Chapter Nine: Rely on the Dharma, Not on Persons

I. Can One Truly Rely on the Dharma Without Understanding the Sutras?

Sentient beings who have not cultivated to a certain stage and have not generated wisdom cannot possibly comprehend the sutras. Many people believe they understand the Buddhist scriptures, but in reality, they merely interpret the literal meaning, which is far removed from the Buddha’s intended message. When one places excessive trust in oneself, one often misleads oneself.

In the Sutra of Forty-Two Chapters, the Buddha said: “Your mind cannot be trusted; only when you attain the fruition of Arhat can your mind be trusted.” This was spoken to Śrāvaka disciples. To Mahāyāna Bodhisattva disciples, the Buddha might say: “Your mind cannot be trusted; only when you realize the nature of your own mind can your mind be trusted,” or “Only with the wisdom of consciousness-only and entry into the Tathāgata’s family can your mind be trusted.” At that stage, one has realized the true reality of all dharmas, and wisdom has been developed and thoroughly penetrated. Before this, sentient beings must at least cultivate to the point of possessing the discerning eye for the Dharma to distinguish the right and wrong of dharmas. With the discerning eye for the Dharma, one gains the discerning eye for teachers; the two are interdependent.

Currently, most sentient beings have not cultivated to the level of possessing the discerning eye for the Dharma, leading them to misjudge both dharmas and teachers. Their judgment of teachers is based on reputation and external appearances, not on the teacher’s wisdom. Because they lack wisdom themselves, they cannot discern the depth of a teacher’s wisdom. Sentient beings who are overly self-confident or overly trusting of teachers harm themselves. One should skillfully contemplate the Dharma and skillfully distinguish teachers, correctly assessing one’s own level of wisdom. Most importantly, one should cultivate abundant merit and virtue. When merit and virtue are sufficient, errors decrease, and wisdom arises.

II. The Heart Sutra is a short text of just over 260 characters, yet ten readers produce ten interpretations, and a hundred readers yield a hundred explanations. Everyone speaks of relying on the Dharma, not on persons. Thus, those studying Mahāyāna should first rely on the Heart Sutra, which is the essential summary of Mahāyāna. Only by understanding the Heart Sutra can one realize Bodhi. Given the current situation, where each person has a different understanding, how can one rely on the Heart Sutra? Each believes they are relying on the Dharma, but if their understanding of the Dharma is wrong, how can they truly rely on it? Each believes their understanding is correct, yet the correct Dharma has only one meaning. If a hundred people have a hundred interpretations, ninety-nine are likely wrong. How can this be considered relying on the Dharma?

The Buddha consistently speaks of the true emptiness and wondrous existence. Yet some deny true emptiness, while others deny wondrous existence. These two groups hold contradictory views, yet they can blend together and affirm each other. Is this not strange? Why does this happen? The reason is that sentient beings do not understand their own views and lack the ability to discern the Dharma. Hence, erroneous views now flourish, and false dharmas spread widely, while sentient beings remain unaware. In the Dharma-ending age, sentient beings have meager merit and willingly accept misleading teachings. If sentient beings do not cultivate merit and virtue, the future of the true Dharma is precarious; it may perish swiftly, leaving sentient beings trapped in anguish, unable to extricate themselves.

III. What Is Meant by Relying on the Dharma, Not on Persons?

Relying on the Dharma, not on persons, means that the Dharma refers to the sacred words or the realization of truth, not worldly sayings or erroneous statements. It accords with the Buddha’s teachings on liberation, with the principle of suchness, and with the Tripitaka and twelve divisions of the sutras. All statements consistent with these scriptures can be relied upon. Commentaries derived from actual practice that accord with the sutras can also be relied upon, regardless of who expounds them. Even if ghosts or spirits can expound dharmas consistent with the sutras, they can be relied upon—not because of the identity of the ghost or spirit, but because, like treasure hidden in coarse clothing, one should take the treasure, not the coarse clothing.

Those who rely on persons only observe a person’s identity, status, wealth, appearance, or reputation, choosing someone they admire or delight in. Whatever such a person says is regarded as infallible, without discerning whether their words accord with the sacred words or the Buddha’s teachings. The harm in this is immense. Truly discerning individuals who can rely on persons are exceedingly rare—one in ten thousand—and very difficult to find!

