Miscellaneous Discourses on the Dharma (Part II)
Chapter 12: The Buddha-Dharma and Non-Buddhist Teachings
1. Why Non-Buddhist Practitioners Attained Fruition, Even the Fourth Fruit, Upon First Hearing the Buddha Teach the Dharma
Non-Buddhist practitioners had all cultivated the four dhyānas and eight meditative absorptions, subduing and eradicating afflictions of delusion regarding phenomena to varying degrees. All that was lacking was the contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) wisdom regarding the principle of the Four Noble Truths; the conditions for seeing the Path were already fulfilled—it was, as the saying goes, everything ready except the east wind. This east wind refers to the conditions for seeing the Path. Once those conditions appeared, seeing the Path could happen immediately, and that condition was the Buddha coming to proclaim the principle of the Four Noble Truths. Those who possessed the conditions for the first fruit attained the first fruit; those who possessed the conditions for the second fruit attained the second fruit; those who possessed the conditions for the third fruit attained the third fruit; those who possessed the conditions for the fourth fruit attained the fourth fruit. Therefore, each person who heard the Buddha teach the Dharma attained a different fruition, the difference lying in the differing conditions for seeing the Path.
Seeing the Path is like eating the seventh pancake. The non-Buddhist practitioners had already eaten six pancakes and were only seventy or eighty percent full, not yet completely satiated. When they saw the Buddha expound the principle of the Four Noble Truths, they ate the seventh pancake and were instantly full. The first six pancakes were the foundation, lining the stomach; adding one more pancake filled it completely. Do not merely look at someone's final result; look at the arduous process of their cultivation and how much sweat they diligently shed. If they had not paid an enormous price, had not diligently cultivated the four dhyānas and eight absorptions, there would be no foundation of six pancakes; even if given six more pancakes, they probably still could not eat their fill and see the Path. Some say that in the question-and-answer exchanges between the Buddha and his disciples, the disciples saw the Path in an instant—just a matter of a few minutes, so easy, without such hardship and trouble. But do you know that the merit of seeing the Path within those few minutes was accumulated from the countless wholesome roots and merit of the Buddha's disciples? How long did each of them take to eat those six pancakes? How arduous was it? How much did they pay in price in past lives and this life?
Many people envy athletes who win a gold medal in a single competition—international gold medals, national gold medals—thinking how lucky they are, completely failing to see their years of striving, how much sweat and tears they shed, how much rest they gave up, how much physical cost they paid, even the cost to life and health, how much grievance they endured, before seizing the gold medal in one stroke at the competition. Where in the world or beyond the world is anything so easy? Is attaining fruition as easy as eating cabbage? Through measureless kalpas of birth-and-death transmigration, evil karma has piled up like mountains, entangling and binding. How could a few minutes or a few hours break through the karmic obstacles of birth-and-death accumulated over many measureless kalpas, extinguishing the karma of the three evil destinies? How is that possible? One would not even dream of such good fortune. Otherwise, why would there be boundless sentient beings in birth-and-death rather than boundless Buddhas?
2. The Difference Between the Buddha-Dharma and Worldly Teachings
The Buddha-Dharma is the dharma that guides sentient beings to liberation, enabling them to attain liberation from birth-and-death. Worldly teachings include the various teachings outside the Buddha's Path, such as Confucian and Daoist teachings; these teachings cannot guide sentient beings toward liberation and cannot free them from birth-and-death. Only the Buddha-Dharma speaks of the illusory emptiness of the world and the emptiness of ultimate reality; only by realizing emptiness can there be liberation. Teachings outside the Buddha's Path mostly speak of existence; even those that speak of emptiness speak only of partial emptiness, emptiness at a shallow level. The worldly emptiness is never ultimate, let alone the supramundane emptiness of ultimate reality. Emptiness brings liberation; existence is bondage. The Buddha-Dharma is the dharma of emptiness that liberates and seeks nothing; non-Buddhist teachings are the dharma of existence that binds, a dharma that seeks something.
