Relying on persons instead of the Dharma will lead to adverse consequences.

Explaining the color of white snow to a blind person—no matter how hard one tries, exhausting every possible analogy, the blind person still cannot comprehend the whiteness of white snow, until in the end the one explaining goes mad with frustration.

The deeper the Dharma, the greater the controversies; the shallower the wisdom, the greater the controversies. Because one cannot observe directly (pratyakṣa) and one's wisdom is insufficient, one can only rely on imagination and intellectual interpretation, and depend on those with great fame, believing that the greater the fame, the more reliable they are. The Buddha taught to rely on the Dharma, but when the Dharma is too profound to be observed, one cannot take refuge in it.

It is the same in the secular world: the lower the level of a group, the more disputes there are, all quarreling over low-level notions, with abundant gossip and conflicts, never at rest. Higher-level groups dispute higher-level issues, and low-level gossip is scarce. Among groups of lofty wisdom there is almost no dispute—quiet and tranquil, like a gentle breeze and fine rain nourishing things silently. For example, among the assembly of great bodhisattvas and in other more sublime buddha-lands, there is not only no dispute, but not even the sound of discussion and conversation; the sages share the same thoughts and views, in perfect accord, without any divergence whatsoever.

Because sentient beings have low wisdom, they have no choice but to rely on people of great fame; therefore, those with fame must be extremely, extremely cautious when teaching the Dharma. Because their influence is broad, they attract many people, and their teachings spread far and long. If there is any error in them, those wrong views will persist for a very, very long time into later generations; people of lesser fame will find it hard to correct them, and obstacles to propagating the Dharma will be great. Even if the Buddha were to come again in a different identity to make corrections, because at first He would not be famous, sentient beings would not accept Him either.

Both in the secular world and in the Buddhist community, in order to maintain stability, individuals are prevented from building up great reputations and from vigorously expanding their influence. Because once one has many believers, the influence is enormous—if such a person harbors ill intent, they can exploit their personal influence to call upon believers to commit evil, thereby harming the overall interests of the nation and of Buddhism. As long as a person deliberately promotes themselves and widely builds a reputation, that person must have some special purpose of their own, and afterward there will be enormous conflicts, troubles, and destructive power. Such things are not rare; recently there have been such people and such events in our own Buddhist community. Fortunately, the Saha world still has the care and protection of Śākyamuni Buddha, the founder of the teaching, which has averted even greater turmoil. A true bodhisattva has long since realized the emptiness of mind and seeks nothing, has seen through all worldly affairs, is without self and without selfishness, and the mind is tranquil, utterly tranquil—how could such a person vigorously pursue fame and gain, maliciously harm Buddhism, widely commit all kinds of evil, and, like an asura, stir up widespread strife and discord within the Buddhist community?