How can one rely on the Dharma? First, one must understand the Dharma to rely on it; without understanding, one cannot rely on the Dharma. When unable to rely on the Dharma, one invariably relies on persons. However, sentient beings severely lack merit, have not cultivated the corresponding discerning eye for the Dharma, possess inadequate discriminatory power, and have deep emotional attachments. Thus, they are incapable of relying on the Dharma, and the vast majority rely on persons—especially those with whom they have karmic connections or those with great reputations.

For example, the Heart Sutra is the Dharma. To rely on the Heart Sutra to correct ourselves, we must comprehend its true meaning and understand its essence. Then, by practicing according to the Heart Sutra, we develop the great wisdom of prajñā, perceiving that the five aggregates are empty. Only then is it true reliance. Yet, among all the Buddhists in the world, how many understand the essence of prajñā in the Heart Sutra and practice according to this Dharma? Very few. If one cannot rely on the entire Heart Sutra, relying on a single phrase or even the four characters “不生不灭” (non-arising, non-ceasing) is beneficial. But even these four characters are not understood by many in their prajñā essence. How, then, can one rely on the Heart Sutra for study and practice? Thus, while saying “rely on the Dharma” is easy, doing so is extremely difficult due to insufficient wisdom and merit. Relying on prajñā sutras is already this challenging; how many can rely on consciousness-only sutras? Perhaps one in ten million, if even that, can be found. Almost all rely on reputation and authority, unable to rely on the Dharma, much less on actual realization.

If everyone wishes to realize the mind and attain enlightenment, they must thoroughly understand the four characters “不生不灭” (non-arising, non-ceasing) in the Heart Sutra—what exactly “non-arising, non-ceasing” means. Understanding this meaning enables one to examine whether the Dharma realized by oneself or others is characterized by arising and ceasing or by non-arising and non-ceasing, and whether it accords with the Heart Sutra. If what is realized is characterized by arising and ceasing, it is a false dharma, not the true dharma of non-arising and non-ceasing. Then it is a mistaken realization, for only the non-arising and non-ceasing is the true dharma, as stated in the Heart Sutra.

We must know: what is realized in enlightenment? What is the object of enlightenment? What is the state of enlightenment? To what degree are views and knowledge elevated at the moment of enlightenment? What is the state of body and mind? Then, one must understand the functioning of the three—sense faculties, sense objects, and consciousness—and the activities and functions of the five aggregates. One must also know the hidden meaning within those critical phrases, and above all, the nature of the Tathāgatagarbha and its mode of functioning. Only then does one possess the great wisdom of prajñā, which is true realization of the mind and enlightenment. Thereafter, one can truly rely on prajñā sutras, the Dharma of Tathāgatagarbha, and prajñā wisdom.

We should practice diligently and steadfastly in daily life, not only extensively studying and learning theoretical knowledge but also focusing intensely on actual realization. Some are very diligent in their Buddhist studies, learning theoretical knowledge everywhere, amassing rich knowledge of Buddhism. Yet they never consider whether what they have learned is correct, whether it can be realized, or when to realize it. They absorb Buddhist knowledge without discrimination, especially teachings from famous individuals, never attempting to discern because they lack the ability. The Buddha never said in the sutras that famous people are great virtuous teachers to be relied upon; instead, he repeatedly urged reliance on the Dharma, not on persons.

If one does not cultivate merit ordinarily, upon encountering the Dharma, one lacks the ability to discern right from wrong and can only rely on reputation or what is publicly recognized. What is meant by “publicly recognized”? “Public” refers to the masses; “publicly recognized” means what the masses accept. But truth is always held by a very few. The wisdom of the masses is insufficient to discern the levels of the Dharma; the masses are mostly deeply deluded. Relying on the masses’ views is utterly unreliable. In any group, whether secular or Buddhist, how many wise individuals can be found? One in ten thousand, perhaps, or maybe none at all. Groups are densely populated with ignorant people; few possess wisdom. To believe in public recognition is to believe in ignorance.

