’ (志诚), ‘Fa Da’ (法达), Zhi Chang (智常) and Shen Hui’ (神会), etc, by using what is sometimes called the ‘Language of Benevolent Opportunity’ (机缘之语 - Ji Yuan Zhi Yu) or ‘Expedient Means’ (related to the ‘Language of the Uncreate’).
Following the flourishing of Hui Neng’s Southern School of Ch’an, and then the split of the Ch’an School into the two paths represented by Qing Yuan Xing Si (青原行思) and the other by Nan Yue Huai Rang (南岳怀让) - the established methods used by Ch’an masters were both varied and distinct. These included ‘implication’ (暗示 - An Shi), ‘metaphor’ (隐喻 - Yin Yu), ‘rhetorical counter-question’ (反诘语 - Fan Ji Yu), ‘activity’ (动作 - Dong Zuo), and the threat of the use of the ‘stick’ and ‘harsh words’ (棒喝 - Bang He), etc, amongst other methods designed to lead and instruct the Ch’an disciples. The master expertly relieves the student of attachment to (external) sense objects, and his or her entrapment within the conditioned concepts associated with language acquisition, language structure and language usage. This process facilitates the clearing of the surface and depth mind as well as the perception of the empty mind ground (that underlies all perception), the turning about of the mind at its deepest level and expansion of the mind’s awareness to embrace all objects within the environment and the environment itself. This is the realisation of full enlightenment within the Ch’an School. The following is an assessment of these methods.
1) Implication - (暗示 - An Shi)
Teaching by ‘implication’ often means that words and gestures are used to point at an underlying reality not necessarily (or obviously) linked to the ‘apparent’ or ‘superficial’ meaning contained in the words and gestures being used themselves. Reality lies just beyond the conceptual reach of the words and gestures used, with the strength of insight of the master powering the student from where they are (unenlightened) to where they need to be (enlightened). The master’s intent meets with the student’s cultivated inner potential and an integrated ‘oneness’ is attained that becomes self-motivating in the mind, body and environment of the student. The ‘Public Case’ (公案 - Gong An) can be used in this way whereby a Ch’an master avoids the literal implications of a superficial question, and instead ‘frees’ the enquirer from this type of ‘closed circuit’ by uniting the previously scattered awareness and returning this focused attention to the empty mind ground...
2) Metaphor - (隐喻 - Yin Yu)
Within the Ch’an School, this is a rhetorical device used to ‘shock’ a student out of the old habits of the mind. A metaphor is the comparing of one thing to another so as to suggest a relationship. Quite often there is some type of logical or expected association, but Ch’an will turn the tables on this kind of expectation. A student might well ask where they must go so as to study of the Dharma properly (implying that some other place is ‘better’ than the present moment), but the master will invariably reply ‘here and now’. Looking at the external world with attachment, and then viewing this play before the eyes as ‘reality’ is a grave error in the Ch’an School. Many deluded beings try to manipulate a master into confirming their delusion is enlightenment – but the compassionate master will always side-step these attempts with an immediate ‘metaphor’ that turns the deluded mind back toward the perception of its own empty mind ground. Many Public Cases’ (公案 - Gong An) are designed as ‘metaphor’ and used in this manner.
3) Rhetorical Counter-Question - (反诘语- Fan Ji Yu)
This is used when the student is assuming an intimacy or social closeness with a master that does not exist. Whilst the ego attempts to justify its dominance of the enquiring individual by associating itself with enlightenment, the master immediately uproots the apparent (an assumed) stability in the deluded mind of the enquirer by expertly applying a shocking ‘counter-question’. This works by suddenly pulling-out the rug from beneath the feet of ignorance, and permanently ‘cutting off’ the root of ignorance. This has the potential to immediately ‘clear’ the surface and depth mind, turn the mind the right way around (thus curing inversion), and expanding awareness. In the practice of martial arts, this is like sweeping the legs and removing the functional foundation – but within Ch’an is applied to the entire mind-body nexus. An example might be the question: ‘Where is my mind?’ - answer: ‘Where is your mind?’ Sometimes, a student might be attached to meditation and this attachment is preventing the final breakthrough. This is attachment to what is considered ‘holy’ - which is viewed as just as bad as attachment to what is considered ‘deluded’ - as both form an impenetrable barrier. As the empty mind ground underlies all phenomena equally, the ‘ordinary’ and the ‘holy’ lose their meaning and even change place... Such is the ‘shock’ associated with a well-placed ‘Rhetorical Counter-Question'.
