(Clearwisdom.net) A local person who enlightened along an evil way after July 20, 1999, affected many practitioners for several years. In view of this situation, we wrote an article to expose him and submitted it to Clearwisdom, but the article was not published. After discussing this with fellow practitioners, I feel that the reason for this is related to our own hearts.
First, our intentions were impure. This was reflected in how we organized and wrote the article. Actually, when we write an article, it is necessary to explain the matter or the Fa principle that we have enlightened to as clearly and as thoroughly as possible. Our thinking should be focused on the Fa, the whole body, fellow practitioners, and all beings, not on whether or not the article gets published.
Second, what is the standard? After submitting the article, many fellow practitioners were hoping that it would be published quickly so that it would be easier for us to help those who enlightened along an evil way or had misunderstandings, because when they were shown the article they would have no argument.
Master said that, on major issues, practitioners should refer to Clearwisdom. Clearwisdom is a platform where we exchange ideas, so the published articles certainly won't have issues regarding their general orientation. However, for many reasons, it is impossible that every article that is published is without problems. Just like a practitioner said, whether Clearwisdom publishes the article or not is one thing, but we should have the Fa in our hearts, and we should have our own standard. I believe that if Clearwisdom had published our article, it would no doubt have helped us in a big way, but that would only have been of assistance to us. To truly help a fellow practitioner return to the right path, we must help him understand from the Fa's standpoint, because only after enlightening to the Fa can he truly become sober-minded. We all can explain the content or the reasoning in the article even more comprehensively or thoroughly than the article itself does, so why can't we explain it face-to-face and instead have to wait for Clearwisdom to publish it? If everyone places his or her hopes on the publication of this article or regards this matter as very important, it is like he or she is accepting and depending upon Clearwisdom, not the Fa. Originally it was because those practitioners did not solidly study the Fa and had too many human thoughts that they enlightened along an evil way or became confused. We must try to find a solution to enable them to return to the Fa.
On the other hand, there are practitioners who are willing to listen to only a specific person. Even if another person says the same thing or has the same reasoning, they will only accept it if this specific person says it. Those who are like that should look inside and ask, "Why don't the others accept me?" or "Why do the others accept me?" The person who is addressed should also think about it and ask if what they are accepting is the Fa or this specific person. Master has explained it thoroughly in Fa lectures many times, in particular in the video, "Fa Teaching Given to the Australian Practitioners." Fellow practitioners should study it again carefully.
Certainly, in order to help the practitioners who strayed, as long as the method is righteous, we should use it, but the key is that we cannot have attachments. Once we have attachments we will easily be taken advantage of. If we are able to eliminate our concerns for whether Clearwisdom publishes the article or not, or wait patiently for its publication and just do what we should do, doing it firmly, steadfastly, scrupulously, and completely, then that is validating the Fa with righteous thoughts.