Why did the Buddha, nearing parinirvāṇa, admonish his disciples to rely on the Dharma, not on persons? Because relying on the Dharma is extremely difficult. Those who do not understand the Dharma and lack merit simply cannot rely on the Dharma and can only rely on persons. If one relies on the right person, it is due to merit cultivated in past lives and the maturation of causes and conditions. Most people do not rely on the right person. If they did, their practice would progress swiftly, not resulting in a lifetime of futility.

IV. Everyone claims to rely on the Dharma, not on persons, but few can actually rely on the Dharma; most rely on persons. Because the Dharma is so profound, and due to insufficient roots of goodness and merit from past lives, sentient beings do not understand the Dharma and cannot rationally judge its correctness, its level of correctness, or the degree of its error. To rely on the Dharma thus becomes exceedingly difficult. Therefore, they can only rely on persons—those with whom they have karmic connections, those with great reputations, or so-called publicly recognized individuals. Sentient beings can only do this; it is very hard for them to rely on the Dharma. This is a very common phenomenon in Buddhism today. If, when relying on persons, one can rely on the right person and judge the level of that person’s teachings, relying on what is correct, then this is both relying on persons and relying on the Dharma. Relying without understanding the Dharma is blind reliance, like gambling, entirely dependent on great merit for support.

Ordinary people indeed find it very difficult to rely on the Dharma, not on persons. But can those who have realized the mind completely rely on the Dharma, not on persons? Bodhisattvas who have realized the mind discover that they still do not understand many dharmas. They never knew before how ignorant they were, which is why arrogance overflowed, often comparing themselves to others. After realizing the mind, they know they are actually very ignorant and then urgently strive to practice, diligently day and night, contemplating and exploring the deeper mysteries of the Dharma. Therefore, even after realizing the mind, due to remaining afflictions of ignorance like dust and sand, their delusion is still profound, and they cannot fully rely on the Dharma, not on persons—especially those with heavy emotional attachments, who mostly rely on persons and cannot fully rely on the Dharma.

Thus, every Buddhist should strive as much as possible to rely on the Dharma, not on persons. Though it is not easy, cultivating more merit enables one to rely on the right Dharma and the right person. And relying on the right person is equivalent to relying on the Dharma. Therefore, as long as they are true virtuous teachers, we should still rely on them. Such reliance on persons means relying on the true Buddhadharma they expound, which is equivalent to relying on the Dharma.

V. What Is Meant by Relying on the Dharma, Not on Persons?

As long as one avoids personality cults, does not regard any single person as supreme, and can contemplate the Dharma as it truly is, that is relying on the Dharma. Relying on the Dharma is difficult. With some profound dharmas, if one’s meditative power is insufficient to contemplate them, the vast majority choose to rely on persons—those already renowned, whom they believe are publicly recognized by most and therefore must be correct. But we do not know who most people are, or even who the vast majority are. The Saha world is overwhelmingly filled with ordinary people. The wisdom and cognition of ordinary people are not reliable; even those with shallow meditative wisdom have unreliable cognition. Therefore, sages and absolute truth are not elected by vote. Reliance on persons remains overwhelmingly common. No matter how much the Buddha admonishes us to rely on the Dharma, without sufficient wisdom, merit, and meditative concentration, one simply cannot rely on the Dharma and can only rely on persons. Famous people, of course, enjoy prestige.

VI. How Can One Rely on the Dharma, Not on Persons?

The Dharma is the truth of reality. All learners should rely on the truth of reality. If one does not know what the truth of reality is, one should either choose to remain silent—not comment, not evaluate, not declare yes or no—or strive to discover the truth of reality, endeavoring to prove whether a particular dharma is indeed the truth of reality. Before obtaining evidence, choose silence.

This way, blind reliance on persons can be avoided. As long as one is not a Buddha, the Dharma one expounds is certainly flawed and incomplete. If one chooses to rely on a person, one relies on the flaws and incompleteness as well, leading to unfavorable consequences. Even the Dharma spoken by the Buddha, if not heard directly but transmitted indirectly, may contain errors or misinterpretations. As Buddhist disciples, one should strive to realize it personally, examining whether the indirectly transmitted Dharma is true and reasonable. Without generating true wisdom, one should not evaluate it lightly.