4) Activity - (动作 - Dong Zuo)
Movement – and its opposite - ‘stillness’ and ‘silence’, etc, are very important aspects of Ch’an instruction (either face to face or over a distance via word of mouth or the written word). Gestures can be slight – like raising a single eyebrow – or obvious like pushing over a table or delivering a punch or kick, etc. In many ways the deluded movements of the student are perfectly countered (and returned to ‘stillness’) by the movements of the master. In the more elaborate sense, this enlightened movement may take on the attributes of small plays or ‘psycho-dramas’ which see attachments fall away and deluded ideas abandoned. It is a form of theatre which is often unpredictable and dangerous. The violence involved can appear extreme on occasion – but the violence of the ego within society can be much worse. The expert use of activity can immediately reveal the essence of the empty mind ground to a student whose mind is attached to ‘movement’ and the thought patterns associated therein. The enlightened mind, for instance, does not discriminate (r become ‘stuck) on issues surrounding ‘gender’ or ‘skin tone’ and is indifferent to social rank. This presence and awareness in the enlightened mind denote an entirely different way of moving through society that is extant in all the lives of all Ch’an masters throughout history, and can be used as an indicator of the achievement of full enlightenment. This reality can be clearly discerned throughout the many preserved ‘Public Cases’ (公案 - Gong An).
6) Threat of the Stick and Harsh Words - (棒喝 - Bang He)
After the Ch’an masters started teaching large groups of practitioners, the meditation groups took on the dynamics of a proper community that relied upon self-discipline to maintain good law and order in the external world, so that the attention can be effectively ‘turned’ within and the empty mind ground perceived. If the mind ‘moves’ with delusion and is confused – sometimes all the master needs to do is ‘reach’ for the stick for this surface activity to completely cease. At other times, reaching for the stick whilst emitting ‘harsh’ words has the power ‘stop’ all deluded thought and clear the surface and depth mind for the perception of the empty mind ground. This can release great power and trigger tremendous endurance. This is related to the ‘stick’ being used to expertly strike the medicinal pressure-points along the shoulder and upper-back. This can unblock qi-flow and ensure all-round good health. The threat and use of the stick, coupled with well-timed harsh words can free the mind entirely, or at the very least create the conditions for a far greater effort during seated meditation practice. The threat of the stick can prevent a direct (deluded) reply and reveal the true mind, but after enlightenment the threat of the stick can ‘test’ the depth and quality of perception and see if the event has been genuine. The use of the stick can only be applied by a fully qualified (and enlightened) master who knows when – and when not – to use the stick. The threat of the stick is not a punishment, but a ‘corrective’ premised upon compassion. A practitioner can request the stick or refuse its application, just as a master may exempt any student deemed not suitable for this method. Whereas Ch’an Master Baizhang Huahai (百丈怀海) often spoke with a ‘harsh tongue’ (as if ‘beating’ the student with ‘words’), it was not until Masters Qingyuan Singsi (青原行思) and De Shan Xuan Jian (德山宣鉴) that the ‘stick’ is recorded as being literally applied to Ch’an training. It appears to have spread from these beginnings during the Tang Dynasty...
