Biography

He was born in Jinjiang, Fujian province (in modern Quanzhou). His ancestor by seven generations was Li Nu, the son of Li Lü, a maritime merchant. Li Nu visited Hormuz in Persia in 1376, converted to Islam upon marriage to a Semu girl ("娶色目女") (who was most likely either Persian or Arab), and brought her back to Quanzhou. This was recorded in the Lin and Li genealogy《林李宗谱》. However, the new faith did not take root in his lineage and the family stopped practising Islam during the time of his grandfather. His father made a living by teaching, and Li Zhi was therefore educated from an early age.

In 1551, he passed the village examinations, and five years later was appointed as a lecturer in Gongcheng (in modern Huixian, Henan Province). In 1560 he was then promoted to the Guozijian in Nanjing as a professor, but went into filial mourning, returning to his native Quanzhou. During this time he participated in the defence of the coastal city against Wokou raids. After returning from mourning in 1563, he was assigned to the Guozijian in Beijing.

In 1566, he served in the Ministry of Rites in Beijing, where he became learned in Yangmingism as well as Buddhist thought. He was then assigned as a prefect in Yunnan in 1577, but left his post three years later. After this, he took up a teaching post in Hubei on the invitation of Geng Dingli, but was attacked as a heretic by Dingli's brother, the scholar and official Geng Dingxiang, and eventually moved to Macheng. In 1588, he took the tonsure and became a Buddhist monk, but did not follow the ascetic lifestyle of other monks. Two years later, his work A Book to Hide was printed.

He travelled during the 1590s, visiting Jining and Nanjing, where he met with Matteo Ricci and discussed the differences between Buddhist and Catholic thought. Returning to Macheng in 1600, he was again forced to leave after attacks from the local magistrate for his philosophical views.

In 1602, after being accused of deceiving society with heretical ideas by Zhang Wenda and other officials of the Censorate, he was arrested and imprisoned, where he committed suicide. Having heard that he was to be exiled to his native Fujian, he cut his throat with a shaving knife which he seized from a servant. After his death, he was buried in Tongzhou, where his grave still remains.

Philosophy

Li Zhi's philosophy was based upon Neo-Confucianism, though he was a staunch critic of the then-orthodox Cheng-Zhu School, and indeed identified himself as a heretic. He can be seen as having been influenced by Wang Yangming (1472–1529), as well as the Taizhou School. He denied that women were inferior to men in native intelligence, and argued that many women in Chinese history, such as Wu Zetian, had actually been superior to men. However, he did not believe women should be emancipated and commended widows who chose suicide over remarriage.

The Childlike Heart-Mind (tóng xīn; 童心)The childlike heart-mind is the genuine heart-mind. If one denies the childlike heart-mind, then he denies the genuine heart-mind. The childlike heart-mind is free of all falsehood and entirely genuine; it is the original mind at the very beginning of the first thought. -Li Zhi, 「On the Childlike Heart-Mind」Li Zhi wrote a considerable amount on the 「childlike heart-mind」 (tóng xīn; 童心). Although someone of a childlike heart-mind was once considered to be someone 「naive, immature, and inexperienced in the ways of the world」 – and thus 「bound to come to a bad end」 – Li uses the term in a different sense, as evidenced by his reference to the 13th-century play The Western Chamber (Xixiang ji). In this play, a scholar and a maiden develop a somewhat 「forbidden」 relationship, have a clandestine and passionate love affair, push through 「traditional barriers」 to their love, and finally marry. In the original telling (from the Tang Period, 7th-10th century CE), these same lovers have a short-lived, passionate romance which takes a sharp downward turn when the scholar decides to leave the maiden, leaving them both with no choice but to marry other people, although not out of 「true love」. In referencing this, Li argues for the ideals of the lovers in the Western Chamber, the 「spontaneity, genuineness, abundance in feeling, and passionate desire」. These are all aspects of Li's childlike heart-mind.

Li's works on the childlike heart-mind are thought to be 「innovative」 yet 「muddled and inconsistent」. Some regard his seemingly incompatible ideas on the heart-mind as a relativist ethical structure 「where anything goes." Pauline Lee, however, rejects this interpretation, arguing instead that Li's work is useful in allowing us to understand the cultural milieu in which he lived, and that his 「philosophical vision」 bears great 「intrinsic value and power」.

This concept of the childlike heart-mind is not unlike concepts of Li's contemporaries on similar subjects. In fact, Li may have even considered his contemporaries』 terms, namely the 「original heart-mind」 (ben xin), the 「genuine heart-mind」 (zhen xin), 「pure knowing」 (liang zhi), and 「the infant heart-mind」 (chizi zhi xin).

