(Clearwisdom.net) A few days ago, Falun Gong practitioners in Scotland gathered in Glasgow to study the Fa together. Chinese and western Falun Gong practitioners from all over Scotland studied Zhuan Falun, several of Teacher's new articles and an article by the editors of Minghui/Clearwisdom. Following the Fa study, we had a very rewarding cultivation experience sharing session.
We began the group Fa study at 10:00 a.m. After we finished studying one lecture of Zhuan Falun, we took a lunch break and then studied Teacher's articles and an article by the editors of Minghui/Clearwisdom. Then a fellow practitioner raised a question, asking why we were studying an article by the MH/CW editors, who are our fellow practitioners. Because it was a rare occasion for us practitioners in Scotland to gather together, the host wanted to treasure the limited time we had. He asked everyone to cooperate and suggested that those who did not agree with the idea of studying MH/CW editors' article as the Fa, not to read out loud. He said we could discuss this issue afterwards.
But the practitioner who objected studying the editors' article confronted the host and asked why he denied her the right to express her opinion. Next, a few fellow practitioners came out and backed up the host. They thought MH/CW editors' article was also very important and they thought no one should sabotage this event by overly emphasizing his or her opinion. However, the first practitioner stressed the importance of differentiating the editors' articles from Teacher's Fa. Just when everyone thought this was going to be a very lengthy debate, the practitioner who first raised the objection added, "Because the MH/CW editors' articles is not the Fa, we should differentiate it from the Fa by having only one practitioner reading it aloud, and then we can study Teacher's new articles together." It was not until then that everyone understood and accepted her point because her suggestion was in compliance with the Fa. Some began to feel that we would have saved the argument if we had the patience to hear her out in the first place.
However, Dafa activities are different from everyday people's activities. We won't truly solve any conflicts if no one upgrades his xinxing. Soon, another round of argumentation broke out. Although the first practitioner was trying to be responsible for the Fa when she insisted that we differentiate MH/CW editors' articles from Teacher's Fa, some other practitioners felt that she should keep her opinion to herself in order to keep our Dafa activity going smoothly. Thus we started debating again.
Then a fellow practitioner mentioned that he had read two MH/CW articles about a young female college student and her journey of Fa-rectification, namely the following two articles:
The young college student had traveled alone to a large city where she had never been, which was a few thousands miles away from home, to help the fellow practitioners step forward for the Fa. Most of the fellow practitioners there hadn't stepped forward.. They did not have any access to the Internet and, therefore, hadn't read Teacher's new articles or fellow practitioners' articles. She managed to locate the practitioners and approach them one by one and told each of them the progress of Teacher's Fa-rectification, as well as the admirable actions many fellow practitioners had taken to safeguard the Fa. Because of her encouragement, many fellow practitioners in that city finally had the courage to step forward for the Fa. Some fellow practitioners she approached exhibited many different problems and attachments, but she refused to regard those as their own problems, but instead, as loopholes of the one-body of practitioners. As a particle of the one-body of practitioners, she encouraged each of them to search inward for his or her own attachments. In the end, the environment in that city was greatly improved.
The practitioner in Scotland said that he had taken one thing from the story: It is important to think from the perspective of the one-body of practitioners. Whenever a fellow practitioner exhibits an attachment or a problem, he believes that he should see it as a loophole of the entire body of practitioners in his area and he should search inward instead of attributing the problem to individual fellow practitioners. When he sees an attachment in a fellow practitioner, he will start searching inward first. When he begins to see things from the perspective of one-body of practitioners, he is able to give fellow practitioners feedback with an altruistic and kind mentality.
As he was sharing the female college student's story of Fa-rectification, everyone was all ears and was deeply touched. Next, the practitioner who had objected to reading the MH/CW editors' articles out aloud in a group said with a very sincere attitude, "I was anxious to make my opinion heard, so I lost my composure. I lacked compassion when I tried to make myself heard. I once wrote an email to a fellow practitioner. Afterwards I realized I had been very abrasive in the email. Another fellow practitioner said, "Compassion is able to melt down the barriers between fellow practitioners. Compassion is able to forge all of us into one body. Compassion is able to promote better insights and decisions among us. I truly feel the enormous power of compassion!"
Then a relatively new Western practitioner made an interesting comment before he left. He had to leave early because of schedule conflicts. He stood up in a very gentlemanly manner and said, "I did not feel uneasy because of your arguments. I am very glad to be here and listen to all of you exchanging cultivation experiences and insights. I feel that Truth, Compassion and Forbearance have grown out of your 'debate.'" His humor made everyone smile. In the end, we felt we had upgraded as one body of practitioners!
First published in English at http://www.pureinsight.org/pi/articles/2005/8/8/3209.html