Buddhist Empirical Realization Must Be Pratyakṣa Observation

The realization of the Dharma is not reliant on inferential cognition but on direct perception through observation. It does not depend on reasoning, speculation, inference, or study, but on contemplative practice and investigation within meditative concentration. Only conclusions derived in this manner constitute direct perception, which is reliable, capable of revealing truth, realizing truth, and thereby yielding genuine benefit—resolving doubts and generating faith.

So-called inferential cognition is akin to conjecture. Conjectures are seldom correct, and the proportion of accurate guesses is low. Even when a conjecture happens to be correct, it does not equate to direct perception. For example, upon seeing smoke rising behind a mountain, one might infer and speculate that there must be a fire on the other side. In reality, it may not be a fire; it could be damp grass being smoked, for instance, without actual flames appearing. Another example: seeing a woman pregnant, one might assume she must have engaged in sexual desire to conceive. Yet, in truth, individuals with advanced meditative concentration can enter the womb without sexual desire—such was the case with the Fifth Patriarch’s rebirth, as well as that of certain highly accomplished Chan masters during the Tang and Song dynasties.

There are countless examples illustrating that inferential cognition is not equivalent to direct perception. Inferential cognition relies entirely on the intellect’s understanding, analogies, reasoning, and speculation—anyone with a modicum of cleverness can manage this; it is not difficult. The world abounds with people possessing petty cleverness. The true difficulty lies in direct perception through observation. This is precisely why countless people cultivate the path seeking liberation, yet those who genuinely attain liberation are as rare as phoenix feathers and unicorn horns. True sages will forever remain an exceedingly small minority; the ratio between sages and ordinary beings is profoundly disproportionate.

Conclusions derived from speculation and inference do not constitute genuine realization. Even if an inference happens to be correct and aligns with facts, it cannot resolve doubts or yield the beneficial effects of liberation. For instance, ordinary beings all regard their five aggregates and eighteen elements as the true self. Superficially, every ordinary being seems free of doubt, firmly convinced of this. Yet, if beings were truly and unequivocally convinced of this, why would some develop doubts upon hearing the Buddha’s teaching that the five aggregates are not-self? Why would they then cultivate concentration, contemplate, and investigate the principle of the Four Noble Truths, ultimately resolving their doubts and proving their former understanding to be erroneous? Evidently, the so-called “unwavering certainty” of beings is unreliable. Otherwise, how else could the Buddha deliver sentient beings? Similarly, the inferential reasoning and research conducted by many people do not resolve doubts in their minds; sooner or later, they will overturn their own derived conclusions and seek genuine realization.

Take another example: scientists, through various scientific methods, arrive at a conclusion. Even if everyone agrees with this conclusion, it is not necessarily factual or true. Otherwise, later scientists would not use more advanced technological means to overturn the conclusions of their predecessors. If scientists’ inferences and research were all correct and aligned with facts, then scientists should possess great wisdom identical to the Buddha’s—fully capable of exploring the truth of the universe, understanding the essence of worldly phenomena. Their conclusions should not contradict the Buddha’s sacred teachings; they should all become sages within the Dharma and teachers for sentient beings. Yet the reality is not so. They remain burdened by deep ignorance, still utterly ordinary beings, unaware of the true nature of the Dharma realm.

Thus, it is evident that inferential methods such as reasoning, inference, and research cannot be applied to Dharma practice and should not be regarded as means to realize the Dharma. Results derived from inference, even if fervently believed, are not genuine acceptance. The mental faculty harbors unresolved doubts, unknown even to oneself. At life’s end, the truth will be revealed. Will it be too late to turn back then?