北宋雲門宗禪僧契嵩（1007-1072）為一代佛教哲學與禪門之高僧，得法於洞山曉聰禪師，示化於杭州之靈隱寺。契嵩以博通佛儒的《鐔津文集》流布於世，力倡儒佛一致之說，甚有延續中晚唐圭峰宗密（780-841）禪教一致與會通三教的義理規模，亦有唐末五代禪僧永明延壽（904-975）調和學風之論，其思想淵源與對後世的影響皆極為深遠。 本文從契嵩以前的禪宗史觀開始介紹，再探討契嵩的《傳法正宗記》、《傳法正宗論》、《傳法正宗定祖圖（並序）》為研究其禪宗史觀的文獻中心，分析宗密與契嵩之間的禪宗史觀，探討先後傳承及其組織結構的區別，以及在禪宗史上所呈顯的意義。 從《寶林傳》之後的禪宗「燈史」類著作，如《祖堂集》、《宋高僧傳》到《景德傳燈錄》等，一直到契嵩的《傳法正宗記》，主要是延著一條主軸心的敘述系統。但其中影響契嵩最為深遠的，應該尌是宗密的禪宗史觀，尤其是宗密的《禪門師資承襲圖》對契嵩直接影響到其《傳法正宗定祖圖》的產生，這也是禪宗祖師對於法脈 傳承正統性的一種堅持與寫作背景。其中，契嵩以雲門宗為天下第一宗，其義甚明，其法嗣為天下正宗之正，意圖可謂顯明。 契嵩在《傳法正宗論》中，展現其治學嚴謹的態度，契嵩秉持著「辯道真偽，究事本末」的學術研究精神，希望以論證的形式完成正宗與傍出法系的楷定釐清，但對於某些文獻的梳理與考證結論，顯有混淆雜亂的情況。然而，在北宋初年《景德傳燈錄》頒行天下之後，禪宗法脈的正宗或正統問題，顯然不如唐代南北二宗的諍論如此激烈，但做為北宋經歷了五代的混亂局面，禪宗的正宗論爭到了契嵩也至此告一段落，因此契嵩的研究成果與禪宗史觀，實具有深遠的時代意義。

Chi-sung (契嵩1007-1072), an extremely learnt monk from Yun-men Zen school of North Song Dynasty, was a master of Buddhist philosophy and Zen; he learned Dharma from Master Tung Shan Hsiao Tsung (洞山曉聰), and lectured in Lingyin Temple in Hangzhou. Chi-sung was famous for his Tan Jin Anthology (鐔津文集) that combines Buddhism and Confucianism, which emphasizes on consistency of Confucianism and Buddhism. Additionally, certain literary collection consists of Master Kuei Feng Tsung-mi (圭峰宗密)(780-841) from late Tang Dynasty suggesting both consistency of Zen and a structural scale that combines three religions. Meanwhile, the collection also contains theories of balancing the education styles from Master Yung Ming Yen Shou (永明延壽)(904-975), and thus ideological origins and impacts on future generations in this literature are extremely far-reaching. The debate of the prose begins with an introduction of historical views from Zen aspects before Monk Chi-sung; accordingly, works of Chi-sung, including Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Chi (傳法正宗記), Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Lun (傳法正宗論), and Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Ting Tsu Tu (and Preface) (傳法正宗定祖圖並序) shall be adopted as center of documentation of historical views from Zen aspects to analyze differences between Tsung-mi and Chi-sung, to explore their heritages and varieties among organizational structures, as well as presented the meanings in Zen history. Starting from Pao Lin Chuan (寶林傳), latter classic writings of Zen “Teng Shih” (燈史) like Tsu Tang Chi (祖堂集), Snug Kao Seng Chuan (宋高僧傳), Ching Te Chuan Teng Lu (景德傳燈錄), and Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Chi (傳法正宗記) by Chi-sung, adopted the same narrating system that followed an axis. Nonetheless, it was Tsung-mi’s historical views from Zen aspects that had the greatest influence on Chi-sung; particularly his Chan Men Shih Tzu Cheng His Tu (禪門師資承襲圖) that affected the development of Chi-sung’s Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Ting Tsu Tu (傳法正宗定祖圖). It is also possible to see insistence and writing backgrounds of heritage legitimacy for Zen masters. Moreover, it is obvious that Chi-sung clearly considered and stated Yun-men Sect (雲門宗) as the first of all heritages, and its lineage is unshakably righteous. Chi-sung showed rigorous attitudes in his academic research in Chuan Fa Cheng Tsung Lun (傳法正宗論), as well as containing spirits of “learning the ultimate truth, and knowing the ins and outs of things” with hope to accomplish clarifying lineal descent from others though forms of arguments. However, chaotic conditions showed in his documentation recollecting and research conclusions. Nevertheless, after the publishing of Ching Te Chuan Teng Lu (景德傳燈錄) during early North Song Dynasty, issues of legitimacy of Zen heritage were not as fierce as the two descents in Tang Dynasty; still, after the chaos in the five Dynasties during the entire North Song Dynasty, debates on legitimacy of Zen heritage seemed to end in Chi-sung’s time. That is why his research outcomes and historical views from Zen aspects contain profound significance to the era.