The Buddha-Dharma is the Buddha-Dharma, and non-Buddhist teachings are non-Buddhist teachings—their views and concepts differ. If they were the same, non-Buddhist teachings would not be non-Buddhist teachings and would also be called the Buddha-Dharma. Some say Laozi was also an enlightened sage, but if Laozi were enlightened and the dharma he transmitted could also liberate sentient beings, then the Buddha would not have needed to come to the human world—it would have been superfluous. The common ground between non-Buddhist teachings and the Buddha-Dharma lies in meditative concentration and worldly goodness, but their views, concepts, and realms differ. The Buddha-Dharma teaches that the world is illusory and unreal; it teaches emptiness. Non-Buddhist teachings teach existence, practicing meditative concentration and wholesome dharmas on the basis of existence. Therefore, no matter how good their meditative concentration or how good their minds, they cannot realize emptiness and cannot attain liberation from the five aggregates (pañca-skandha).
Although certain worldly teachings also contain terms like "source" or "origin," these are all shallow meanings, referring to worldly sources and origins; the source is still existence, not empty, and does not touch upon the fundamental source of birth-and-death that underlies the essence of all dharmas. Worldly teachings are not truly awakened dharma; otherwise, worldly teachings would be called the Buddha-Dharma.
3. Wholesome Dharmas Are Not the Dharma of Liberation
Question: Did Lei Feng eradicate the view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi-prahāṇa)? Was there still a "self" in his mind? Did those who sacrificed themselves heroically for others and died righteously eradicate the view of self? Was there still a "self" in their minds?
Answer: The Buddha-Dharma is the dharma of learning from the Buddha, cultivating practice, and becoming a Buddha. The wholesome dharmas of worldly teachings, the wholesome dharmas of the human world, are not the Buddha-Dharma. Non-Buddhist teachings also contain wholesome dharmas, but as long as the principle of liberation is not understood, wholesome dharmas cannot liberate sentient beings; they can only yield the meritorious rewards of humans and gods, and when the retribution is exhausted, one is still not spared the birth-and-death transmigration of the three evil destinies. To avoid the transmigration of birth-and-death, one must also engage in contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) on the birth-and-death bondage of wholesome dharmas, contemplate wholesome dharmas as empty, and not cling to wholesome dharmas in the mind; only then can one attain liberation.
Furthermore, the subject and master of liberation is the manas. One must completely eradicate all views of self in the manas regarding the five-aggregate body—all non-true views and non-principled views—seeing no dharma whatsoever among the five aggregates as self or as real; only then is there hope of liberation. Practicing wholesome dharmas while clinging to the view of self is still the bondage of birth-and-death. Know that the true mind and self-nature that is truly liberated forever has no wholesome mind and does not practice wholesome dharmas, has no unwholesome mind and does not practice unwholesome dharmas, has no worldly mind and does not practice worldly dharmas; therefore it is not bound by any of these dharmas—only that is a liberated mind. Clinging one-sidedly to wholesome dharmas or to any dharma whatsoever, one cannot attain liberation.
4. The Difference Between the Buddha-Dharma and Non-Buddhist Teachings Regarding Affirmation and Negation
The non-Buddhists' negation: they see material form with their eyes yet say it does not exist. If it does not exist, why is there any speech about it? The non-Buddhists' affirmation: although all material form is clearly impermanent and empty, they say it is real and indestructible. The dharma the Buddha taught is neither existent nor nonexistent, neither existent nor nonexistent in the sense of both being and not being; it is both existent and nonexistent, and is not "neither non-existent nor non-nonexistent." To take one side of this and disregard the rest is the non-Buddhist view. The Buddha-Dharma is always perfectly all-encompassing; however you speak of it—left or right—it all holds true. Non-Buddhist doctrines, however, can never be self-consistent; they contradict themselves.
5. No Matter How Long a Wrong View Is Propagated, It Will Never Become Truth
Question: How does one judge whether a sūtra is genuine or spurious? Among Buddhist mantras, which are in accord with the Dharma and which are not—what is the criterion for judgment? The Tripitaka contains many Tibetan Buddhist classics; if they are spurious sūtras, why would the Tripitaka include them? If some sūtras and mantras are problematic, why have they been transmitted for over a thousand years without dying out?
Answer: Judging the authenticity of sūtras and mantras depends entirely on experience and wisdom; it cannot be taught. If you lack experience and wisdom, do not make judgments or pronounce verdicts; it is best to be careful and prudent and keep your distance, lest you create evil karma without knowing it. The Tripitaka was mostly collected, compiled, edited, and organized by ordinary beings (pṛthagjana)—but what do ordinary beings understand? If the Māra King saw that the Tripitaka had great influence and went to edit and print it, what content would he add to it?