VII. If a Buddhist lacks rationality and wisdom, admires celebrities and reputation, enjoys memorizing the words of famous people without engaging their own mind in contemplation, then their thinking and reasoning become easily confined and obstructed. This hindrance may persist for lifetimes, making it difficult to break through, needlessly delaying their spiritual progress. Is this not a pity!

VIII. The sixth consciousness (mano-vijñāna) and the seventh consciousness (manas) are like two people. When one cannot observe the mind of the other, one should not rashly claim that the other lacks a certain mental state, thought, or emotion, etc. Making such claims is erroneous. Because the sixth consciousness is limited by afflictions and has not transformed consciousness into wisdom, it is difficult to observe the various functions of the seventh consciousness. When unable to observe, one cannot draw definitive conclusions about the seventh consciousness.

When the standard for defining a dharma is unclear, one cannot compare two dharmas and claim that because A does not conform to B or is inconsistent with B, A is wrong. Such judgment is abrupt and irrational. Because B is not necessarily the standard or correct, the inconsistency between A and B does not prove that A is wrong.

When a person possesses superior wisdom, understands both A and B, and knows what the correct standard is, then they can judge and determine whether A is indeed correct and whether B is correct. This is called relying on the Dharma, not on persons. Conversely, not knowing the ultimate standard of the Dharma, lacking the wisdom to discern whether A and B accord with the standard, yet wishfully determining that B is the standard because it is publicly recognized, and thus claiming that A, being inconsistent with B, must be wrong—this absolutely constitutes relying on persons, not the Dharma. It stems from emotional attachment and ignorance.

IX. How Should One Practice Relying on the Dharma, Not on Persons?

Relying on the Dharma means purely trusting and accepting based on the true reality of the Buddhadharma itself, being able to accurately judge whether a dharma is right or wrong. If it is right, rely on it for practice; if it is wrong, avoid it and inform fellow practitioners. If one can judge the right and wrong of dharmas, then one need not pay special attention to whether the author is famous or what the person is like; focus solely on the meaning of the Dharma. If the meaning is correct and true, even if the author is labeled as Māra (Pāpīyas), pay no heed. If the meaning is predominantly heretical, even if labeled as spoken by Śākyamuni Buddha, do not be interested.

For those who truly wish to rely on the Dharma, not on persons, to cultivate the supreme Dharma: If we were to label the Buddhist sutras as authored by Māra and present them as such, and then label the dharmas spoken by Māra as the Buddha’s words and present them as sutras, how would you judge the content? How would you treat these two kinds of Dharma meanings? If we were to scramble the authors’ names of all texts and articles or label them all as “Anonymous,” how should you treat the content of these writings?

X. The objective truth of all dharmas does not depend on whether certain sentient beings, some sentient beings, or all sentient beings understand or acknowledge it. Objective facts are facts. The blind not seeing the sun does not mean there is no sun. Thus, for example, the existence of the beauty of a flower, the existence of manifest and unmanifest forms in the five dusts (sense objects), and other dharmas do not change according to sentient beings’ knowledge or perception. Objective truths and facts require ignorant sentient beings to continually explore and discover them. No exploration means no discovery, but no discovery does not mean objective truth does not exist. It is called “objective” precisely because facts and laws do not change according to the will of individual or collective sentient beings; it only means whether sentient beings have the wisdom to discover and recognize them.

Sentient beings all take their own consciousness too seriously. Thus, when consciousness is deluded, they do not know it is deluded and complain that there is no truth. Truth is right before their eyes; what kind of vision one uses to see it is a significant issue. In the Saha world, when the vast majority of sentient beings do not recognize or accept the Buddhadharma, Buddhas and sages will not come to this world to transmit the Dharma or teach. Sentient beings who do not wish to awaken cannot attract light; even if light shines constantly above their heads, they remain asleep.

XI. Among the Four Reliances and Four Non-Reliances, one is “rely on the meaning, not on the words.” What is “meaning,” and what are “words”? When the Buddha taught, he told sentient beings to rely on the true meaning within his teachings, not on the superficial words. Words convey the surface meaning; the meaning is the hidden, true intent. Why didn’t the Buddha directly state the true meaning, instead concealing his true intent within the surface meaning?