The term 「ben xin」 comes from a passage in the Mengzi that says that if a person acts in accordance with their 「appetitive parts,」 even if it is to save their own life and even if the decision is difficult for them, then they have 「lost contact」 with their original heart-mind, something which Mengzi believed is a person's 「greatest moral resource." Li Zhi makes a conscious decision not to use this term, preferring instead to use tong xin. This may be due in part to the fact that, while Mengzi believed that the heart-mind was something to be cultivated and nurtured, Li saw the heart-mind as something to be 「preserved,」 since, in his view, it is innately perfect from birth. Mengzi also thought that there was a specific 「path of moral self-cultivation」 and that those who had followed this path correctly would all have the same ethical attitudes, whereas Li held that there were many different ways that one could cultivate the heart-mind, particularly through the reading of certain texts or engagement in certain practices.

「Zhen xin」 is found in the Buddhist text the Platform Sutra, in which it is said to be analogous to the 「deep concentration of oneness,」 something to practice while also maintaining a lack of attachment to things. However, the heart-mind, in this view, runs the risk of becoming enmeshed with the Dao if ever it lingers in anything, if it becomes too attached. Ultimately, the heart-mind in this conception is considered to be functioning properly if it is doing things with natural ease, rather than struggling against the natural way of things (or Dao). Self-cultivation plays a role in this idea of the heart-mind, as well, through deep concentration.

「Liang zhi」 comes from Wang Yangming's idea of the heart-mind as something that is known through a discovery-based self-cultivation method and as being 「directly manifested in a faculty of 『pure knowing』」 (a term which Mengzi used but which Wang means differently). Wang regarded pure knowing as something innately perfect, just like Li's heart-mind, but which was 「clouded over」 at birth, akin to the sun being obstructed by clouds. This 「clouding」 could be caused by one's qi if it had somehow become corrupted or soiled, so the aim was to have clear qi by exercising one's pure knowing, something which could be accomplished only through the will.

「Chizi zhi xin」 is a term used by Luo Rufang meaning 「infant heart mind」. This idea held the 「free expression of one's natural desires」 in high regard. Luo believed that a person's feelings 「are their human nature,」 and so the feelings should not be 「repressed」 in any way. Spontaneous expression (expression without thinking about it) is also a part of the human nature, and as long as 「artificial obstructions」 (such as 「false teachings or excessive meditation」) do not interfere, the feelings can thrive.

To Li, losing the genuine mind could result in losing the genuine self, and anyone who failed to be genuine would never recover their genuine heart-mind. The childlike heart-mind is lost when anything from the outside – be those 「aural and visual impressions」 (even of the 「Principles of the Way」), 「knowledge and perceptions,」 or the favor of a good reputation while masking a bad one – interferes with it. Li also believed that if a person's childlike heart-mind was 「obstructed,」 then whatever that person said would not come from the childlike heart-mind, and so would lack 「foundation」 and would not be truthful. This is because, 「when childlike heart-mind is obstructed, the Principles of the Way that come from outside the self become one's heart-mind." This is a problem because, in this case, everything a person encounters and does with their physical senses is of the Principles of the Way, and so is not arising spontaneously from the childlike heart-mind. Words  inspired by the Principles of the Way might sound nice or flow well, Li thought, but they wouldn't have anything to do with the person themselves. Their words would be 「phony」 and so the person themselves will be 「phony,」 and so too for everyone else until the whole world became like this, eventually leaving people unable to determine between 「good」 and 「bad."

Li felt that the childlike heart-mind's 「genuine feelings and desires,」 as well as the expression of these, could 「connect one to an abundant and powerful source」 which is too great for 「phony」 individuals to comprehend. Because of this, such individuals would turn away from opportunities to deepen their spiritual "vision," and face instead a life of comfort and 「blindness."

Li notes that early sages had so securely preserved their heart-minds that, when they read and studied the moral teachings of the Principles of the Way, they were able to protect their heart-minds. However, Li was concerned that many students would allow these same teachings to interfere with their heart-minds. This seems contradictory, given that it was the sages themselves who wrote the books of these teachings that, when read and studied, would cause the students to lose their childlike heart-mind. However, Li's justification for this reasoning is that the sages』 teachings were specific to each student, not necessarily to be used universally. He likened the teachings to medicine, not only in that each one is tailored specifically to the 「patient's」 needs, but also in that what helps one person might worsen the condition of another. For Li, writings such as the Analects and the Six Classics were not to be understood as the 「ultimate standard for thousands of generations,」 because, he proposed, these texts would not then be direct products of the childlike heart-mind.