No matter how long non-Buddhist wrong dharmas are propagated, this cannot show that the dharma transmitted is correct. The reason it has been transmitted so long is that sentient beings are foolish and lack the wisdom to distinguish right from wrong. For example, for measureless kalpas sentient beings have believed the five aggregates are the self and that the self is real; for measureless measureless kalpas they have believed this, transmitted down to the present—yet this cannot show that the notion "the five aggregates are the self" is correct and without error. Sentient beings have believed for measureless kalpas that one should grasp the worldly dharmas of the five aggregates, that worldly dharmas are good and cannot be left even for a moment—but in fact it is not so. If the Buddha had not come to tell us that the worldly dharmas of the five aggregates are empty and not-self, would we not forever continue grasping the worldly dharmas of the five aggregates? Even given another measureless measureless kalpas, it would be the same. What can time prove or change, for foolish and ignorant sentient beings?
Likewise, no matter how many people share the same views, a wrong view is still not a right view. Truth is not established by the number of people who accept it; it is often at the top of the pyramid, not in the hands of those at the very bottom. Therefore, in an impure land like the Sahā world, truth is often held in the hands of a few, a very few; and at certain times, there is not a single person in the whole world who holds the truth—all are foolish, ignorant sentient beings.
6. The Buddha's Most Original Buddha-Dharma Is the Three Baskets and Twelve Divisions of the Canon
The so-called "original" should be all the dharma the Buddha proclaimed during his forty-nine years, including the three vehicles of great, middle, and small: the liberation path of the small vehicle's arhats and the middle vehicle's pratyekabuddhas, and the path to buddhahood of the great vehicle's prajñā and Yogācāra dharma. Of course, the middle and small vehicles are also a small part of the path to buddhahood, the earliest part, part of the Mahāyāna Buddha-Dharma. The entire path to buddhahood is threaded throughout by true suchness, buddha-nature, and tathāgatagarbha. The Āgama sūtras alone can only lead to the small vehicle's arhatship, gaining the wisdom of liberation from the world of the three realms, but cannot gain the Buddha's omniscience/wisdom of all aspects (sarvākārajñatā).
The Āgama sūtras and the arhat fruit are not yet ultimate; on that basis, continuing to study prajñā and Yogācāra allows continuous advancement on the path, culminating in buddhahood. Therefore, the Buddha's most original Buddha-Dharma is the three baskets and twelve divisions of the canon; there is no "original" versus "later." The Buddha's original Buddha-Dharma in other buddha-lands was not as limited as the three baskets and twelve divisions of the Sahā world—these three baskets and twelve divisions are like the dirt in a fingernail, while the Buddha-Dharma transcending them is like the dirt of the great earth. Therefore, all dharma that leads to buddhahood is Buddha-taught; there is no need to fragment the complete path to buddhahood.
Yet some people say only the Āgama sūtras are the Buddha's original Buddha-Dharma, and the other Mahāyāna teachings are not Buddha-taught but fabricated by later people. But if a school collects some materials to become that school's history, each has its own historical records, which are then passed down—who can prove that one school's historical transmission is genuine while other transmissions are not? On what basis should we believe that one school's textual research is the true history, matching what actually happened at the time? Through supernatural powers, or through immense wisdom? Are those doing the research great cultivators of successive generations with penetrating wisdom and the dharma eye? If not, on what basis should we trust their own judgments?
If they are not great cultivators of successive generations, lacking the wisdom-eye and dharma-eye, on what basis do they judge that the Theravāda is the most original Buddha-taught teaching, while the other Mahāyāna sūtras and the three baskets and twelve divisions are not Buddha-taught? On what basis do they thus slander the most precious treasure that the Buddha painstakingly transmitted over forty-nine years? If the Buddha had taught only the Āgama sūtras in his forty-nine years, by what would the Buddha have become a Buddha? Could one become a Buddha merely by cultivating such an extremely coarse and shallow dharma as the Āgamas? For such a coarse and shallow dharma, why would the Buddha have needed to teach it repeatedly for forty-nine years? Who can prove that the Buddha taught only the Āgamas in forty-nine years and never taught the Mahāyāna dharma? Who has opened the eye to witness the entire historical background and process of the Buddha's teaching in those years?
Those who slander the Mahāyāna dharma and deny it, and those who propagate Theravāda teachings that conflict with the Mahāyāna, commit offenses that surge to the heavens. If anyone has ever propagated Theravāda Buddhism to resist the Mahāyāna dharma, they should quickly repent publicly; otherwise, the cause for the hells has been established and cannot be changed, and evil retribution will inevitably befall them, unavoidable. Those who slander the Mahāyāna are the greatest evildoers in the world; among all evil dharmas their offense is heaviest, surpassing even murderers, arsonists, and those guilty of the ten unwholesome deeds beyond pardon.