Original Chinese Language Text:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_9e6c11b70102xlqt.html
文/常进法师
禅宗作为在中国发展起来的佛教派别,在传播过程中形成了一套有别于其他宗派的教化弟子的方法。从达摩禅师来到东土开始,以至到六祖慧能,这几代禅师在教化弟子时,通常是采用带领众人发心、忏悔,传授佛法等普通的传法方式。这种传法方式被禅林称之为“开法”、“普说”。
除了普通的教化方式之外,这些禅师还会根据每个学徒的不同根基,采用不同的教化方法。就像《六祖坛经》中六祖慧能在教化志诚、法达、智常、神会等人分别采用不同的教化方式一样,这就是禅宗史上所说的“机缘之语”。
在慧能南宗禅创立之后,特别是禅宗到了青原行思和南岳怀让等两派之后,禅宗祖师所采用的教化方法翻新出奇,多种多样,其中最常见的教化方法有暗示、隐喻、反诘语句、动作以及棒喝等方式传授禅法和接引弟子。目的是让对方脱离语言名相束缚与表象迷惑,而达到彻悟。
由于这些不同的教化方法是针对弟子各自不同根机而采用,因而在修行实践中收到了理想的效果。下面分别介绍这几种不同的教化弟子的方法。
一、暗示
所谓暗示就是不明白表示意思,而用含蓄的言语或示意的举动使人领会。
在禅宗史上,有许多祖师面对修学有所成就却又没有见自本性的弟子所经常采用的教化方法。通过暗示的方式,使弟子能够放弃对教理名相的执着,从而能够从观照自心中触缘开悟。
禅宗史上有许多公案都是通过暗示的方式来打破弟子对语言名相的执著,使他们能够改正悟道过程中的偏差,从而能够明心见性。在众多禅宗公案中经常有关于“祖师西来意”的问对。
“祖师西来意”是禅林中的常用语,又称“西来祖师意”、“西来意”、“祖意”,表示佛法之奥义、禅理之精髓。在禅林之中,有许多记载“祖师西来意”的公案。
如:学僧问马祖:“离四句,绝百非,请师直指西来意。”马祖:“我今天太累了,不能回答你,去问智藏禅师吧!”学僧乃去问智藏,智藏:“为什么不向马祖请教?”学僧:“马祖让来问你。”智藏:“我今天头晕,不能回答你,去问百丈怀海吧!”学僧问怀海,怀海说:“我也不会。”面对学僧对“祖师西来意”的提问,不管是马祖还是智藏,抑或是百丈禅师,都没有给予直接回答,他们是通过暗示的方式来告诉他,“西来意”只能依靠你自己去体会,而不能直说的,如果说出来就不是“西来意”了。
龙牙参洞山良价时问:“什么是祖师西来意?”洞山:“等洞水倒流时再向你说。”龙牙从此悟旨。
学僧问三圣禅师:“如何是祖师西来意?”三圣:“肉臭招苍蝇。”学僧告诉兴化,兴化说:“我不这样答。”学僧:“如何是祖师西来意?”兴化:“破驴背上苍蝇多。”
以上两则公案中禅师对“祖师西来意”的回答内容虽然不同,但都和学僧问马祖时一样,没有给予明确的回答,而是暗示他们禅的至深境界需要自己去认真参究。
在禅宗史上,自马祖之后,禅宗学徒,都以参究“祖师西来意”为时尚,从字面上看,“祖师西来意”就是“达摩祖师到中国究竟有何意。”这里所问的“西来意”就是指达摩祖师所传的心法。
历代祖师对此问题或避而不答,或回答一些毫不相干的具体事物,而且这些事物与学徒所问的问题之间没有任何联系。禅师之所以这样回答,就是暗示弟子,“祖师西来意”是不能用语言来表达的,而是需要禅者自参,所谓“拟议己差,动念即乖”,才涉言路,便失真常。
所以历代祖师种种答非所问的回答,均是通过暗示的方式直下截断问话者的言语思路,使其直探心源。学者一旦豁然觅得,方知宝藏是自家故物。
类似以暗示方式接引学人的公案,在《景德传灯录·庞居士传》中也有记载:庞蕴居士“参问马祖:不与万法为侣者是什么人?祖云:待汝一口吸尽西江水,即向汝道。居士言下顿领玄要。”
