Controversies Arise from Reliance on Individuals Rather Than the Dharma

To directly perceive and truly observe the operation of the manas, one must possess the wisdom of consciousness-only and all-knowing awareness, requiring at minimum the observational wisdom of a first-ground bodhisattva.

It is precisely because the manas cannot be observed, and its true nature is not genuinely known, that disputes arise. Shallow dharmas provoke no debate because everyone can directly perceive them. It is regarding that which cannot be observed that people debate; otherwise, what is there to debate? White is white, black is black. Only when black and white cannot be distinguished does controversy arise.

Regarding the mental factors (caittas) possessed by the manas, which person can actually observe and verify them? Both the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are defiled and afflicted, obscured by such heavy veils—what capability do they have to conduct actual observation? If there is anyone capable of verification, let them describe the verification process.

Relying on the Dharma means relying on the true reality of the manas’ operation. If one cannot observe the manas, how can one define the manas based on its true reality? How can one truly rely on the actual Dharma of reality? If one cannot rely on the Dharma of reality, then one relies on persons. Relying on persons contradicts the essential purpose of Buddhist practice and realization; it contains errors and omissions, does not accord with the Buddha’s intent, and certainly cannot lead to attaining the Way.