Founder Xuefeng's Articles
|
This post was edited by OasisRadiance at 2026-5-22 19:43 Spiritual Narcissism Scam: Why You Can’t Grow Lotuses on Ruins and the Fallacy of Pseudo-Zen: Purging the Malignant Influence of Lanzhou (Part VI) Let us first examine what else Lanzhou Grass babbled in her article, *“The Tao Lies in Non-Attachment, the Boat Navigates with Measure.”* She claimed: *“The true meaning of Zen lies in 'the ordinary mind is the Tao.' One can practice Zen in the bustling marketplace, and one can realize the Tao in a thatched hut.”* *“One can grow lotus flowers on ruins.”* And she warned to *“avoid the trap of spiritual narcissism and spiritual superiority: dismissing Civilization 2.0 as ‘impoverished, backward, and totalitarian’ is, in reality, a binary opposition.”* What on earth is she talking about? She is implying that Lifechanyuan dismisses Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian," thereby treating Civilization 2.0 and Civilization 3.0 as two mutually incompatible and contradictory opposites. According to her, even if Civilization 2.0 is a ruin, one can still grow lotuses on ruins. She suggests that one must look at Civilization 2.0 with an "ordinary mind," for that is the true Tao. She believes one can practice Zen in the smoke and fire of lower-class marketplace life and realize the Tao in remote, impoverished areas. Thus, since people can comprehend Zen, realize the Tao, and attain the Tao just the same within Civilization 2.0, why bother advocating for Civilization 3.0 at all? Within just a few short sentences, she not only fabricates facts and displays sheer ignorance, but also attempts to summon the soul of savagery and backwardness. You claim that Lifechanyuan dismisses Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian." Please produce the evidence! When, where, and in which article did Xuefeng ever dismiss Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian"? Your talent for fabricating facts out of thin air is truly remarkable! Can lotus flowers actually grow on ruins? Have you ever planted one? Have you ever succeeded? A "ruin" refers to an empty space or a pile of rubble left behind after a city, house, or wall has been destroyed. A lotus is an aquatic plant; for a lotus to grow, it must simultaneously possess abundant water, thick bottom mud, and intense sunlight. Therefore, it is extremely, extraordinarily difficult for a lotus to ever grow on ruins. Lanzhou Grass, you are profoundly ignorant! Deconstructing the "Ordinary Mind" Illusion and Toxic Positivity Is the "ordinary mind" truly the Tao? Is your mind, Lanzhou Grass, an ordinary mind? Is my mind, Xuefeng, an ordinary mind? Are the minds of the Chanyuan Grasses and the common people of the world ordinary minds? If you say no, then please tell me: whose mind is ordinary, and where can one find an ordinary mind? If you say yes, meaning your mind is the Tao, my mind is the Tao, and the minds of all common people are the Tao, then why do you even bother talking and preaching about the Tao? Wouldn't everyone just following their whims and desires be a direct manifestation of and compliance with the Tao? What exactly is an "ordinary mind"? Can you explain it? Can you clarify it? *"One can practice Zen in the marketplace, and realize the Tao in a thatched hut."* Wow, what a profoundly deep truth! Why don't you go give a speech at Buddhist monasteries and Taoist temples? Tell those who chant sutras, worship Buddha, practice Zen, and sit in meditation to pack up and go to the bustling marketplaces and thatched huts. Tell them to tear down the temples and monasteries! After all, since the marketplace and thatched huts are perfectly fine for practicing Zen and realizing the Tao, why waste human and material resources building monasteries and temples? Why should disciples travel thousands of miles to monasteries when they could just honestly realize the Tao in marketplaces and thatched huts? Go ahead! Go to temples, monasteries, churches, and mosques to preach your theory that *"the marketplace is for Zen and thatched huts are for the Tao."* As long as you aren't kicked out as a psychotic lunatic, you will surely become a grand master of the Tao. The Fallacy of Rationality vs. Spirituality: Opening the Divine Perception Lanzhou Grass warns us to *“avoid the trap of spiritual superiority.”