马祖就是通过答非所问的方式来暗示“佛”是不能用语言正面表述的。
二、隐喻
隐喻是一种文学修辞手法,不用“如”“像”“似”“好像”等比喻词,把某事物比喻成和它有相似关系的另一事物。通常也叫暗喻。
在禅宗公案中,隐喻通常是用看来平时习见的话语或事物表示另外一种佛法深意。
如《景德传灯录·马祖传》中云:“百丈问:如何是佛法旨趣?师云:正是汝放生命处。”这里马祖道一禅师借用安身立命之处比喻佛法深旨。
台州涌泉景欣禅师曾有一则名为“涌泉骑牛”的公案,其公案曰:有强、德二禅客到,于路次见师骑牛,不识禅师,乃曰:“蹄角甚分明,争奈骑者不识(未见自性)。”禅师骤牛(急速骑牛)而去。
二禅客憩于树下煎茶,师回下牛,近前不审,与坐吃茶。师问曰:“禅客近离什么处?”曰:“离那边!”师曰:“那边事作么生?”彼提起茶盏。师曰:“此犹是这边事,那边事作么生?”二人无对。师曰:“莫道骑者不识好。”这是有名的景欣骑牛公案。
在本公案中,二位禅客自认为从蹄角来说,此明明是一头牛(这里牛隐喻自性),奈骑的人不识,显然没骑的人定能识得此是牛(能够认识本性)。
既然此二人自喻能见牛,景欣禅师就以“禅客近离什么处”的提问来测试一下禅客的悟境。然后景欣禅师以这边事与那边事让二人起分别心,虽同是在那边喝茶,在这边也喝茶,两人的认知是同样在喝茶,但当此两人提起茶盏说在那边也喝茶,禅师却故意以“那边事做么生”提问,弄得两位禅客不知莫名其妙。
通过这样一番问对,禅师知道两位禅客不过是门外汉而已,然后给他们丢下一句“莫道骑者不识好”,景欣禅师的话意在隐喻禅客本身就没有见自本性,应当观照自心,从而见性成佛,切不可以不悟者的眼光来看待悟道之人。
三、反诘语
反诘也就是反问,即当事人反过来对提问人发问。
在禅宗史上,有许多禅宗祖师通过反问的方式来截断禅子的妄见情思,从而使他们在言语道断,心思路绝中开悟。
马祖道一禅师在开法传禅的过程中,有僧问他:如何是西来意?师云:即今是什么意?(见《景德传灯录·马祖传》)
“西来意”即达摩来华的用意。这是禅僧参问常用的话题。马祖用反诘语表示对此无法用语言答,让他自己省悟。
《语录》中记载,大珠慧海禅师初参马祖时,马祖问:“来此拟须何事?”慧海答:“来求佛法。”马祖当即斥责:“自家宝藏不顾,抛家散走作什么?我这里一物也无,求什么佛法!”慧海又问:“阿那个是慧海自家宝藏?”马祖便说:“即今问我者是汝宝藏,一切具足更无欠少,使用自在,何假向外觅求?”
于是,慧海顿然觉悟。这里的“自家宝藏”,不仅有佛性清净心的意思,还包括众生日常的起心动念,表示一般的日常行事本身就是“一切具足”。
世俗世界就是佛国净土,平常的生活蕴涵着佛法大意,人在举首投足、扬眉瞬目、自然而然之间能够显示出生命的真谛,一念回转就可以获得心灵的自由与生命的超越。所以,马祖在回答百丈怀海所问“如何是佛旨趣”时,直截了当地说:“正是汝安身立命处!”
这些都是否定那些只是纠缠在经典词句与祖师言论、妄想藉此证悟解脱的浮华作风,以及远离现实生活的修行方式。
有则著名“磨砖作镜”的禅宗公案,通过反诘的方式说明了马祖是如何在怀让门下受法的。
《祖堂集》卷三记载有这一有趣故事:说马祖在般若寺传法院经常坐禅,怀让为了启示他懂得觉悟不一定要坐禅,关键是能否体悟自性的道理,便在他面前天天磨砖。
马祖觉得怀让这样做很奇怪。就问怀让磨砖头作什么用,怀让告诉他说是为了“磨砖成镜”,在马祖提出“磨砖岂得成镜”的疑问时,怀让便对他说:“磨砖尚不成镜,坐禅岂得成佛也?”马祖由此大悟,专心修持“心地法门”。
怀让就是通过磨砖的这一行为,并以反诘之语,打破马祖对坐禅的执著,从而促使马祖在反观自心中悟道。
四、动作