To slander the Mahāyāna is to blind sentient beings' eyes; to slander the Mahāyāna is to cut off sentient beings' path of seeking liberation. Those who cut off sentient beings' path of liberation will themselves, life after life, fall into the Avīci hell. The foolish and unwise actually resist the Buddha's Mahāyāna Buddha-Dharma; when evil retribution arrives, they can only experience endless suffering and torment, forced to bear pains they cannot bear. Such is the fate of those who assist in propagating slander of the Mahāyāna dharma. Those with any clarity of mind should quickly repent; otherwise the evil karma will be fixed, and there will be no further chance for repentance and reform.
All sentient beings want to be human and want to be human again in the next life; all fear the suffering of the three evil destinies, all want liberation from the three evil destinies and freedom from them, all want to eradicate the view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi-prahāṇa) and sever the three fetters, all want to attain fruition. But what do they do every day? Their bodily, verbal, and mental actions all correspond to the three evil destinies. Clearly they wish to rely on the Buddha's teachings for liberation, yet deliberately or inadvertently they slander the Buddha's teachings—is this not foolishness? Every day they live depending on the pure river's water, yet deliberately or inadvertently they pour filth into that river—is this not foolishness? All illnesses are easy to cure; only the illness of foolishness is hard to treat. Therefore the Buddha taught the Dharma and delivered beings in the human and god realms, and did not go to the animal realm to teach the Dharma.
7. Can Proponents of the Six-Consciousnesses Theory Attain Fruition?
Proponents of the six-consciousnesses theory acknowledge only the five consciousnesses and the sixth consciousness, not acknowledging the seventh and eighth consciousnesses; in essence this belongs to annihilatory emptiness/nihilistic emptiness (uccheda-śūnyatā) doctrine. If one does not acknowledge the seventh consciousness—the consciousness that is one's master—then one cannot engage in contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) on the manas's masterly nature, nor on its nature as one of the six faculties (roots); one cannot understand how there can be a dharma that is both faculty and consciousness. Because of not understanding, they will deny the existence of the seventh consciousness, the manas. Then the eighteen dhātus will lack one element, the view of self cannot be completely eradicated, and attaining fruition is impossible.
Theravāda Buddhism is the six-consciousnesses theory. The Āgama sūtras taught by the Buddha touch upon the seventh and eighth consciousnesses; he taught that all sentient beings have "self as island" (attadīpa), have "dharma-dwelling," have "sentient beings' refuge"—this refers to the eighth consciousness. He also taught the manas as one of the six faculties and one of the eighteen dhātus. It is only that those people of the Theravāda sects cannot understand the true meaning spoken in the Āgama sūtras; they can only understand the six consciousnesses, so they acknowledge only the six consciousnesses and become proponents of the six-consciousnesses theory. If one does not acknowledge a principal consciousness of transmigration and denies it, this is tantamount to slandering the Dharma; and slandering the Dharma is tantamount to slandering the Buddha. Those who slander the Buddha and the Dharma cannot attain fruition.
Once sentient beings slander the Buddha and the Dharma, not only do the three refuges and five precepts fail to be established, the bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī precepts also fail to be established, and the bodhisattva precepts even more so cannot be established. A true bodhisattva, upon hearing sounds of slander against the Buddha and the Dharma, feels as if three hundred spears were piercing his heart—how could he still personally slander the Mahāyāna Buddha-Dharma and the bodhisattva piṭaka? Therefore, true bodhisattvas would never be willing to dwell and cultivate together with persons or groups that slander the Buddha and the Dharma, let alone go so far as to praise and publicize the teachings of such persons or groups. True bodhisattvas will not do this; those who do this will not become true bodhisattvas. True bodhisattvas all strive to protect and uphold the Three Jewels and Buddhism, paying attention to the overall developmental trends and changes of Buddhism, concerned with whether themselves and sentient beings can attain liberation, not caring only about some personal benefit.