Words correspond to the sixth consciousness, conveying superficial meaning. Behind the words and language lies the deeper meaning that the seventh consciousness intends to express. Under special circumstances, some people cannot, do not wish to, or find it difficult to directly express their true thoughts, so they imply or conceal them. Listeners must grasp the implied meaning beyond the words, understanding the meaning behind the surface language. Sentient beings find it somewhat easier to understand the surface meaning, but it is not the true meaning and is incomplete. The deeper meaning is harder for sentient beings to grasp, yet it is what the speaker truly intends to convey.

Therefore, nearing parinirvāṇa, the Buddha told his disciples to rely on the meaning, not on the words, urging sentient beings to rely on the ultimate meaning, which is the Buddha’s true intent. If sentient beings only comprehend and focus on the surface words, they have not understood the Buddha’s true meaning and have distorted the Buddha’s true intent.

Ordinary people also speak with explicit and implicit meanings. Explicit meaning is the surface meaning; implicit meaning is the true intent. Why not express one’s true thoughts and intentions directly? In some situations, certain thoughts cannot be directly expressed. One reason is concern that the other party cannot accept or understand them, fearing misunderstanding. Another reason is methodology and strategy: to inspire deep contemplation, allowing the listener to arrive at the answer through profound reflection, leading to greater acceptance and deeper wisdom.

Those skilled in the art of language employ such skillful means. Even the Buddha sometimes taught indirectly, not directly expressing the true meaning in his mind. One reason is fear that sentient beings cannot understand it or will misunderstand. Another is to guide sentient beings to contemplate more deeply, drawing their own conclusions, thereby increasing wisdom and faith—especially when sentient beings of different capacities are mixed together, making direct expression of profound meaning inappropriate.

XII. People today do not cultivate meditative concentration (samādhi) or cultivate it poorly; they only engage in empty talk. After reading a couple of books and intellectually understanding, they consider themselves enlightened—not even attaining intellectual understanding (解悟), they claim to have realization (证悟). Therefore, it is necessary for sentient beings in the Dharma-ending age to understand the difference between the seventh consciousness (manas) and the sixth consciousness (mano-vijñāna), so that the public knows what intellectual understanding is and what realization is, to prevent sentient beings from committing the grave offense of false claims of enlightenment.

The chaos of the Dharma-ending age is severe. Sentient beings have deep emotional attachments. They often say “rely on the Dharma, not on persons,” but in practice, they do the opposite. If sentient beings could practice according to principle and Dharma, truly relying on the Dharma, not on persons, uttering fewer slogans and doing more practical work to the best of their ability, truly following the Buddha’s teachings, the Buddha would be more at ease. Not opposing the Buddha and practicing according to his teachings is equivalent to repaying the Buddha’s kindness. Reducing emotional attachments a little allows one to see a little more of the truth of reality. Prioritize the spiritual path over emotional attachments. Emotional attachments cannot save people; each bears their own karma; no one can substitute for another. If one’s mind can be broader and energy more abundant, prioritize Buddhism and the life-and-death matter of sentient beings. Above all, first understand the Buddha’s kindness and find ways to repay it. Do not speak or act in ways that sadden the Buddha. Know that the Tathāgatagarbha stores seeds instant by instant. At every moment of our speech, actions, bodily, verbal, and mental activities, the Tathāgatagarbha supervises and records. Therefore, we must revere the Tathāgatagarbha and revere cause and effect—not just pay lip service while acting contrary to it.

XIII. Personally realizing all dharmas and directly perceiving them is more important than anything else. Even words spoken directly by the Buddha should be personally observed and realized before one can confirm them without doubt. Principles personally verified are facts; facts are more reliable than the Buddha’s words. Yet the Buddha’s own words are more reliable than transmitted sutras, because sutras have passed through others’ mouths and hands, constituting a retelling. Sutras are more reliable than treatises by Equal Enlightenment Bodhisattvas (等觉菩萨). Treatises by Equal Enlightenment Bodhisattvas are more reliable than those by other great Bodhisattvas. Treatises by other great Bodhisattvas are more reliable than words by ordinary people. Ultimately, no matter how reliable sutras and treatises are, none are more reliable than personal realization.

