An Analysis of the Exact Meaning of Actual Realization and Personal Realization

"Actual realization" means having genuinely experienced it, having genuinely encountered it; "personal realization" means having personally gone through it, having personally experienced it. It is not a play of imagination, not scratching an itch through a boot, not watching a fire from across the river, and certainly not making things up in one's head.

For example, to actually realize electricity or personally realize electricity is not merely knowing that electricity exists, but actually touching electricity, feeling the flow of the current, personally experiencing the process and manner of the current's operation, personally coming into contact with electricity—its features, properties, states, and forms of existence all become clear; one even genuinely feels its influence. Electricity will never again be vague or ambiguous to you, and you can describe it fluently, as if recounting your own family treasures.

Hearing this, someone will immediately ask in astonishment: "Wouldn't that mean getting shocked?" Exactly! Only by being shocked, by touching the current, can it be called personal realization; otherwise, isn't it just scratching an itch through a boot? Only by personally experiencing it can it be called personal realization. How could something merely thought or believed be called personal realization? How could personally realizing a true fact be flat and bland, with no feeling at all? Having experienced such a momentous event, how could the heart remain dull and flavorless? Wouldn't one jump up in shock and excitement?

Someone else will ask: "Wouldn't that mean being electrocuted to death?" Exactly! When you actually realize the tathāgatagarbha, you are reborn—transformed from the bones out, gaining new life; the old self dies and no longer exists. Is there a problem with that? If you are still the same person as before—the mind unchanged, the body unchanged, nothing changed at all—then what did you realize? What did you experience? Nothing was realized. You say that seeing the washing machine washing clothes, you know electricity is running. But did your eyes see the electricity or the current's operation? Did your hand touch the sliding of the current? Did your body feel the stimulation of the current? None of these. You only saw the washing machine turning; you did not see the flow of the current. The eyes did not see and the body did not touch—how can that be called personal realization? You do not know how the electricity operates, do not know what it looks like or its state, do not know what features it has—you know nothing at all. What meaning does your so-called realization have? What function does it serve? What can it change? What is the difference between realizing and not realizing?

The "electricity" in "actually realizing electricity" means electric current; it represents current, with the meaning of flowing—it is not a noun or concept. What is there to realize about a noun or concept? The rolling of the washing machine is also not electricity, not the flow of current; it is the washing machine's own rotation. When you see the washing machine turning, you infer that current is passing through, but inference is not the same as seeing the flow of current with your own eyes, nor is it the same as personally touching the current.

Personal realization means the six sense faculties have genuinely made contact, and the seven consciousnesses have genuinely perceived it. If none of the six faculties has made contact, how can it count as personal realization? It is like someone who has never been to Beijing, yet looking at pictures and videos of Beijing claims to have personally realized Beijing and arrived in Beijing. But when you look at the pictures, have you personally experienced Beijing's local customs, dialects, cultural and geographical features, and the living environment of Beijing's people? Have you experienced Beijing's bustle and crowding? Have you felt the busy rhythm of people's lives? You have experienced none of it—so what is the difference between realizing Beijing and not realizing Beijing? At most, you have personally realized the Beijing in pictures and the Beijing in videos, but not the Beijing in reality.

Take another example: seeing smoke rising beyond a high wall in the distance, one says one knows there is a fire and has realized fire. But you have not seen the fire with your own eyes; seeing smoke is not the same as seeing fire, and inferring there is a fire is not the same as actually seeing a fire, truly seeing a fire. To truly see the fire, you must go to the site where the smoke is rising and personally look to see whether there are flames beneath the smoke clouds and how fierce the fire is. Only then does it count as personally realizing fire and seeing fire. Imagination and inference will not do; even if you imagine or infer correctly, it still does not count.

Only when at least one of the six sense faculties makes contact with the object of realization can it count as personal realization. For the realization of material form (rūpa-dharma), besides the manas making contact, at least one of the five faculties must also make contact—seeing with the eyes, hearing with the ears, smelling with the nose, tasting with the tongue, touching with the body—at least one faculty must make contact; sometimes two, three, four, or all five faculties must make contact before it counts as personal realization. For formless mental dharmas, the manas must personally make contact and realize them. Relying purely on the mind consciousness's imagination and inference is not actual realization; if the faculty does not arrive at the scene, it does not count as personal realization.