Inference Is Not Equal to Direct Perception (Pratyakṣa)

The Buddha knows and perceives all dharmas through direct perception (pratyakṣa); what something is and what it is not, He knows it in the very moment, without any need for inference at all. When one cannot know through direct perception, one must resort to inference, which shows that the wisdom-power of the manas and the mind consciousness is insufficient, and one must rely on inference to obtain accurate information. The Buddha, however, possesses the unsurpassed wisdom that is perfect and complete in both merit and wisdom, and there is no dharma that He does not know through direct perception.

The bodhisattvas at the causal stage and all sentient beings do not have perfect wisdom; there are still dharmas that they cannot know and realize through direct perception, and therefore at times they are compelled to use inference as a method. The more they use it, the more it shows that their wisdom is deficient. Those whose wisdom is sufficient know in the very moment, without any obstruction. Therefore, it is said that in the process of investigation and verification, if one uses the method of inference, it shows that this person lacks the wisdom of direct perception and has no choice but to adopt a secondary method, an unskillful method, to obtain information. Moreover, inference is akin to guessing and conjecturing; when one's power of observation and judgment is insufficient, one can only conjecture and guess, making judgments in a manner that cannot be certain, and the conclusions drawn are thus not of direct perception and cannot be entirely correct—even if entirely correct, it would be mere coincidence and chance.

Those who possess the wisdom of direct observation express their views with complete certainty; those with insufficient wisdom express themselves with half-affirmative statements; those without wisdom express themselves with interrogative sentences, showing a lack of confidence. Those who use inference lack confidence; when others raise doubts and challenges, their minds will hesitate and waver, lacking firmness, which shows that the source from which they obtain information is not secure.

In short, in the process of cultivating and realizing the Buddha-dharma, inference is only an auxiliary means, to be used only when there is no alternative; afterwards, one should use the method of investigation to verify the correctness of the inference. Because inference employs the mind consciousness, while genuine investigation and verification employ the manas, and the manas is the master, the conclusions He reaches are naturally weighty and resonant, forceful and unshakable, and no one can do anything about them. Conclusions reached by the mind consciousness are not like this—He does not preside, and they must wait for the one who presides to approve before the gavel falls and the matter is settled; hence the mind remains unsettled and anxious. At the final critical juncture of cultivating and realizing the Buddha-dharma, it is better, more wonderful, and more ultimate to use the mind consciousness sparingly or not at all. This is the conduct of a great man, not something that those of small faculties and small capacity can compare with.