* I must ask: is spiritual excellence a trap? If spiritual superiority is a trap, then does that mean rational superiority is a smooth, safe plain? Do you even understand what spirituality is? When we praise a dog by saying, "This dog really has spirituality," or criticize it by saying, "This dog lacks spirituality," do you know what that means? Without spirituality, or lacking spirituality, can a human being possess sharp perception, observation, insight, and responsiveness? Without spirituality or lacking spirituality, can one practice Zen and realize the Tao? Can you read the Wordless Heavenly Book by relying solely on cold rationality? Can you realize the Tao by relying on rationality alone? Without relying on spiritual excellence and superiority, can the divine perception (spiritual sense) ever be unlocked? If your divine perception remains closed, can you ever see the Buddha or the Greatest Creator by relying merely on your visual, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and auditory senses? Without divine perception, do you expect to be like the blind men touching an elephant to guess its shape? I tell you, viewing spiritual excellence as a trap is an outright desecration of spirituality. Do you even know where the ultimate source of spirituality comes from? This behavior of yours is called being monstrously rebellious. However, discussing spirituality with a person like you who possesses no spirituality is like playing the lute to a cow—it is like discussing colors with the blind, or describing bird songs to the deaf. The "Dog Feces" Experiment: Eradicating Pseudo-Intellectual Counter-Arguments Lanzhou Grass says: *“Dismissing Civilization 2.0 as ‘impoverished, backward, and totalitarian’ is, in reality, a binary opposition.”* Since explaining principles to Lanzhou Grass is useless because she cannot comprehend them anyway, let’s just conduct a live experiment. Suppose you invite a dozen guests to dinner. The dining table is filled with exotic delicacies, but right in the center, you also place a plate of dog feces. The moment a guest complains that the dog feces smell too foul and asks you to take it away, you immediately snap at them and shout fiercely: “You are trapped in a binary opposition!” Let’s see how well your theory of "non-binary opposition" works out for you in real life. Within just a few short sentences, Lanzhou Grass has packed in so many ignorant ravings and cognitive distortions that completely violate common sense. Alas! For a living "human" to live to such a pathetic state, she might as well just... forget it. Search Tags: Spiritual Narcissism, Pseudo Zen, Rationality vs Spirituality, Toxic Positivity, Binary Opposition, Spiritual Superiority Trap, Lifechanyuan Xuefeng, Path to Civilization 3.0 A lotus flower growing in water and rich mud under sunlight — representing Xuefeng's argument that ... 
Original Text： [Xuefeng Corpus · Satires]Purging the Malignant Influence of Lanzhou Grass (Part VI) Xuefeng Let us first look at what else Lanzhou Grass said in her article, “The Tao Lies in Non-Attachment, the Boat Navigates with Measure.” She said: “The true meaning of Zen lies in 'the ordinary mind is the Tao.' The marketplace is for practicing Zen, and thatched huts are for realizing the Tao.” “One can grow lotus flowers on ruins.” “Avoid the trap of spiritual superiority: dismissing Civilization 2.0 as ‘impoverished, backward, and totalitarian’ is, in reality, a binary opposition.” What on earth is she talking about? She is saying that your Lifechanyuan dismisses Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian," thereby viewing Civilization 2.0 and Civilization 3.0 as two mutually incompatible and contradictory opposites. According to her, even if Civilization 2.0 is a ruin, one can still grow lotuses on ruins; one must look at Civilization 2.0 with an ordinary mind, for that is the true Tao. She thinks one can practice Zen in the smoke and fire of lower-class marketplace life and realize the Tao in remote, impoverished areas. Since people can practice Zen, comprehend the Tao, and attain the Tao just the same within Civilization 2.0, why bother advocating for Civilization 3.0 at all? Within just a few short sentences, she not only fabricates facts and displays sheer ignorance, but also attempts to summon the soul of savagery and backwardness. You claim that Lifechanyuan dismisses Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian." Please produce the evidence! When, where, and in which article did Xuefeng ever dismiss Civilization 2.0 as "impoverished, backward, and totalitarian"? Your talent for fabricating facts out of thin air is truly remarkable! Can lotus flowers be grown on ruins? Have you ever planted one? Have you ever succeeded? A "ruin" refers to an empty space or a pile of rubble left behind after a city, house, or