Although Li does say that the childlike heart-mind cannot return once it is lost, the aforementioned metaphor of 「healing」 might suggest that anyone is capable of recovering their childlike heart-mind, though perhaps not in its original condition. This is partially because our phoniness is our own doing and our own decision, and therefore is not entirely out of our control. The metaphor also reminds people that this particular kind of 「health,」 the recovery of the heart-mind, is relative. Each individual person has certain things that they need to do in order to remain healthy, and these practices are different from person to person.

Ethics

Li did not believe in rule-based ethics, but in using one's innate and sensitive 「faculty of knowing」 (or the 「child-like heart-mind」) to read and evaluate each situation as it came and to determine from this which action to take. This does not mean that Li regarded all judgments as being entirely subjective. Consistent with his view that one should follow their heart-mind, their most genuine and spontaneous nature, he was highly critical of any actions that were taken or works which were written that did not come from this nature.

While Li advocates for spontaneity and 「immediate」 action 「without prior reflection or thought,」 this does not mean that he favors completely reckless behavior. For Li, such spontaneity was possible and favorable only because the subject had (ideally) worked to preserve their childlike heart-mind. Without an intact heart-mind, such spontaneous action could be mis- or uninformed.

Opinions on Fiction Writing

Many of Li Zhi's contemporaries regarded fiction with disdain; true to form, however, Li disagreed and held it in high esteem. He argued that the 「most exquisite literature in the world」 comes from the childlike heart-mind because, if something is written from this heart-mind, then nothing is obstructed and no one is 「forcing」 the 「structure」 or 「style」 of their writing. Therefore, if someone composes a written work of fiction that originates from their childlike heart-mind, then this work is indeed 「exquisite.」 He took issue with the more popular idea that 「good」 prose is that which is written in a 「classical」 style (such as from the 「pre-Qin period」). He claimed that all of the 「exquisite」 literature from past periods could not be seen through the lenses of their own preceding periods, and that they were notable because they were, indeed, originals. To Li, what defined the quality of certain literature was not the time in which it was written, but rather the faculty within its author from which it arose.

In fact, in general Li vehemently discouraged people from regarding 「ideas of antiquity」 as solid, 「unchanging」 truth without first critically examining them, as he believed truth to be 「context-dependent」 and, therefore, was subject to change with one's environmental variables. He did not believe that people should adhere to 「universal truths,」 since, in his particularist view, there likely were none.

The "Good Death"

Li Zhi once wrote to his friend Kong Ruogu regarding his own death, saying, 「Under no circumstances should you leave my bones for others to take care of." This is a reference to a passage of Kongzi's on what constitutes a 「good death." According to Kongzi, such a death is 「genuine in feeling」 (therefore not 「deceptive」), occurs with friends and loved ones around, and is 「supported by relations and rituals constructed by culture,」 not alone and away from people and social customs. The Xunzi also discusses what constitutes the 「good death,」 describing it as an event which is both 「genuine in feeling」 and 「social in nature." Though Li does not employ the importance of ritual, 「formality,」 「social relations,」 and 「reverence」 as part of his own ideas on the 「good death,」 he does incorporate some Confucian aspects of it, namely the qualities of genuineness and 「sincere generosity." This comes as no surprise given that Li believed that a necessary quality of a good life is the 「attendance to our genuine desires」. However, Li acknowledged the roles of culture and social relationships in people's daily lives, and so also believed that this single quality was not enough to secure a good life. In fact, during his periods of mourning, he followed the traditional customs, and appears to have meant it genuinely. For instance, when he returned home to bury both his grandfather and second eldest son, he expressed to Kong Ruogu his guilt over having delayed the burial of his great-grandparents by fifty years. Although this was due to insufficient funds rather than carelessness, Li insists that this is a 「crime」 for which 「nothing can atone,」 as it goes against "custom".

Among Confucians, disfigurement in death was considered to be unacceptable and something to be avoided. In fact, among Confucian families it was considered a filial duty to keep the body from disfigurement. However, Li writes as if unfazed by the idea, saying that, should he die 「on the road」 (already an unfavorable death by Confucian standards), he should like for his body to be cremated or thrown into a river.

