How to Treat Others' Words

By a Western practitioner

Master recently said in “Fa Teaching Given at the 2014 San Francisco Fa Conference”:

"When you don’t trust one another and aren’t truthful in what you say, and no one can take any criticism or look inside, then of course things are complicated. So what kind of a media company are you? And what are you people doing? Cultivating? [You have] such strong attachments! Be it the TV station, the Epoch Times, or other media companies, from now on, change the state you are in. You are not acting like cultivators! I brought up these matters long ago. When are you going to do something about it? When are you going to do something about it? Time is running out."

A few days ago, after visiting an elderly relative, some Fa principles became clearer to me, at my level.

A relative of mine is over 90 years old, and suffering from dementia. For example, she may say that she talked to someone yesterday, while it had actually been a year ago. She may tell me the same story every time I visit, or even several times during the same visit. She tends to merge two different things that happened into one, and she may think one person did something, when it was actually someone else, etc.

Though she is aware that her memory is not what it used to be, she isn't aware of the extent of the deterioration, and each time she tells me something, she is sure it is so, and that it's the first time she is telling it to me.

During my last visit, she asked me, as always, "How's your business coming along?" (despite that in a recent visit she asked the same question and was answered). She then began a ten-minute monologue listing all the things I've done wrong for the past ten years, and that time waits for no one.

Even when she was clearheaded, she was a stubborn person, not to mention now. So I just sat quietly and listened. When she asked for my reply, I just told her that I'm listening attentively and will really think it over - which I truly meant. After she finished her speech, she relaxed and we talked about something else.

On the surface, there is no reason to seriously consider anything she says. She lives in "her own world," where everything is jumbled, and not entirely related to reality.

But, when I quietly listened to her, without paying attention to who was saying the words, from what motive, or whether she knows what she is talking about, I managed to clearly see that some of her points do indeed point to my shortcomings, while some others are irrelevant and just words.

Master said in “Teaching the Fa in the City of Los Angeles” (2006):

"You must get to the point where you are able to take criticism, regardless of who it's from. If there is truth to it you correct yourself, and if not, you are mindful of it. If you can stay unruffled while being criticized or chided, you are improving."

For instance, it's true that many decisions I made over the past decade were wrong, and I need to check that I've learned the right and positive lessons, and that I'm now implementing them. It's further true that I have not cherished my time here on this Earth.

Looking back, there were times when I wasn't sure of the effectiveness of what I was doing, and it drove me to despair and to waste time. Despite feeling regret about it, I still waste time today. These two things are directly related to what I'm cultivating at the moment.

Looking Inside Further and Lessons Learned

1) Upon reflection, it seems to me that all people are like my relative, even if they don't have dementia. They have no idea about their lives, they live in delusion, connect unrelated things, and make wrong deductions, etc. I shouldn't overthink their words, and should have more compassion.

Master said in “Teaching the Fa in San Francisco,” 2005:

"You should remember that your righteous thoughts can change ordinary people and that you are not to be directed by them. If ordinary people say something or interfere with you, don't take it to heart, and just do what you need to do. The sources of human thoughts are very complicated, and in many cases it is people's notions talking, not their true thoughts or their true beings. So the things they say are often specious and not what they mean. They forget the things they just said right after saying them. They don't even take their own remarks seriously, so why would you? Don't worry about what they say, [but] every word that you say is like a thunderclap to them."

2) As cultivators, we are aware of higher truths and realms. But these are also limited. So no matter how much a fellow cultivator is sure of something, the Fa is the only criterion. More importantly, no matter how sure or insistent I am on my understanding, it is limited. After all, I also live in delusion.

Master says in Zhuan Falun, Lecture Six, “The Mentality of Showing Off”:

"A practitioner who has developed gong and reached the state of Unlocking Gong or truly enlightened should not take himself to be someone special. What he has seen are things limited to his own level. His cultivation has reached this level, because his enlightenment ability, xinxing standard, and wisdom have reached this level. With regard to things at higher levels, therefore, he might be in disbelief. Precisely because he does not believe them, he thinks that what he sees is absolute and that there are only these things. That is way off, because this person’s level is just here."

In my understanding, this is exactly also an omission of the old forces, and one of the reasons that caused them, level after level, to act vainly and to cause extensive damage to sentient beings. If I act like them, aren't I helping them, instead of helping Master rectify the Fa?