wall has been destroyed. A lotus is an aquatic plant; for a lotus to grow, it must simultaneously possess abundant water, thick bottom mud, and intense sunlight. Therefore, it is extremely, extraordinarily difficult for a lotus to ever be grown on ruins. Lanzhou Grass, you are profoundly ignorant! Is the "ordinary mind" truly the Tao? Is your mind, Lanzhou Grass, an ordinary mind? Is my mind, Xuefeng, an ordinary mind? Are the minds of the Chanyuan Grasses and the common people of the world ordinary minds? If you say no, then please tell me: whose mind is ordinary, and where can one find an ordinary mind? If you say yes, meaning your mind is the Tao, my mind is the Tao, and the minds of all common people are the Tao, then why do you even bother talking and preaching about the Tao? Wouldn't everyone just following their whims and desires be a direct manifestation of and compliance with the Tao? What exactly is an "ordinary mind"? Can you explain it? Can you clarify it? “The marketplace is for practicing Zen, and thatched huts are for realizing the Tao.” Wow, what a profoundly deep truth! Why don't you go give a speech at Buddhist monasteries and Taoist temples? Tell those who chant sutras and worship Buddha in monasteries, and those who practice Zen and sit in meditation in temples, to go to the marketplaces and thatched huts. Tell them to tear down the temples and monasteries! After all, since the marketplaces and thatched huts are perfectly fine for practicing Zen and realizing the Tao, why waste human and material resources building monasteries and temples? Why should disciples travel thousands of miles to monasteries and temples when they could just honestly realize the Tao in marketplaces and thatched huts? Go ahead! Go to temples, monasteries, churches, and mosques to preach your theory that “the marketplace is for practicing Zen and thatched huts are for realizing the Tao.” As long as you aren't kicked out as a psychotic lunatic, you will surely become a grand master who has attained the Tao. Lanzhou Grass warns us to “avoid the trap of spiritual superiority.” I must ask: is spiritual superiority a trap? If spiritual superiority is a trap, then does that mean rational superiority is a smooth, safe plain, right? Do you even understand what spirituality is? When we praise a dog by saying, "This dog really has spirituality," or criticize it by saying, "This dog lacks spirituality," do you know what that means? Without spirituality, or lacking spirituality, can a human being possess sharp perception, observation, insight, and responsiveness? Without spirituality or lacking spirituality, can one practice Zen and realize the Tao? Can you read the Wordless Heavenly Book by relying solely on cold rationality? Can you realize the Tao by relying on rationality alone? Without relying on spiritual superiority, can the divine perception ever be unlocked? If your divine perception remains closed, can you ever see the Buddha or the Greatest Creator by relying merely on your visual, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and auditory senses? Without divine perception, do you expect to be like the blind men touching an elephant to guess its shape? I tell you, viewing spiritual superiority as a trap is an outright desecration of spirituality. Do you even know where the ultimate source of spirituality comes from? This behavior of yours is called being monstrously rebellious. However, discussing spirituality with a person like you who possesses no spirituality is like playing the lute to a cow—it is like discussing colors with the blind, or describing bird songs to the deaf. Lanzhou Grass says: “Dismissing Civilization 2.0 as ‘impoverished, backward, and totalitarian’ is, in reality, a binary opposition.” Since explaining principles to Lanzhou Grass is useless because she cannot comprehend them anyway, let’s just conduct an experiment. Suppose you invite a dozen guests to dinner. The dining table is filled with exotic delicacies, but right in the center, you also place a plate of dog feces. The moment a guest complains that the dog feces smell too foul and asks you to take it away, you immediately snap at them and shout fiercely: “You are trapped in a binary opposition!” Let’s see how well your theory of "non-binary opposition" works out for you. Within just a few short sentences, Lanzhou Grass has packed in so many ignorant ravings and cognitions that completely violate common sense. Alas! For a living "human" to live to such a pathetic state, she might as well just... forget it. 2026-05-11
|
Forum:
Founder Xuefeng's Articles