Having been arrested in Tongzhou for behaving as a heretic and a traitor (such as by bathing with prostitutes and inviting high-class women to attend his various philosophical discussions), Li ultimately decides his own death as he awaits his trial. Still in prison, he slits his throat with a razor borrowed from a prison guard, though does not die until two days later. Whether this act was one of desperation or of courage has long been disputed, but Li's friend Yuan Zhongdao notes that, either way, Li's qi (「life energy」) must have been considerably robust in order to sustain him for those two days.

Toward the end of his life, Li claimed that his having taken the tonsure did not make him feel that he was living in a way that was 「superior」 compared to others, as this way of life was, in his words 「the only way." His reasons for having done this had nothing to do with its supposed 「desirability」 or with practicing the Dao, but with his aversion to being controlled. Believing that people are controlled their whole lives – and even after death (such as in burial) – Li chose to break free of this restraint by adopting the tonsure rather than returning home. He writes of this in his essay 「Testimony,」 assuring the reader that this decision was the 「genuine intention」 of his 「original heart,」 or his childlike heart-mind.

Gender Equality

Confucian feminism focused mainly on self-cultivation as a means of approaching patriarchal issues, primarily through 「reading classical texts, writing poetry, engaging in discourse and debate,」 and 「meditation」. Li Zhi felt that, because women are inherently just as capable as men are of achieving 「intellectual and spiritual development,」 men and women should both have 「opportunities」 for self-cultivation available to them.

Pauline Lee describes Li as a 「particularist」 in that he believes that anyone can 「work to achieve」 「moral knowledge,」 but also that all moral judgments are relative to their 「specific conditions and time." However, she notes that this does not mean that Li is content to leave women's problems of inequality as they are, as he argues against standard Confucian practices such as the 「cloistering of women」 in the home, or customs that denounced the remarrying of widows, or the overall subservience of women.

Chinese Confucian cosmology, describing not just the order of the universe but also the order of relationships between people (the latter mirroring and even influencing the former, and vice versa), was one particular area of Confucianism which Li attacked. This cosmology involved the 「elements」 yin and yang which are often associated with other opposing energies, including masculine and feminine. Lee argued that yin-yang relationships, at least by the third century, were 「hierarchical,」 with yin as yang』s secondary subordinate. While Li maintains the traditional Confucian idea of the cosmos as emanating from one original source, he sees this creation as 「cooperative,」 with yin and yang working together to produce the universe rather than one force being the initiator for the secondary force to follow. He also held the Confucian idea of the family and society as reflections of the cosmos (and vice versa), but again his view was more binary than monistic, believing there to be no hierarchy in creation and, therefore, no hierarchy in male-female or husband-wife relationships. Li also challenges the hierarchical notion of the five essential Confucian relationships (father-son, ruler-subject, husband-wife, old-young, and friend-friend), all of which, aside from friendship, were based on power imbalance. He does this by arguing in his letter 「Discussion on Husband and Wife」 that societal order is dependent upon the husband-wife relationship as its 「ultimate source,」 and so this particular relationship should be seen as one between friends who have willingly decided to work together.

Not surprisingly, Li had a more egalitarian view of gender relationships than did traditional Confucian thinkers, regarding such relationships as 「complementary." He saw men and women as intellectual and spiritual equals, with equal capabilities for self-cultivation in these areas. It is worth it to note that Li did not discuss gender equality in the area of moral development, though this may be due to the fact that, for much of Chinese history, women appeared to have superior moral capacities by nature.

Although the popular belief at the time was that women could not understand the Way due to their supposedly inherent 「shortsightedness,」 Li Zhi disagreed. To Li, someone who is shortsighted is concerned only with what happens within their lifetime, such as the events of their offspring and what happens to their physical body. A farsighted person, however, considers what is beyond that, 「transcending」 not only the body but also the 「superficial appearances of life and death」 while also turning their attention away from mindless chatter and prejudices and toward the teachings of the sages, which encouraged a more unbiased perspective.

Li argued that, although men and women are different, their vision is not; that is, there is no vision that is either 「male」 or 「female,」 as 「vision" in the way that Li meant it, is not gendered. This means that shortsightedness is not inherently female, nor is farsightedness inherently male. Li illustrates this point by describing a hypothetical situation in which there is someone with 「a woman's body and a man's vision,」 someone who is both female and not only values engaging in conversation of the 「transcendent,」 but also understands that attachment to the ever-changing things of the material world is not worthwhile. He makes reference to notable 「farsighted」 women of the past, such as Yi Jiang (King Wu's ninth minister) and Wen Mu (also known as Tai Si, King Wen's consort and a 「sage」 whose 「virtuous behavior」 set such a high standard that it 「rectified」 the customs of the southern regions).

