Disputes Arise When Relying on Individuals Instead of the Dharma

To truly observe the operation of the manas through direct perception, one must possess the wisdom of consciousness-only and the observational insight of at least a first-ground bodhisattva. Disputes arise precisely because the manas cannot be observed or genuinely understood. Superficial teachings provoke no controversy, as all can directly observe them; it is the unobservable that becomes contentious—otherwise, what is there to debate? White is white, black is black. Only when clarity is absent do disputes emerge.

Regarding the mental factors associated with the manas—who can practically observe and verify them? Both the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are tainted by defilements and afflictions, so heavily obscured—what capacity do they possess for genuine observation? If anyone claims to have verified this, let them articulate the process of verification.

To rely on the Dharma is to rely on the true nature of the manas’ operation. If one cannot observe the manas, how can they define it based on its true nature? How can one genuinely rely on the actual reality of phenomena? Failing to rely on the reality of phenomena means relying on human opinion instead. Such reliance contradicts the purpose of Buddhist practice and realization, leading to errors, deviations from the Buddha’s intent, and an inability to attain enlightenment.