禅宗祖师接引弟子的方式多种多样,除了暗示、隐喻等方式之外,还常常会通过动作、眼神或手势来教化和引导弟子。在禅宗史上有许多禅师都是通过这种方式来开示学人的。
曾有尼问师(赵州禅师):“如何是密密意?”师以手掐之。尼曰“和尚犹有这个在。”师曰:“却是你有这个在。”
赵州禅师在面对尼师的提问时,用手掐的动作告诉她佛法的深意不是以语言文字来表述的,只能靠一个人自证自悟方能体会其中的滋味。
谁知女尼并没理解禅师的深意,反而对赵州的这一行为感到吃惊,就说:“和尚犹有这个在。”女尼心中所说的“这个”是指世俗的男女之情,在女尼看来,你赵州禅师是一位声名远播的开悟祖师,竟然还没有破除男女之间的色情之心,这是与戒律相违背的。
赵州知道女尼没有破除对男女的情见,所以,接着他就对女尼说,不是我有这个在,而是你有这个在。因为对一个开悟的祖师而言,他的心中是没有性别色相方面的分别执著的。
庞居士问祖(马祖)曰:“不昧本来人,请师高着眼。”祖直下觑。士曰:“一等没琴弦,唯师弹得妙。”祖直上觑。
士礼拜,祖归方丈。士随后曰:“适来弄巧成拙。”马祖对庞居士自认为已悟本来面目没表认可,未高着眼;而对于说自己善弹无弦之琴表示默许,故将眼上视。马祖通过这样一个眼神,使庞蕴居士知道了其中的深意。
马祖不仅使用眼神这样的动作,而且还以脚踢方式启悟学徒。水老和尚初参问马祖:“如何是祖师西来的的意?”被马祖一脚当胸踏倒。当下大悟,起来扶掌,呵呵大笑。云:“大奇,百千三昧,无量妙义,只向一毛头上,便识得根源去。”(《景德传灯录·水老和尚传》)
还有的禅宗祖师常以拂子示人。马祖门下,百丈怀海、南泉普愿、西堂智藏是其得意弟子。
有一天傍晚,师徒四人在一起看月。师问:“正这样的光景怎么?”西堂答:“正好供养。”百丈答:“正好修行。”南泉则拂袖而去。马祖说:“智藏是参读经的主儿,怀海是位禅家,只有普愿,超然物外。”
马祖曾问百丈怀海:“你用什么方法开示人?”怀海举起手中的拂子。“就这个吗?”禅师问。百丈又把拂子扔掉,算是回答。面对马祖的提问,百丈禅师认为“法”是“说是一物即不中”,所以就举拂,举拂子是一种动作,是有所为,故可表示有为法。
意思是说:总要教些什么。马祖再问,抛下拂子,这是无为法。有教是一法,不教亦是一法。但不论有、无,对象都是一杆拂子。不论有为、无为,拂子还是拂子,它都是不变的,是超出有无的,也就是那个不可言说的“一”。可以教什么呢?就是这个一。百丈不落言荃理路地回答了师父的提问。
在《景德传灯录》中,有一则有名的“一指禅”公案:有个尼姑到俱胝和尚那里去,她头戴竹笠,手执柱杖,绕着俱胝转了三圈,然后对俱胝说:“你如果能说得出这是什么意思,我就取下竹笠来。”尼姑连续问了三次,俱胝都说不上来,于是尼姑便转身离去。
这时天色已晚,俱胝留她明天再走,她还是因为俱胝说不出绕他三圈是什么意思而没有留下。
尼姑走后,俱胝很惭愧,打算到外地去寻访高僧,进修禅法,但当夜有山神来劝他不要离开,因为不久就有高僧来到。果然,十天以后,天龙和尚到访。俱胝把事情经过告诉他,天龙听了,什么也没说,只向他举起一根手指。
俱胝见了,立刻大悟。从此以后,凡是有禅师来切磋的,他都不说什么,只举一指以应。
有一小沙弥,每次见到有人来学法,也学俱胝和尚那样举起一个手指回应。后来有人对俱胝说:“小沙弥也会佛法了,凡是有人问询,他都像您一样举起了一个手指。”
于是,有一天,俱胝在袖子里暗藏一把刀子,找小沙弥来问:“听说你会讲佛法,是吗?”小沙弥说是,俱胝便问:“那么什么是佛法呢?”小沙弥就举起一根手指。这时俱胝就拿出刀把那根手指砍断。小沙弥痛得大叫,急忙转身而走。俱胝在后喊他回来,他一回头,俱胝再问他:“什么是佛法?”小沙弥又举起手来,但是已经没有了那根手指。他顿时豁然大悟。
