Answer: In such moments, first, one should reflect on whether one's words were untimely; or whether one's speech was inappropriate and lacked skillful means; or whether one harbored arrogance and looked down on the other person; or whether one's own capacity to inspire faith and acceptance was insufficient, and so on. Second, one should consider: being attacked and opposed is a normal phenomenon. Because sentient beings have ignorance, their understandings all differ, so each clings to their own views, and even stubborn partiality can appear. Third, one should observe the psychology of sentient beings more, understand them more, and learn methods and techniques of communication, and so on. When encountering problems, looking for the cause in others cannot solve the problem; only by looking for the cause in oneself can one correct oneself, thereby enabling the other person to trust and accept oneself and one's goodwill.
If one's views are not accepted, and one believes one has been attacked, thereby giving rise to the various feelings described above, this shows that one's grasping at self is very heavy, not allowing the slightest rejection or disapproval from others, caring too much about others' attitudes toward oneself. From the description in the above words, one can see that the arrogance of self is rather serious; the self in the mind is inflated, and one has unconsciously belittled and despised others, which is why those feelings that should not exist appear. If one has right view and correct principles, one should keep the mind empty and accord with conditions, speak in a low-key yet skillful manner, take a light view of the other person's attitude and reactions, not care about others' evaluations, remain unencumbered by all outcomes, and maintain a humble and gentle attitude at all times. In this way, one's state of mind and one's aura will imperceptibly gather in and influence the other person, and one's views will be more easily accepted—at the very least there will be no verbal clashes. That is why I say that when encountering problems, one should first examine oneself.
In dialogue with others, if one first presupposes that oneself is correct and possesses the true Dharma, then one places the other person on the side of the false, assuming that they lack right view and right understanding. In this way, opposition between true and false inevitably arises, along with disputes over self and others, because no one is willing to be on the side of the false. If one considers oneself correct, it implies that others are false, and others will naturally be unwilling to accept this; conflict will arise, and contradictions are often intensified in this way. A person's tone of speech often reveals one's attitude and stance; once the other person perceives it, they will feel aversion and emotions will arise, their speech will become inappropriate, and conflict will emerge.
In all my years of teaching the Dharma, I have never said that what I teach is the true Dharma, or that I represent the true Dharma; such words have never appeared in my Dharma teachings—you can flip through the books and see for yourself. Therefore, I never create opposition with others. Even if someone does not accept the Dharma I teach, it is not because of me myself, but due to other reasons not of me; the problem does not lie with me. A person with wisdom, in speech and action, will not place others in opposition to oneself and will not make enemies for oneself. Only a person with severe grasping at self will constantly make enemies, even regarding everyone as one's imagined enemy; acting this way, of course, one will have enemies everywhere. But for a person with enemies everywhere, how far can they go? Can their undertakings go smoothly?
12
+1