![]() | ||||
|
Who are You Clarifying the Truth To? By Dafa practitioner Wei Er
(Clearwisdom.net) For a long time now, I have observed that many fellow
practitioners and I have had the following problem. When we clarify the truth,
we regard the other person only as a human being, instead of clarifying the
truth to their true being.
A human being has a Main Spirit and an Assistant Spirit. In addition to these
Spirits, one has acquired notions, karma and thought karma. What is beneath the
human body is the person's true being. The human body is worn like a hat and
clothing, so to speak. [Karma and notions exist by wearing the body].
Since the true being is very much hidden and hard to detect, we often think that
it is the person himself speaking. A person has a clear-headed side and a
muddle-headed side. In regards to levels, when it seems that we talk about
things and people don't understand, this is in fact because we talk from too
high a level and fail to gear our words toward that person's level. The person
is then controlled by karma and notions.
Around October, an article on Clearwisdom stated that when a female
practitioner clarified the truth to her father, she could clearly tell when it
was the karma speaking through her father's mouth, and when that happened she
didn't say anything except eliminate the karma with righteous thoughts. When it
was her father's Main Spirit speaking, she patiently clarified the truth.
Once I saw a fellow practitioner clarifying the truth to someone, and right
at the beginning the practitioner said Buddha came to the human world to save
people, the Fa rectifies the cosmos, and people should all cherish this
opportunity, etc. In the end, this person mumbled something and ended the
conversation. I also did the same thing when clarifying the truth to my uncle
and one of my colleagues. The result was, after suppressing themselves for a
while, they cut me off impatiently, "Don't say anymore!" Later, I
realized after reflecting that when we say something too high above one's level,
this person's karma and acquired notions would also hear this, and naturally
these would all go against what they hear. What is truly against the truth
clarification is not this person's Main Spirit; it's his karma and notions at
work. From then on, I also added another righteous thought: use my supernormal
capabilities to suppress this person's karma and notions and clarify the truth
to this person's Main Spirit.
In the past, when I discussed things with my wife, I naturally spoke to her
as a husband, but I found that she always used some trivial excuses in daily
life to cover up [her attachments]. Later I changed my method and spoke
directly to her Main Spirit and the outcome was different. Afterwards I realized
that if I take her as my wife in my sub-consciousness, then I would be in fact
speaking to the part of her life that composed the sentimentality between
husband and wife, and that this part would naturally work as an obstruction. The
same applies to our brothers, sisters, friends and colleagues.
When practitioners point out problems and shortcomings in each other, similar
issues would arise. Cultivators have the side that's well cultivated, but they
also have the side of human beings. They have various attachments and also the
human side saved for us by Teacher that we are supposed to have for now to
maintain our cultivation environment. When a fellow practitioner has a strong
attachment, other practitioners often say, "Why is she like that?"
While in fact, the most appropriate thing to say would be, "Why does her
attachment show up like that?" For example, the first way of saying it
would be, "She is very arrogant and always treats others with an air of
superiority." But the second way would say, "The attachment of
arrogance in her is very strong, and it manifests as an air of
superiority." The first statement mixes the cultivated side and the
attachment and regards them both as her, while the second one separates them.
This is why she would somehow show resentment and would be less likely to accept
it if we used the first statement, while the second one is much easier to
accept.
I have brought up this issue in order to attract valuable feedback.
Posting date: 4/19/2002
feedback@clearwisdom.net |