Master said in “What Does it Mean to 'Help Master Rectify the Fa'?” from Essentials for Diligent Progress Vol. III:

"However great your idea may seem, it is limited to only this one plane of existence, this singular spot, and that one particular matter. And could you possibly know what impact that thing which Master wants done is meant to have at countless, immeasurable planes of utterly massive cosmic bodies? If you, as my student, truly want to “help Master rectify the Fa,” then you should concern yourself only with how to best fulfill what Master wants. This alone is what you should be doing, yet you want instead for Master to help you? How could you use Dafa during the Fa-rectification to instead help fulfill your human ideas?"

3) We should always pay attention to the actual content of people's words, measure everything with the Fa, and make the best use of every opportunity. Thus, even my "enemy" may be able to help me, while my "friend" might not, unintentionally leading me to veer off-course.

Master said in “Fa Teaching Given at the NTDTV Meeting”:

"I remember that after the persecution began, a person from mainland China wrote me a letter posing as a student. The letter talked about how a particular thing could be done better and so on, but I knew that this person was a special agent. So as to disguise himself, the point that he made was beneficial to us. So, I adopted the idea. Why do I bring this up, then? All that I do is for the sake of saving sentient beings, and no matter who you are, as long as you can contribute to the salvation of sentient beings, I will use [what you have to offer]."

Group Discussions

I have noticed that the following phenomenon sometimes occurs during discussions among practitioners:

Someone raises a certain point, that in and of itself merits discussion and introspection. But he does it imperfectly - with attachments intermingled, provocatively or offensively, motivated by self-interest, etc.

Then others point out these omissions. Let's suppose he is right and they are indeed omissions, and don't really discuss the actual point raised. Then that person responds by pointing out the omissions of those who pointed out his. And so on...

I think there are distinct disadvantages to this:

1) It's hard to have a beneficial discussion with a positive result if we keep jumping from one topic to the next instead of focusing.

2) We never get to discuss the actual point, which may merit serious attention.

3) It is disrespectful and lacks compassion to the practitioner who raised the point.

We also may sometimes have the perception that a practitioner "has not cultivated well," so we miss important things he says. We sometimes have a perception that another practitioner has "cultivated well,” or is an important coordinator, so we accept what he or she says without evaluating it with the Fa.

Isn't this acting in a way contradictory to what Master asked?

Master said in Zhuan Falun, Lecture Six, “The Mentality of Showing Off”:

"In fact, it does not matter who the person is—there is only one Fa. Only by observing this Dafa can one meet the genuine standard."

How to Do Better When I'm Speaking

I discussed above what I enlightened to, regarding how to act better when on the listening side. I would like to say a few words from the other perspective.

If I notice that others aren't listening to what I'm saying, instead pointing out my shortcomings, then maybe it's time to look inside at my motives, and at my shortcomings.

Perhaps I should also think about how to make it easier for other practitioners to pay more attention to the actual content of my words, and for them to be able to evaluate it with the least amount of human notions playing a role, and not intentionally trigger their human side.

In human terms, this might be called "building credibility," but as practitioners, it's simply about being even more considerate of others.

What I mean by the above is that similar surface actions could be performed from two very different mindsets: one human—cunningly wanting to become more accepted and influential by gaining others' trust; the other, altruistic—wishing to be as considerate as possible toward others, acting only for the benefit of others, and safeguarding and validating the Fa.

Actually, when acting from the latter mindset, one naturally "builds his/her credibility." That's the relationship between the two, as I see it now.

I began to realize a few years ago, that how I say things is actually important when we validate the Fa together. In the beginning, I had this notion that I was behaving like a politician, and I felt conflicted about it. But later, with the help of fellow practitioners and further Fa study, I realized that this was not the case - it's really only a question of which "heart" it comes from.

Regarding stirring human notions, my understanding is that it indeed is unavoidable that our human notions and attachments get stirred-up when we cultivate, including when interacting with other cultivators, and it is actually good for us that this is exposed.

Master says in Zhuan Falun, Lecture Four, “Transformation of Karma”:

"If both you and I are nice to each other and sit there in harmony, how can it be possible to increase gong? It is precisely because that person has created this conflict for you that there is this opportunity to improve xinxing, and you can make use of it to upgrade your own xinxing."

I do not think this means we need to, or are capable of, taking Master's role and using our own limited understandings to intentionally 'plan' others' cultivation paths and tribulations in order to 'help' them. We should instead follow Master's guidance.

Master said in “Fa Teaching on World Falun Dafa Day”:

"I’ve often said this: if you sincerely do it for the other person’s sake, and there is nothing self-serving on your part, your words will be able to move the other party to tears. Want to give it a try?"

The above are my personal understandings, please point out anything that is not in accordance with the Fa.