Li Zhi asserts that it is only a shortsighted man who would anger at the idea of women being farsighted, and that a truly farsighted man would neither engage with nor desire the approval of shortsighted men (for, if he did, it would only make him one such shortsighted, 「small-minded」 man himself).

Literary works

Li was a notable author of the xiaopin, a form of short essay. His philosophical works included A Book to Burn and A Book to Keep (Hidden).

A Book to Burn and A Book to Keep (Hidden)

A Book to Burn is composed of Li's responses to questions from friends (「soul friends,」 he calls them) in which he offers criticism of what he considers to be mistakes of the contemporary scholars of the day. Li wanted to print this book because of the possibility that it would make its way to those who might be interested in his ideas. Though he feared being killed by dissenters for what he'd written, he was nevertheless optimistic that someone might read his work and understand what he meant.

Li also writes of the relationship between married couples in this text, describing 「loving-kindness」 as being particularly 「profound." He discusses how the intimacy that is cultivated within such a relationship extends beyond sex and even friendship by virtue of both parties having struggled and 「sacrificed」 together. He waxes poetic about his late wife, praising her 「feminine」 virtues, which, in Confucianism, referred to 「womanly virtue, womanly speech, womanly appearance, and womanly work."

A Book to Keep (Hidden) gives accounts of thousands of years of good and bad deeds from antiquity to the current age. By Li's own advice, it cannot be read by those who possess 「eyes of flesh」 (a Buddhist term indicating the 「most mundane form of vision」 characteristic of someone unenlightened).

生平

李贄于明世宗嘉靖六年（1527年11月19日）農曆十月廿六日出生于福建泉州府南門外。六世祖林駑是泉州巨商，從事遠洋貿易，乘船往來於泉州與忽魯模斯（今伊朗的阿巴斯港）之間，娶色目女為妻，改信伊斯蘭教。

李贄父親李鐘秀以教書為業，李贄七歲時便隨父親讀書、學習禮儀。自幼倔強，善于獨立思考，不受儒學傳統觀念束縛，具有強烈的反傳統理念。他在社會價值導向方面，批判重農抑商，揚商賈功績，倡導功利價值，符合明朝中後期資本主義萌芽的發展要求。

嘉靖三十年（1551年）中舉人，五年後，授河南共城縣教諭。嘉靖三十九年（1560年），擢南京國子監博士，數月後，父白齋公病故于泉州，回鄉守制。時值倭寇攻城，他帶領弟侄輩日夜登城擊柝巡守，與全城父老兵民同仇敵愾。

嘉靖四十二年（1563年）出任北京國子監博士。嘉靖四十五年（1566年），補北京禮部司務，浸淫陽明學、佛學。隆慶四年（1570年），轉任南京刑部員外郎。

萬曆五年（1577年），任雲南姚安府知府，三年後棄官，故人稱「李姚安」。

萬曆九年（1581年）春，應湖北黃安耿定理之邀，攜妻子女兒到耿的家鄉黃安天台書院講學論道，住耿定理家中充當門客而兼教師，但和耿定理做大官的哥哥耿定向意見衝突。定理死後，遷居麻城，住維摩庵，過著半僧半俗的「流寓」生活。後遷至麻城龍潭湖芝佛院，讀書著述近二十年。

萬曆十六年（1588年），剃髮為僧，雖身入空門，卻不受戒、不參加僧眾的念佛、誦經。他有潔癖，衣服一塵不染，經常掃地，以至「數人縛帚不給」。

萬曆十八年（1590年）其《藏書》在麻城刻印出版。萬曆二十年（1592年）作《童心說》，批點《西廂記》民間文學，刊印《卓吾評點水滸傳》。

萬曆二十五年（1597年）至二十八年（1600年），到山西、通州、濟寧、金陵遊歷。在濟寧、金陵曾兩次與利瑪竇見面，討論天主教與佛教教義。二十八年回到麻城。同年冬天，湖廣僉事馮應京以「維護風化」為名，指使歹徒燒毀龍湖芝佛院，又毀壞他預為藏骨的卒塔婆。李贄被迫避寓麻城東北商城縣黃檗山中。