But now, even if the Buddha himself came to transmit the Dharma, all sentient beings could only believe in the sutras, not in the Buddha’s own words, because they would not know it was the Buddha descending into the world, and they lack the wisdom to discern whether the Dharma meaning is correct and true. Thus, their faith is blind faith and reverence, not faith based on realization or true faith; it is merely faith in the Buddha’s reputation and prestige. If sentient beings believed that the Buddha personally came to the Saha world to transmit the Dharma, they would believe the words spoken by the one appearing as the Buddha, not necessarily the sutras, even if the sutras are perfectly correct. This also shows that sentient beings’ faith in the Buddha and his teachings is blind reverence, not faith based on realization. If they believe the dharmas spoken by someone appearing as the Buddha, what if Māra appears in the Buddha’s form to transmit the Dharma? Then they would fully believe and be led astray, sinking in birth and death, unable to attain liberation.

Therefore, a thousand words, ten thousand phrases—only personal realization is most reliable. Believing only in facts, only in truth, is the principle all should follow. Yet realizing truth is extremely difficult, requiring immense merit and wisdom. Thus, sentient beings have no choice but to believe what others say—a helpless compromise. This is also why the Buddha, before departing, repeatedly admonished his disciples to adhere to the Four Reliances and Four Non-Reliances. Clearly, these Four Reliances are extremely difficult to follow; almost ninety-nine percent of people cannot do so due to deficiencies in merit, meditative concentration, and wisdom.

On the other hand, once it is said that one should believe in personal realization, some with deep arrogance will only believe their own inferences and interpretations, considering them personally realized, and no longer believe what those with realization say. They become increasingly arrogant, deceiving themselves and others, ultimately failing to gain the benefit of the Dharma. In the Dharma-ending age, the phenomenon of Buddhist study is difficult even for the Buddha to handle. Sentient beings are either extreme in one way or another—either blindly following or arrogantly overconfident. Those lacking wisdom find it hard to grasp an appropriate measure, a suitable degree. One might say even the world’s best physicians would throw up their hands.

The root error is severe; the right or wrong of branches and leaves becomes irrelevant. Discussing consciousness-only (唯识) without realization is a joke. Even with the wisdom of realization, one cannot properly explain consciousness-only without having cultivated and realized it. How can one explain consciousness-only? If the consciousness-only teachings in today’s world are transmitted to future generations, and if the expounders are renowned and authoritative, people in the future will again prostrate themselves in admiration, not knowing how many sincere Buddhist practitioners they will mislead. People often mistakenly assume that the works of famous and virtuous masters are entirely correct and that those who can explain consciousness-only must be realized practitioners. Sentient beings’ ignorance lies here; they are beyond remedy.

If one propagates and studies such consciousness-only teachings, the more one propagates, the greater the karmic burden; the more one studies, the less liberation one attains. The path of practice is perilous, fraught with various pitfalls. Cultivating merit and increasing wisdom are most essential. In the future, these teachings will become ancient texts. People often revere antiquity. If they revere such erroneous ancient texts, will it not harm people? How many people in the world have clear vision to distinguish right from wrong in ancient texts?

XIV. Master Daosheng Expounds the Dharma and the Stones Nod

The monk Daosheng once said: “Icchantikas (一阐提人) can also become Buddhas.” As there was no scriptural basis or proof, everyone considered this statement wrong. But Master Daosheng insisted on his view and refused to change, so the assembly expelled him from the Sangha. Left with no choice, Daosheng explained this principle to stones, and the stones, moved, nodded. Soon after, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra was transmitted from Western India to China. In it, the Buddha stated that icchantikas, upon eliminating all ignorance and karmic obstacles, can become Buddhas, proving Master Daosheng correct. Only then was he accepted back into the Sangha. This shows that a true Dharma, even without scriptural basis, is still truth, a correct view. Truth does not change according to people’s will, nor does it mean that what is not spoken by the Buddha is not truth.