Keywords: “New Identity”; Only Learning; Like to hide; Confucianism and Buddhism Association and the Association of Confucianism and Buddhism Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association and the Association” (14FZX035).

In modern times, it is undoubtedly a change of development due to widespread criticism. In the theoretical negotiations between learning and sensibility, the two cases attracted attention: one is a discussion that covers the real problems of “The Great Faith” and the other is a discussion induced by Xiong Shili’s “New sensibility”. The former concerns that the theory of Chinese sectarianism conforms to the law and that Chinese sects are hiding the sect’s legitimacy and no; the latter concerns that the law-Xuanzang only recognizes the authenticity and no, and the Xuanzang only recognizes the correctness and no theory. From the perspective of thinking about history, the two cases have logical interfering relationships. If the “Big Up Faith” respected by the Chinese Cultivational Teaching, which is regarded as a warning, the correct position of the Chinese Cultivational Teaching will be questioned, which means that Xuanzang’s only learning is authentic, and vice versa. But “New Identity” just asked the world at this time, and using the Identity shell to perform the true reality of the original heart, even if it is unintentionally aroused dissatisfaction among the internal colleges, the dispute in “New Identity” was naturally included in the dispute in “The Great Awakening of Faith”. Not only this, “New Literature””The Discussion” talks about Confucianism and Buddhism, and also transformed the disputes that seemed to be part of modern Buddhism into conflicts between Confucianism and Buddhism, adding a common divisive plot to the negotiations between Confucianism and Buddhism in modern times.

1. The problem of “Breaking the New Identity” and “Breaking the New Identity”

Liu Dingzhi believed that Xiong Shili’s understanding of the only learning “take it for the smooth ones, and abandon it for the evil ones, and no ones only give it back, and then revisited it, so he did not have the worldly protection method after thousands of loads, and was undetected” (1), which was “the meaning of the two schools of Confucianism and Taoism in the Middle Kingdom, Ye Qiuguan: “? “, and also learn from the conversations of Indian heretics” (2). Liu Dingrule decided to oppose this complex foreigners and scholars’ learning to integrate Buddhism and wantonly reform the universal practice of learning only. More importantly, Liu Dingzhi believed that the “New Identity Discussion” destroyed the correct nature of the Dharma-Identity Discussion”, so the “Destroy the “New Identity Discussion”” had to be written.

The “Break the New Personal Discussion” criticizes Xiong Shili’s “New Personal Discussion” from four aspects: breaking the one-centric theory, breaking the homologous theory of sentient beings, breaking the universe’s theory, and breaking the reverse and seeking reality. Among them, the first three parts are a whole, which is an important one-central theory thinking that criticizes Xiong Shili, and breaks the counter-seeks the practical evidence to explain the inability of its theory from the perspective of kung fu cultivation. In fact, the decision-making authority is mainly based on the method of judging and rebelling. For example, the reaction to the homologous origin of all living beings and the universe is based on Xiong’s right and example, the examples will lead to the fact that it cannot be as good as its own words, and its own words are inconsistent. For example, in destruction of the same origin of all sentient beings, “Everyone has gained the first level of effectiveness, why does heaven get it but not earth and people just by becoming heaven? Why does it even get it but not Liuhe and people just by becoming things but not Liuhe?” (3) There are many such reversals. Judging from these reflections, Liu’s rightThe metaphysical mono-analysis is ambiguous, and his understanding of the concept of the body is also confused with many misunderstandings, and the uni-analysis in philosophy is a direct reason that prompted Xiong Shili to immediately write an article “Breaking the “Breaking the New and Only Identity””.

In addition, Liu Dingzhi’s criticism of Xiong Shili’s reverse-seeking statement also lacks strength. For example, when Xiong Shili said that once he seeks his original intention and conscience, the living organism will be filled with it. Natural things are all in line with heaven, and at the same time he said that he is in the situation of crowds of noisy and heat and disease-breaking situation. Liu Ding’s authority remarks: “Is it not the unsolute nature of things, and the unsolute behavior of psychology?” (4) The unsolute relationship between Xiong Shili’s disease and anti-breaking situation is obviously a confusion of philosophical discussion and real life. There is also such a misunderstanding in the rest of the ways of breaking one and one being able to get the difference. It can be seen that Liu Ding’s right is eliminated in each episode until the remaining 5 contestants challenged the five “New Identity Stories” and were suspected of wanton cutting.

Liu Dingzhi made a positive and negative response to the “New Identity Discussion” that the law only establishes true nature as the body, and also establishes a seed as the body. Liu Dingzhi made a positive and negative response to the problem of how the treatments of the two bodies are related. First, the Wind Ten Power itself takes one closing and one proof as the true nature, and takes the constant turning effect as the main body. True nature is the original body called by the Wind Ten Power, and the True nature arises thousands of methods as the cause, and it actually forms the True nature in the discussion. But Xiong Shili uses the true nature as the cause to generate all kinds of Dharma, which is the original meaning of the cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause to cause