萬曆二十九年（1601年），前御史馬經綸聞訊將李贄接到通州，住蓮花寺。

萬曆三十年（1602年），都察院左都御史溫純及都察院禮科給事中張德允，上疏奏劾李贄，明神宗見疏即下詔，以「敢倡亂道，惑世誣民」之罪，逮捕李贄下獄，著作被通令燒毀。入獄後，李贄聽說朝廷要押解他回原籍福建，感慨道：「我年七十有六，死耳，何以歸為？」又說：「衰病老朽，死得甚奇，真得死所矣。如何不死？」寫遺言詩曰：「志士不忘在溝壑，勇士不忘喪其元。我今不死更何待？願早一命歸黃泉！」

三月十五，呼侍者剃髮，奪其剃刀割喉，氣不絕者兩日，三月十六日（公曆5月7日）子時氣絕，享年76歲。東廠錦衣衛寫給皇帝的報告，稱李贄「不食而死」。馬經綸葬之通州，墓今猶存，在北京市通州區海子公園燃燈塔西側。

萬曆三十八年（1610年），李贄的學生汪可受，以及梅掌科、蘇侍御捐銀錢為李樹碑。據說「卓吾血流二日以歿，慘聞晉江，士庶甚閔，於晉江西崙作『溫陵先師』廟，頗奉香火，後毀於兵燹。」

李贄生有4子3女，除大女兒外，其他都不幸夭殤。

思想

李贄深受「陽明學」支流「泰州學派」影響，是羅汝芳學生，把王陽明與羅汝芳的學說推向極端，鼓倡狂禪最激烈。黃宗羲說：「李卓吾鼓倡狂禪，學者靡然從風。」針對當時官學和知識階層獨奉儒家程朱理學為權威的情況，貶斥程朱理學為僞道學，提出不能「以孔子之是非為是非」。朱國楨提及：「今日士風猖狂，實開于此。全不讀《四書》本經，而李氏《藏書》、《焚書》人挾一冊以為奇貨。壞人心，傷風化，天下之禍，未知所終也。」詩文多抨擊前七子、後七子複古之主張，認為《西廂記》、《水滸傳》就是「古今至文」。公安派三袁兄弟受其影響較深。

晚年頗好史學，據歷代正史纂《藏書》，又廣泛收集明代資料撰寫《續藏書》，對傳統史學觀點有所突破。李贄承認個人私慾，「私者，人之心也，人必有私而後其心乃見」。「天盡世道以交」，認為人與人之間的交換關係、商業交易合乎天理。

自述

李贄自稱「不信道，不信仙、釋，故見人則惡，見僧則惡，見道學先生則尤惡。」

在《自贊》一文中，他毫不掩飾自己的個性：

關于落髮為僧，在《與曾繼泉》一文中，李贄寫道：

坦然入獄：

遺言：

著作

• 《李氏藏書》六十八卷。明·萬曆二十七年（1599年）刻于金陵。

• 《李氏續藏書》二十七卷。明·萬曆三十七年（1609年）刻。

• 《史綱評要》三十六卷。明·萬曆四十一年（1613年）霞猗閣刻。

• 《李氏焚書》六卷。明·萬曆十八年（1590年）刻于麻城。

• 《李氏續焚書》五卷。明·萬曆四十六年（1618年）新安海陽虹玉齋刻。

• 《初潭集》十二卷、三十卷。明刻。

• 《卓吾老子三教妙述》（又稱《言善篇》）四集。明·萬曆四十年（1612年）宛陵劉遜之刻。

• 《李卓吾遺書》十二種二十三卷。明·繼志齋刻（包括《道古錄》二卷、《心經提綱》一卷、《觀音問》一卷、《老子解》一卷、《莊子解》二卷、《孔子參同》三卷、《墨子批選》二卷、《因果錄》三卷、《淨土訣》一卷、《暗然錄最》四卷、《三教品》一卷、《永慶答問》一卷）。

• 《李氏文集》十八卷。明刻。

• 《易因》二卷。明刻。

• 《李氏六書》六卷。明·萬曆四十五年（1617年）痂嗜行刻（包括《歷朝藏書》一卷、《皇明藏書》一卷、《焚書書答》一卷、《焚書雜述》一卷、《叢書匯》一卷、《說書》一卷）。

• 《陽明先生道學鈔》八卷。明·萬曆三十七年（1609年）武林繼錦堂刻。

• 《龍溪王先生文錄鈔》九卷。明·萬曆二十七年（1599年）刻。

• 《枕中十書》六卷。明·刻本（包括《精騎錄》、《筼窗筆記》、《賢奕賢》、《文字禪》、《異史》、《博識》、《尊重口》、《養生醍醐》、《理談》、《吟壇千秋訣》）。

• 《批評忠義水滸傳》100卷、100回。明容與堂刊、芥子園刊（另《批判忠義水滸傳全傳》121回，明·楊定見刻）。

• 《批點西廂真本》二卷、《批評紅拂記》二冊、《批評幽閨記》二卷、《批評洗紗記》二卷，明刻。

• 《評選三異人集》二十四卷。明·俞允諧刻（包括《方正學文集》十一卷、《傳狀》一卷、《于節暗奏疏》四卷、《文集》一卷、《詩集》一卷、《文集》一卷、《自著年譜》一卷、《傳狀》一卷）。

