梁武帝於天監三年（A.D 504）宣布佛教為國教，而范縝於天監六年發 表了《神滅論》。這是針鋒相對的論辯。由於《神滅論》危及了佛教存在的基礎， 所以把佛教作為國教的梁武帝，急忙《敕答臣下神淢論。…糾集了東宮舍人曹思 文與當朝權貴蕭琛等六十六人，先後寫了七十五篇文章，圍攻《神滅論》。在這 麼多反對《神滅論》的論難者中，只有蕭琛和曹思文有較完整的論難。當時參與 「神滅之辯」重要的論者可以說就是范縝、蕭琛和曹思文等三人。在此三人中， 范縝首先提出《神滅論》，主張形神不離，形滅則神滅。另外，蕭琛和曹思文則 針對范縝的《神滅論》提出論難，蕭、曹二人均主張形、神二者可分，形滅而神 不滅。其中范縝、曹思文有反覆往來的論難，但范縝對於蕭琛之論難則無一專文 予以答辯。本文的重點即放在這三人的五篇論難上，看他們針對同一個問題作出 如何不同的反應和思辯。希望透過對雙方論難中語言文字的皆析，進而理解其思 維方式及其論辯方式，並進而掌握其思想。

In A.D.504, the emperor (Liang Wu Di) established Buddhism as the state religion, and three years later, Zhen Fan publicized his controversial argument "On the Mortality of the Soul." Since "On the Mortality of the Soul" undermined the corner stone of Buddhism, the emperor hastily responded and summoned 66 people, including Si-wen Cao and Chen Xiao. They wrote 75 essays in total to attack "On the Mortality of the Soul." Among all these attackers, only Si-wen Cao and Chen Xiao presented better-organized challenges. The most important arguments involved in this debate were given by Si-wen Cao, Chen Xiao and Zhen Fan. First, Zhen Fan proposed his "On the Mortality of the Soul," asserting that the form and the spirit were inseparable and that one couldn't exit with-out the other. Then Si-wen Cao and Chen Xiao attacked Zhen Fan's argument and claimed that the form and the spirit were separable and that the spirit could be with-out the form. While Zhen Fan and Si-wen Cao attacked each other repeatedly, Chen Xiao's attack on Zhen Fan was never specifically answered. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the five attacking articles by the three of them and analyze how they reacted to the same issue with different responses and arguments. By analyzing the vocabulary applied in the five writings, the writer wishes to understand their thoughts and arguments and then grasp their ideas.