(Clearwisdom.net) Having read the article "What is True Kindness (Shan)," I often used "true kindness" as a reason for pointing out the shortcomings of others. When a practitioner would not listen to me, I would use this as an excuse and say that I truly acted for his sake and that I was being responsible to him. How could he refuse to accept what I said? Although the tone in what I said might not have been that kind, my heart was good. How could he not understand this?

I had kept feeling this way until one day, at an experience-sharing meeting, one practitioner said, "In the past, when I saw a practitioner's shortcomings, I would immediately point them out, thinking that I was being truly kind to him. Now I don't think this way any more. If I were truly being selfless, I would choose an appropriate occasion to talk to him, not just to express what I think, but to truly be responsible to him." Hearing this, I suddenly awoke with a start. Indeed, I always said "I'm acting for the wellbeing of others," but was I truly being selfless? Did I truly not have the intent, however slight, to defend my own ideas? Was it really that others' understandings were not in accordance with Fa, or were they simply not in agreement with mine?

Teacher said in his article "Sober-Minded:" "It is time to make a few remarks on the current methods of work employed by assistance-center coordinators in different regions. It is correct to implement the requirements of the Research Society, but you should mind the way you do it. I often say that if all a person wants is the well-being of others, and if this is without the slightest personal motivation or personal understanding, what he says will move the listener to tears."

Why is it that what I thought was for the well-being of others not only failed to move the listener to tears, but also led to negative results? I thought about this again and again after calming my mind, and in the end, I came to understand that my so-called "for the well being of others" had in fact covered up my own hidden attachments. When I was judging others by my own notions, I had already added into the judgment my own understanding, and this understanding might not be on the basis of the Fa. How, then, could it bring good results when my thoughts carried the intention to protect something of myself?

Furthermore, what is, truly, "for the well-being of others?" It certainly does not mean to defend ones own interests and understandings. As one practitioner said in an article, "When a large building is about to collapse, what is the use of decorating one's own room, however beautiful it may be?" Indeed, if we truly take someone's wellbeing to heart, then we must first of all take care of the whole building instead of trying to decorate his small room.

Dafa has created everything in the universe, and only by safeguarding the principles of the universe can we say that we are truly acting for the wellbeing of others and for all the beings in the universe. Similarly, when we tell people that "good will be rewarded with good, and evil will be met with evil," some people may not accept this for the time being. However, we are truly thinking of them, because we are telling them the principles of this level, a fact that is truly beneficial for their lives.

Teacher said, "'Tathagata' is what humans call someone who's come with the truth and the power to do what he wants, whereas real Buddhas are guardians of the cosmos and are responsible for all righteous elements in the cosmos." [From "Speech by Master Li Hongzhi at the Western US Cultivation Experience-Sharing Conference of Falun Dafa"] My understanding is that Buddha is kind and merciful, not just simply nice to any particular person or any particular life; instead, he is being responsible to the principles of the universe. Isn't this what being kind to all living beings in the universe is about?