(Clearwisdom.net) I would like to share with everyone some things I enlightened to after reading Teacher’s new article ‘What Does it Mean to “Help Master Rectify the Fa”?'

I have many years of education and when dealing with things that need reasoning, such as an article, I often used a set method of thinking, that is, to think, “Why did the author compose the article that way?”; “Why did he approach the issue from that perspective?”; or “What is the purpose of his writing such and such?” This mode of thinking indeed helped me in my studies of ordinary works, but it is obviously an obstacle to coming to a pure understanding of the Fa.

Teacher said:

“When learning Dafa, intellectuals should be aware of a most prominent problem: They study Dafa in the same way that everyday people study theoretical writings, such as selecting relevant quotations from renowned people to examine their own conduct. This will hinder a cultivator’s progress.” (“Learning the Fa” from Essentials for Further Advancement).

In studying Fa or thinking about Teacher’s lectures, I can sense such a mode of thinking as soon as it emerges and I can typically ensure that I will not fall into it.

When I read:

“Disciple asks: If a person believes whatever Master says and doesn't think about it further, is that a correct state to be in?

“Teacher: Gods will definitely think that person is extraordinary. But I would still like the person to read the books, and to study the Fa a lot.” (“Teaching the Fa in the City of Los Angeles”),

I realized that although the mode of thinking I mentioned above can help me analyze ordinary people’s work better, it is of the ordinary people’s level after all. For practitioners, because they are at higher levels, this mode of thinking will lead to mistakes; their findings will not exceed their own level no matter what. Using such a mode to study Dafa, one may end up learning nothing. Just as Teacher said:

'What’s worst is when people read Zhuan Falun for the first time and evaluate the Fa with their human notions: “Oh, it makes good sense here. I have doubts about the things mentioned there.” Then he’ll have read the entire book for nothing—he’ll gain nothing, what a pity!' (in “Teaching the Fa at the Eastern U.S. Fa Conference”)

The reason that I mentioned such a mode of thinking is because in the article “What Does it Mean to 'Help Master Rectify the Fa'?” Teacher mentioned situations when one alters Teacher’s requirement in the actual work. I believe that to a large degree it is because practitioners believe that their ideas can lead to better results. They think that one needs to follow Teacher’s instruction in cultivation, but in doing work they behave as if they themselves are more knowledgeable and experienced. They separate doing work from cultivation, and forget that we lack the wisdom and are certainly not qualified to question Teacher’s requirements. If one thinks his thoughts or ways are better than Teacher’s, it is in a sense the same as what is said in Zhuan Falun (2003 version):

“There were also some monks who spoke about what they comprehended as if that was Shakyamuni’s words, instead of telling people Shakyamuni’s original words. As a result, the Buddha Law was altered beyond recognition, and it was no longer the Law Shakyamuni had preached. Eventually this caused the Buddha Law that’s in Buddhism to disappear in India.”

In a sense it is disrespectful to Dafa and Teacher. It is only conditionally believing in Teacher and Fa—the condition that it conforms to one's previously held beliefs.

Teacher said in “Fa Teaching at the U.S. Capital”:

“Given that this is Fa-rectification, I am particularly insistent on the path I wish to take, as this is about creating the future. All that I have done in the cosmos is most worthy of cherishing, and it is what I will affirm and acknowledge in the future. Things that I don't want cannot be acknowledged or affirmed--they are a disgrace.”

As a practitioner, how can one not do what Teacher wants? On the other hand, intentionally altering Teacher’s requests reflects that one does not put the Fa first; this can lead to an immeasurable loss to oneself.

I myself did not participate in large-scale coordination projects and may not see many practical difficulties encountered. I am simply writing some of my thoughts to share and I welcome everyone’s comments.