8. Is the Mahāyāna Dharma Buddha-Taught?
Regarding whether the Mahāyāna is Buddha-taught, online forums are constantly embroiled in fierce, unending debate. The side that denies the Mahāyāna is Buddha-taught consists of those small-vehicle people who study Theravāda Buddhism. They mainly study the Āgama sūtras, supplementing this with keeping precepts and cultivating meditative concentration. But if one does not believe the Mahāyāna was spoken personally by the Buddha, one of course also denies the tathāgatagarbha dharma, and thereby indirectly denies cause-and-effect and transmigration. Where does cause-and-effect come from? Of course it is realized by the tathāgatagarbha. Why does transmigration through the six destinies occur? Of course it is because the tathāgatagarbha is indestructible, carrying the karmic seeds, going with the manas to future lives and manifesting the retributive body of future lives.
Whether the Mahāyāna is Buddha-taught—people with wholesome roots, merit, and wisdom need not do any textual research at all. Whether a dharma is right or wrong becomes perfectly clear after reading it twice and pondering it. Is research even needed? Those who insist on doing such research are all people of very low wisdom without wholesome roots and merit. For over two thousand years, no one has produced any research result or proof showing that the Mahāyāna is not Buddha-taught but fabricated by later people. What later person could fabricate such a sublime Buddha-Dharma? Their wisdom would be on par with the Buddha's—truly remarkable.
Those who practice Theravāda Buddhism and study the Pāli Āgamas are, generally speaking, more diligent and hardworking than we in the Chinese lands, truly cultivating and practicing. But if they deny the Mahāyāna and deny the tathāgatagarbha, their wholesome roots and merit are very low, and no matter how they cultivate, they will not attain fruition. Because they do not believe the Buddha's words, lacking full faith in the Three Jewels and sufficient faith in the Buddha, the three refuges and five precepts are not established, and they cannot attain fruition. If such an unattained Theravāda teacher's transmission is erroneous, then those who follow and study after them, including people in the Chinese lands, also cannot attain fruition.
Although the Theravāda is very particular about precepts and meditative concentration, if they deny the Mahāyāna, their precepts have deficiencies, and their meditative concentration will not be very high. Moreover, by denying the Mahāyāna, there will be no blessing power of the buddhas and bodhisattvas; relying on individual strength, no matter how they cultivate, there will be no accomplishment. In the Buddha's time, the non-Buddhist practitioners later came to have great faith in the Buddha and the dharma he taught; because they had faith in the Three Jewels, the three refuges and five precepts were established, and with their high meditative concentration, they could attain fruition upon hearing the Buddha teach—even the fourth fruit. But the small-vehicle people who deny the Mahāyāna cannot attain fruition.
The Theravāda people who deny the Mahāyāna and the tathāgatagarbha—their wisdom is truly poor. If they contemplate and analyze the origin of their own five-aggregate body, they would know: without an indestructible tathāgatagarbha, how could there be life after life, how could there be the transmigration of birth-and-death? Without an indestructible dharma, what meaning would a lifetime's cultivation have? Where are the seeds of cultivation stored? Without a place to store the seeds, how could there be the retributive fruits of cultivation in future lives?
Some people think Theravāda Buddhism is good and go follow and study it. In terms of meditative concentration and precepts, Theravāda Buddhism is quite good, but overall, within the Buddha-Dharma it lacks a strong pillar, lacks a substantial dharma as support—like a castle in the air, useless to cultivate. Not only is it useless to cultivate, it also plants evil karmic seeds of annihilatory emptiness/nihilistic emptiness (uccheda-śūnyatā) in the field of the Ālayavijñāna; in future lives when those seeds sprout, one will still be a proponent of nihilistic emptiness, sinking into the three evil destinies to suffer endlessly. Therefore, those who follow and study Theravāda Buddhism must polish their eyes, carefully contemplate its drawbacks and consequences, and quickly withdraw, to avoid suffering in future lives. If one propagates the nihilistic-emptiness Theravāda Buddhism that denies the Mahāyāna dharma and influences others, the offense is extremely grave—it may be karma of the hells. Cause-and-effect is truly fearsome; be ever so careful.
