Preface to the Method of the Mind Base and Mental Factors

Modern science, including psychology, is based on hypotheses, supplemented by experiments, and employs logical reasoning, deduction, and induction. When the conclusions derived from deduction and induction align with experimental results, achievements are made. This remains a matter of hypotheses and experiments unrelated to religion; of course, if researchers have religious beliefs, it is a different matter. If they do have religious beliefs, such achievements might never be realized, because they are bound by millennia of religious worship. Religion does not allow surpassing predecessors; once someone is regarded as a master, they become an absolute benchmark, always correct, and even errors are deemed right. Later generations can only prostrate themselves in worship at their feet, suppressing all wisdom and sealing off their talents and insights. Their views and ideologies must never contradict those of previous masters, let alone surpass or break through them.

The reason why people of insight outside religion have achieved so much is precisely because they are free from the constraints of authority. Western psychology not only has clear and profound theoretical foundations but also emphasizes practical application, extending into fields such as sociology, theology, medicine, and psychophysical development, yielding remarkable results. Our Buddhist community, however, is not like this. Buddhism has always prioritized reputation and authority. Once someone gains great fame, they secure a stable position and prestige, and sentient beings deify them, losing the rationality to use their own minds for thought. Due to blind worship, their intellect becomes imprisoned and sealed, preventing any breakthrough in realization. Thus, the errors of predecessors are perpetuated into future generations, causing sentient beings, already lacking in wisdom, to become even more ignorant.

In the doctrine of Consciousness-Only, concerning the mental faculty (manas) and mental factors (caitta), because the vast majority of people have no direct realization and cannot observe the manas through direct perception, they lack the ability to discern profound doctrines. Having absorbed vague theoretical knowledge from various sources, they believe they understand, and they set up whatever theories they have learned—regardless of their correctness—as standards and yardsticks, measuring everything indiscriminately, forcing things into a mold. This further obscures the essence of the Consciousness-Only theory, blinding many, so that no one can escape the misconceptions. The direct perception and observation of Consciousness-Only and the manas belong to the wisdom realm of bodhisattvas on the grounds. Even bodhisattvas at the three stages of initial enlightenment cannot achieve such direct perception; they can only grasp it analogously. How much less can ordinary beings, who are far from even enlightenment, directly perceive the functioning of the manas?

The mental factors associated with the manas are extremely difficult to verify. However, with prolonged practice, some may distinguish between consciousness (vijñāna) and the manas, and with the aid of meditative concentration (dhyāna), they might directly perceive a small portion of the manas’ functions—this should not be overly difficult. Although these belong to the wisdom of Consciousness-Only, with proper guidance, correct theoretical instruction, and the combination of meditative concentration and insight, realization is still achievable. Secular psychologists, with their observational wisdom, have drawn relatively reasonable conclusions; how much more so should we, as Buddhist disciples studying the Mahāyāna?

Those with deeper meditative concentration and wisdom, who are unwilling to be confined by authority, can, under the guidance of a good spiritual friend possessing direct perceptual wisdom, observe a portion of the manas’ mental activities. As long as one grasps the basic concepts and logical framework, and possesses strong meditative concentration, one can clarify the relationship between consciousness and the manas by observing one’s own and others’ mental states—this is not particularly difficult. The key issue is that most contemporary Buddhist practitioners lack sufficient meditative concentration and even more so, wisdom, making this quite challenging. In secular fields, researchers with a spirit of inquiry often possess considerable meditative concentration when exploring, which is why they achieve results. If they could only accept the doctrine of the Tathāgatagarbha and realize it, their wisdom would be extraordinary. Yet, they lack the roots of virtue and merit; they do not take refuge in the Buddha’s path, do not take refuge in the Three Jewels, cannot develop right faith in the Dharma, and thus cannot grasp the principle of non-arising and non-ceasing.

Those who possess the wisdom of Consciousness-Only can organically integrate the Dharma with various domains of social life, extract the Dharma from social life, and effectively use Consciousness-Only theory to resolve problems in real life, serving humanity and society with the Dharma. The Dharma encompasses all aspects of social life, especially Consciousness-Only, which cannot be separated from these secular matters. Without the secular world, there would be no Dharma, no Consciousness-Only. Current researchers of Consciousness-Only are detached from reality, failing to correlate it with their own and others’ psychophysical worlds. They only know how to recite texts and adhere to established theoretical knowledge, unable to grasp their own or others’ mental states. Thus, the profound Dharma of Consciousness-Only cannot be realized.