• 《讀升庵集》二十卷、《世說新語補》二十卷、《四書評》、《坡仙集》十六卷、 《九正易因》二卷、《李氏說書》八卷、《姑妄編》七卷、《李溫陵集》二十卷、《禪談》一卷、《龍湖閒話》一卷、《文字禪》四卷、《左德機緣》三卷、《李氏因果錄》三卷、《業報案》二卷，明刻。

《焚書》

《焚書》（意為不容于世，早晚必將付之一炬）是李贄最為著名且爭議最大的一部書，是他反程朱理學思想、政治、哲學、社會思想及耿介性格的集中體現。近來，更被評論界譽為「影響中國的百部書籍」之一。

萬曆四十六年（1618年），門人汪本鈳輯錄李贄遺文編成《續焚書》五卷。分《書匯》、《序匯》、《讀史匯》、《雜著匯》、《詩匯》。其中《題孔子像于芝佛院》最為膾炙人口。

影響

晚明文人中，李贄對社會影響最大。他提出「童心說」，強調真誠，鼓勵人根據直覺，表達內在真實的自我，對晚明藝術影響深遠。戲曲家湯顯祖和書畫家董其昌都與李贄交往，並贊賞其學說。湯顯祖認為，「奇士」的作品自然會出類拔萃，其說與李贄的「童心說」相似。

評論

褒

• 李廷機《祭李卓吾文》：「心胸廓八肱，識見洞千古。孑然置一身于太虛中，不染一塵，不礙一物，清淨無欲，先生有焉。蓋吾鄉士大夫未有如先生者，即海內如先生者亦少矣」。

• 池方顯《謁李卓吾墓》：「半生交宇內，緣乃在玄州。閩楚竟難得，佛儒俱不留。世人同喜怒，大道任恩仇。我亦尋知己，依依今未休。」

• 汪本鈳《續藏書》序：「先生一生無書不讀，無有懷而不吐。其無不讀也，若饑渴之于飲食，不至于飫足不已；其無不吐也，若茹物噎不下，不盡至于嘔出亦不已。以故一點攛自足天下萬世之是非，而一欬唾實關天下萬世之名教，不但如嬉笑怒罵盡成文章已也。蓋言語真切至到，文辭驚天動地，能令聾者聰，瞆者明，夢者覺，醒者醒，病者起，死者活，躁者靜，聒者結，腸冰者熱，心炎者冷，柴柵其中者自拔，倔強不降者亦無不意頫而心折焉。」

• 袁宗道：「不佞讀他人文字覺懣懣，讀翁片言隻語，輒精神百倍，豈因宿世耳根慣熟乎？雲中信使不斷，幸以近日偶筆頻寄，不佞如白家老婢，能讀亦能解也。」

• 袁宏道：「發揮天真自心，掃蕩酸腐之氣，慨然醒世，勃然通民。」

• 袁中道《李溫陵傳》：「……骨堅金石，氣薄雲天；言有觸而必吐，意無往而不伸。排搨勝己，跌宕王公，孔文舉調魏武若稚子，嵇叔夜視鍾會如奴隸。鳥巢可複，不改其鳳咮，鸞翮可鎩，不馴其龍性，斯所由焚芝鋤蕙，銜刀若盧者也。嗟乎！才太高，氣太豪……」

• 馮元仲《吊李卓吾先生墓詩》：「手闢洪蒙破混茫，浪翻古今是非場。通身是膽通身識，死後名多道益彰。」

• 許自昌《樗齋漫錄》：「（馮夢龍）酷愛李氏之學，奉為蓍蔡。」

• 吳虞《李卓吾別傳》：「張問達、王雅量能焚毀卓吾之書于一時，誣陷卓吾之身于一日……卓吾書盛行，咳唾間非卓吾不歡，几案間非卓吾不適，朝廷雖焚毀之，而士大夫則相與重鋟，且流傳于日本」。