德山到了沩山,挟复子于法堂上。复子是僧人行脚用的包裹,挟复子就是拿着包裹。他连包裹也不解开,背着包裹就上法堂了。从东过西,从西过东。而后顾视云:“无!无!”说完便在众目睽睽之下出法堂而去,德山的这一举动,表示彻底悟道了。雪窦禅师看到德山的举动说道:“勘破了也”,表明雪窦从德山的动作中看透了他的悟境。
五、棒喝
禅宗祖师在接引学人时,为了杜绝其虚妄思维或考验其悟境,或用棒打,或用口喝,在机锋的基础上又发展出“棒喝”的新方式,来暗示和启发对方。
据佛教史载,马祖道一已运用过棒喝的手段。当有学人向他提问“如何是西来意”时,他便打,还说:“我若不打汝,诸方笑我也。”
他的“喝”也是气状山河,曾使门人百丈怀海禅师“三日耳聋眼黑”,怀海的门人希运听说后不觉吐舌。相传棒的广泛施用,始于青原系德山宣鉴与南岳系黄檗希运;喝的使用则始于黄檗门下的临济义玄。禅林中盛传德山善用棒,临济善用喝,故有“德山棒,临济喝”之称。
《五灯会元》中记载了宣鉴禅师在上堂说法时常用的棒打方式:(宣鉴)小参示众曰:“今夜不答话,问话者三十棒。”时有僧出礼拜,师便打。
僧曰:“某甲话也未问,和尚因甚么打某甲?”师曰:“汝是甚么处人?”曰:“新罗人。”师曰:“未跨船舷,好与三十棒。”
又有一次,雪峰问:“从上宗乘,学人还有分也无?”师打一棒曰:“道甚么!”曰:“不会。”宣鉴一次小参示众曰:“道得也三十棒,道不得也三十棒。”
德山宣鉴禅师从来不以言句教化弟子,每当有人来问,他都会以棒打的方式来对待。以帮助学徒扫除情见,断绝妄念,使他们能在如雨点般的棒打之下证道成佛。在他门下,有很多禅宗学徒就是在棒打之下豁然悟道。
禅师棒打学人,主要有两个目的:一是截断学人的妄想执着,让他们在棒打的瞬间言语道断,心思路绝,从而当下见性。二是不许学人直接说出悟境,以免触犯自性不可说之忌讳。三是通过棒打的方式来测试学徒的悟性如何。
“僧问:如何是西来意?师便打,乃云:我若不打汝,诸方笑我也。”(《景德传灯录·马祖传》)赵州从谂是普愿弟子,一日问:“道非物外,物外非道,如何是物外道?”普愿拿棒便打,“赵州捉住棒云:已后莫错打人去。”(《景德传灯录·普愿传》)
喝,即大声喊叫。百丈怀海“谓众曰:佛法不是小事,老僧昔再蒙马大师一喝,直得三日耳聋眼黑。”(《景德传灯录·怀海传》)棒打与喝合称为“棒喝”。
棒喝这两种教化方式,在很多时候是同时采用的。
义玄禅师在教化弟子实践中,认识到喝对启发禅子根性的作用,便经常用喝之法。义玄禅师一次升堂,有僧出门,义玄禅师便大声喝,那位僧人也跟着喝,然后礼拜,义玄禅师接过来便打。
禅师的喝是为了启发这位学人,而这位学人却不明白师意,也跟着喝,所以,义玄禅师又通过棒打的方式来进一步引导他。
义玄禅师之所以用“棒喝”的方式来教化弟子,是因为他认为,禅宗教外别传的心法,只能够通过反观自心的方式去体悟,是无法用言语表达清楚的。
一次上堂,有僧人问:“如何是佛法大意?”义玄禅师便竖起拂子,僧人便喝,义玄禅师便用拂子打他。
又有僧人问:“如何是佛法大意?”义玄禅师便竖起拂子,僧人便大声喝,义玄禅师也一起喝。前一个僧人问佛法大意,义玄禅师竖起拂子,意在告诉他佛法大意需要自己亲自证悟,而不能用言语说出,僧人不明禅师之意,便以喝来对待,所以,义玄禅师就用拂子击打,再次启发他;
而后一位弟子明了禅师之意,所以也发出喝,义玄认为第二为学人的喝是明白佛法的深意,所以便与他一起喝,表示认同。
禅宗祖师之所以采用以上几种不同的教化弟子方式,用来传授禅法,传递某种信息,交流彼此的参禅心得和悟境,打破了传统的以正面言教为主的传授禅法的方式,从而使禅宗的传法方式显得更加生动活泼、丰富多彩,增加了对禅宗学人的吸引力。
转自:腾讯佛学