Book of learning: Answer to Lu Yuanjing's book (13);

Lai Shu Yun said: "Buddha's thoughts are often mentioned again. Is it better than Mencius' so-called "everything must happen" and Master's so-called "conscience"? It means "always exist", always remember, always know and always save? When this idea is put forward, there must be a way to do it when it comes to things. However, I'm afraid that the time will be interrupted because I don't mention this idea much and put it down much. The idea of letting go is mostly because of selfish desires and polite actions, and suddenly wake up and then mention it. Between letting go and not mentioning, I feel confused and unconscious. Now I want to be good and bright, and I often can't let go. what can I do? If you just keep talking about it, is that okay? Is it more energy-saving if you refrain from constantly mentioning it? Although it is often talked about, I am afraid that the merits of forbearance will be lost without it: if the merits of forbearance are added, it will be a matter of "thinking it over", and it is better to be really good. what can I do? "

Abstinence from fear of treatment is a constant effort, that is, "something will happen", so there are two evils! What this section asks is self-evident in the previous paragraph, but in the end it is left to fend for itself, confusing the audience and being suspected of "unfinished nature". Everyone is selfish and will get sick, so there is no doubt about getting rid of this disease.

The general idea is:

Lu Yuanjing wrote: Buddhists "always put forward ideas" (remember when an idea just came into being? This practice has two functions: first, treat your heart sincerely, because the feelings at this time are the true reflection of your heart; Second, give full play to the role of reflection. Looking back at the original situation is a reflection. ), which is similar to what Mencius said, "Everything happens for a reason". Are these the same as your "conscience"? Is it the same as what you said "always remember, always know and always keep"? When the idea first came into being, the world and things outside the body followed, and there must be countermeasures. I'm worried that when these thoughts are mentioned less and put down more, kung fu will be interrupted. Thoughts disappear because they are put down, mostly from inner selfish desires and external interference, and then they suddenly realize and get up again. Between putting down and lifting up, I can't feel the darkness and clutter inside. Now, if you want to be accurate and understand every day, you often stick to it. Is there any good way to use it? Is it all kung fu to keep talking? Or, should introspection and restraint be added to the constant mention? Even if you don't let go every day, if you don't add the power to restrain fear, I'm afraid it's hard to get rid of selfish desires; If you add the effort to guard against fear, you are doing something "thought out", which is not the result that "true colors" should have. What should I do?

Wang Yangming said that the treatment of abstinence from terrorism is a process of continuous efforts, that is, "there must be something", which is one thing, not two things. The problems you mentioned in this letter have been made clear to you in the last letter, which are caused by your own confusion and fragmentation, and there is also the doubt that "it is not the result that' true colors' should have." These are all questions about your selfishness and future. If we get rid of this question, there will be no such doubt.

Lu Cheng's problem is that he is so obsessed with his inner thoughts that he completely opposes his inner thoughts and his external manifestations, that is, "things come from things" and even fears "things come from things".

There is a passage in Hegel's Little Logic (translated by He Lin): On the one hand, ideas or thoughts are not just hidden in our minds, and ideas are generally not so weak that their own realization depends on people's wishes. On the contrary, the idea is completely practical and realistic. On the other hand, the reality is not as dirty and unreasonable as those blind and simple-minded practitioners think. Reality is different from pure phenomenon. First of all, as the unity of internal and external, it is not in a position of opposition to reason, but completely reasonable. Anything unreasonable, that is, because it is unreasonable, cannot be regarded as reality.

I don't know if it's right. Write it down.