• 宋恕以李贄為知音。1899年寫有四首《讀松陰<幽室文稿>》絕句，其中第三首為：「李氏微宗世莫傳，荒涼誰複問遺編，何期海外高人賞，從此卓吾萬萬年」

貶

• 顧憲成《束高景逸書》：「李卓吾大抵是人之非，非人之是，又以成敗為是非而已。學術到此，真是塗炭，惟有仰屋竊嘆而已！如何如何！」

• 《四庫全書目錄提要》：「贄非聖無法，敢為異論。雖以妖言逮治，懼而自到，而焦竑等盛相推重，頗榮眾聽，遂使鄉塾陋儒，翕然尊信，至今為人心風俗之害。故其人可誅，其書可毀，而仍存其目，以明正其名教之罪人，誣民之邪說。」

• 《四庫全書總目·別史類存目》：「贄書皆狂悖乖謬，非聖無法，惟此書抨擊孔子，另立褒貶，凡千古相傳之善惡，無不顛倒易位，尤以罪不容誅者。其書可毀，其名亦不足以污簡牘，特以贄大言欺世，至今鄉曲陋儒，震其虛名，如置之不論恐貽害人心，故特存其目，以深曝其罪。」

其他觀點

• 沈瓚在《近事叢殘》中說：（李贄）「好為驚世駭俗之論、務反宋儒道學之說。……儒釋從之者幾千萬人。其學以解脫直截為宗，少年高曠豪舉之士，多樂慕之。後學如狂，不但儒教潰防，即釋宗繩檢，亦多所清棄。」

• 沈鐵《李卓吾傳》說：「載贄再往白門（南京），而焦竑以翰林家居，尋訪舊盟，南都士更靡然向之。登壇說法，傾動大江南北。北通州馬經綸以御史謫籍，延載贄抵舍，焚香執弟子禮、而燕冀人士望風禮拜尤盛。」

• 李敖在《李敖快意恩仇錄》裡寫道：「人物中我偏好『性格巨星』式，像東方朔、像李贄、像金聖歎、像汪中、像狄阿傑尼斯（Diogenes）、像伏爾泰、像斯威夫特（Swift）、像蕭伯納、像巴頓將軍（Gen.George Patton），我喜歡他們的鋒利和那股表現鋒利的激情。」

• 黃仁宇在《萬曆十五年》的最後一章專論李贄說：「李贄的悲觀不僅屬於個人，也屬於他所生活的時代。傳統的政治已經凝固 ，類似宗教改革或者文藝復興的新生命無法在這樣的環境中孕育。社會環境把個人理智上的自由壓縮在極小的限度之內，人的廉潔和誠信，也只能長為灌木，不能形成叢林。」

近代

李贄的著述，自明朝以來，先後數次被禁毀，民間盜印、甚至假託其文章者不絕，門人汪本鈳說：「（卓吾）一死而書益傳，名益重……漸至今日，坊間一切戲劇淫謔刻本批點，動曰卓吾先生。」

值得一提的是，在1974年的批林批孔運動中，李贄被當作尊法反儒的英雄，被中共加以推崇，他的著作被劃歸「法家」。

傳記、事跡輯錄

• 卓吾論略（《焚書》）

• 自贊（《焚書》）

• 感慨平生（《焚書》）

• 袁中道：李溫陵傳（《珂雪齋近集文鈔》）

• 汪可受：卓吾老子墓碑（《畿輔通志》）

• 沈鈇：李卓吾傳（《閩書》）

• 何喬遠：李贄傳（《閩書》）

• 錢謙益：卓吾先生李贄（《列朝詩集》）

• 談遷：李贄傳（《國榷》）

• 查繼佐：李贄、袁黃（《罪惟錄》）

• 傅繼鱗：李贄傳（《明書·異教傳》）

• 王鴻緒：李贄（《明史稿》）

• 彭際清：李卓吾傳（《居士傳》）

• 《麻城縣誌》：李贄傳

• 《泉州府志》：李贄傳

• 《福建通志》：李贄傳

• 《雲南通志》：李贄傳

• 吳虞：《明李卓吾別傳》

• 焦竑：《澹園集》

• 汪本鈳：卓吾先師告文

• 沈德符：《萬曆野獲編》

• 朱國楨：《湧幢小品》

• 沈瓚：《近事叢殘》

• 謝肇淛：《五雜俎》

• 劉侗、于奕正：《帝京景物略》

• 黃宗羲：《明儒學案》

• 顧炎武：《日知錄》

• 《明實錄》

• 《李卓吾年譜》（鈴木虎雄 著）

• 《林李宗譜》

注釋