Relying on the Dharma, Not on Individuals, and Relying on Individuals, Not on the Dharma

Consciousness and the mental faculty are like two individuals; when one cannot observe the mental state of the other, one should not rashly assert that the other lacks a particular mental state, thought, emotion, etc., as such a claim is flawed. Therefore, constrained by afflictions and without having transformed consciousness into wisdom, consciousness finds it difficult to observe the various functions and roles of the mental faculty. When unable to observe it, one cannot draw definitive conclusions about the mental faculty.

When the standard for defining a Dharma is unclear, one cannot compare two Dharmas and assert that because A does not conform to B or is inconsistent with B, A must be erroneous. Such a judgment is overly abrupt and irrational. Since B is not necessarily the standard nor necessarily correct, the inconsistency between A and B does not prove that A is erroneous.

When a person possesses superior wisdom, understanding both A and B and knowing what the correct standard is, then one can judge and definitively conclude whether A is correct. One can also definitively determine whether B is correct. This is called relying on the Dharma, not on individuals. Conversely, not knowing what the ultimate standard of the Dharma is and lacking the wisdom to discern whether A and B conform to the standard, yet wishfully asserting that B is the standard simply because it is widely accepted, and consequently declaring that A, being inconsistent with B, must be erroneous—such a situation absolutely constitutes relying on individuals rather than the Dharma. It stems from a mentality of emotional attachment and belongs to the state of ignorance.