When those people read the Mahāyāna dharma, they cannot interpret its true meaning; they are all at a loss, not knowing what the Buddha is saying. Because they cannot understand, they vehemently deny it again and again—foolish and pitiable, precisely because they lack wholesome roots and merit. If they cannot understand the Mahāyāna dharma, then neither can they fully understand the small-vehicle dharma, and therefore they cannot attain fruition. In the small-vehicle dharma, the World-Honored One also spoke of the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha, only in rather veiled language, not expressed very directly. By denying the Mahāyāna, they also indirectly deny the small vehicle; the Buddha's precepts are then not established, and liberation is hopeless. Those people all claim their meditative concentration is so high; many claim to have the fourth dhyāna, but in fact they most likely do not even have the first dhyāna. However, they are indeed serious about practice and very diligent; their male practitioners are much better than some of ours in the Chinese lands, all very diligent. Some of our male practitioners in the Chinese lands are too lax, frequently conducting deliverance and transmigration rituals, so their karmic obstructions deepen, they lose the mind for cultivation, and few cultivate diligently.
Therefore, whoever goes to a monastery to request deliverance and transmigration rituals harms not only the ordained bhikṣus but Buddhism as a whole. If the monastics have no cultivation, Buddhism will perish. After performing transmigration rituals, how would they have the energy and state of mind to work hard on the Buddha-Dharma? Everyone says today's monastics are not as good as before, that the cultivation atmosphere in monasteries is poor—but who caused such consequences? Who brought worldly customs and afflictive habits into the monasteries? Who polluted the monasteries' environment for cultivating the Path? Who deprived the monastics of the time and energy for cultivating the Path?
9. The Buddha-Dharma Has Always Been the One-Buddha-Vehicle Dharma
The Buddha-Dharma has always been the one-vehicle path, the one-buddha-vehicle; all Buddha-Dharmas are each one dharma within the dharma of becoming a Buddha. Great and small vehicles within the Buddha-Dharma have never been separable—one is the foundation, the other is the advancement and progression, the next stage. Why should they be separated?
The Theravādins regard arhats as buddhas and the Buddha as an arhat—very serious slander of the Buddha—so they cannot have the precept substance, nor can they attain fruition. Since they do not believe the Mahāyāna is Buddha-taught, even presenting the Śūraṅgama Sūtra to them is useless. Faith is the mother of the Path and the source of merit; without faith there is no faith-faculty, and no wholesome roots, and cultivation cannot accomplish the Way. Following them for however many kalpas is futile. If you help them publicize and bolster their influence, you will strengthen the forces that slander the Buddha and destroy Buddhism, accelerating the destruction of Buddhism and the Mahāyāna sūtras—the offense is truly enormous, an Avīci-hell offense.
Later on, the Māra King will exploit the foolishness of Buddhist practitioners, feigning textual research again, then creating "eastern transmission" and "western transmission" divisions, splitting Buddhism into fragments so that no one can attain accomplishment, all transmigrating in birth-and-death under Pāpīyān's palm. Who has what qualification and wisdom to research the course of spreading the Dharma and the true events of the Buddha's era? Only a bodhisattva of the Buddha's era reborn in later times, possessing Yogācāra seed-wisdom, who studied and cultivated alongside the Buddha and has the seeds from that time, could do so. But if a bodhisattva truly possessed Yogācāra seed-wisdom, a glance at the sūtras would quickly reveal which are Buddha-taught and which are not; they would not be muddled and unable to distinguish. And what ability does an ordinary being (pṛthagjana) have to research ancient Buddhist history? There are even amateur Buddhism enthusiasts doing such research—what a colossal joke!
Greed can be delivered, hatred can be delivered; only foolishness—even the Buddha can do nothing about it. Those with hatred fall into the hells, and Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva delivers beings in the hells; those with greed become hungry ghosts, and the buddhas and bodhisattvas go to the hungry-ghost destiny to deliver them; but foolish bacteria-like and animal-like beings—no one can deliver them; they cannot understand the Buddha-Dharma, cannot understand human speech.
They also seriously misunderstand meditative concentration. Quite a few of them commit the grave lie, claiming that they themselves and others have the fourth dhyāna, when in fact what they have is the excessive blankness state of preparatory concentration (anāgamya-samādhi). In such concentration there are no thoughts or mental wandering, as if one did not exist, and they mistake it for the fourth dhyāna. Such groups have no one who has attained fruition and can fundamentally produce no one who has attained fruition or accomplishment; following behind them, one can only create some karma and gain no benefit. Yet some people like the Theravāda's denial of the Mahāyāna—what can be done? When Buddhism is destroyed and the great river dries up, how could there be small streams? When the Mahāyāna dharma perishes, Buddhism perishes; when Buddhism perishes, what Theravāda or Mahāyāna transmission remains? What liberation remains? One might as well go study non-Buddhist teachings—at the very least one would not slander the Buddha and the Dharma, and would have no karma of the hells.
