I came across an incident in India: there was a boy of twelve or thirteen years old who worked in a restaurant and his mother was a beggar.

If he follows his mother, the little boy may have this meal, but he will not know where the next meal is, and he must be looking for food all day long; Working in a restaurant, he can eat a lot and get a little money.

And an American friend of mine thinks it's exploiting child labor. I agree with this statement, but I also half-jokingly said: "If it were me, if there was food to eat, I would choose to be such an exploited person first, and the most important thing is to be able to solve the basic food and clothing, which is the source of sustaining life." I said, "If you pay for him to go to school now and pay for all the expenses, I agree with you." Otherwise, what you say here, you may think you are compassionate, but I think he will think that what you are saying is really illogical, because what he needs most at the moment is food and that little bit of money. "It's a matter of how you measure it.

People who can support themselves and have money on them will think: How can these parents treat their children like this?

But if we criticize the little boy or his mother from our point of view, or even protest against the exploitation of child labor by the restaurant owner, instead of letting the little boy go to the restaurant to wash the dishes and dishes, do we think we are doing good?

In fact, in this way, the child will fall into the agony of hunger and life will be even worse. Everyone's definition of happiness is different.

Some people think that happiness means that the salary is a little higher than before, there are more holidays, and you can travel everywhere; But for those who don't have three meals, when their next meal is over, the joy is indescribable.

Great compassion is the hope that every sentient being will be free from the suffering that he is experiencing, and it is difficult for us to understand the suffering of others or the happiness we expect from what we see on the surface.

If our dearest ones are suffering, it is more true that we can empathize; If the sufferer is someone who has little to do with us, often we just cover up our indifference with hypocritical words.

In fact, when we can treat everyone as a family member equally, we don't need to force ourselves, and compassion can arise spontaneously in our hearts. It is the compassion that naturally flows from the heart that makes them feel strongly and urgently for them to be quickly freed from their suffering.

At the beginning, we can visualize sentient beings who are suffering, lacking food and clothing, or suffering from sickness, and imagine what we would do if our closest people, or even ourselves, were in that situation.

In such a role reversal, I put myself in the shoes of others when they feel uncomfortable in pain, and of course hope that their suffering relatives or themselves can quickly get relief from the pain.

"What can I give for their liberation? What can be done? "Think from the bottom of your heart, not just words.

True compassion is not just a matter of words, but this kind of giving and understanding requires oneself to empathize with the suffering experienced in samsara and extend it to all sentient beings, treating all sentient beings with empathy with one's own desire for happiness and resistance to suffering.

They have the same sense of perception as we do, and the right to equal access. True compassion needs to be based on unfeigned equanimity, and this spirit cannot be achieved by paying lip service.