Different Views Lead to Different Actions

If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a Buddha, the ordinary person becomes a Buddha. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a fourth-stage arhat, the ordinary person becomes a fourth-stage arhat. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a third-stage practitioner, the ordinary person becomes a third-stage practitioner. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a second-stage practitioner, the ordinary person becomes a second-stage practitioner. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a first-stage practitioner, the ordinary person becomes a first-stage practitioner. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a stream-enterer candidate, the ordinary person becomes a stream-enterer candidate, on the verge of severing the view of self.

If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a bodhisattva who has awakened to the Mind, the ordinary person awakens to the Mind. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a first-ground bodhisattva, the ordinary person becomes a first-ground bodhisattva. If it is the same as that of a second-ground bodhisattva, the ordinary person becomes a second-ground bodhisattva. If an ordinary person's view is the same as that of a virtually enlightened bodhisattva, the ordinary person becomes a virtually enlightened bodhisattva.

Where the realization reaches, the practice follows. If the view is not ultimate, the practice will not be ultimate. Between the first fruit and the fourth fruit, the wisdom and insight are entirely different; thus the practice differs, the actions and conduct differ, and the physical, verbal, and mental actions differ. Who can claim that the insight of a first-fruit practitioner is the same as that of a fourth-fruit practitioner? Who can claim that the insight of a bodhisattva who has just awakened to the Mind is the same as that of a virtually enlightened bodhisattva or a Buddha? Because the insights differ, their wisdom differs, their ignorance differs, their speech and actions differ, their physical, verbal, and mental actions differ, and thus their fruition levels differ.

Because the first-fruit practitioner’s realization is not penetrating enough, they must continue to study the Four Noble Truths and observe the selfless nature of the five aggregates and eighteen elements. As their wisdom further advances, they become a second-fruit practitioner. Continuing to practice, their wisdom grows, their insight becomes more penetrating, samadhi arises, wisdom increases, afflictions are severed, and they become a third-fruit practitioner. Continuing to observe and practice, their insight becomes even more penetrating, afflictions are completely eradicated, and they become a fourth-fruit arhat.

The Mahayana path is also like this. It is all due to differences in insight, disparities in wisdom, and variations in afflictions and ignorance that their practices differ.

Afflictions of thought arise because incorrect understanding causes afflictions and delusions in thinking. If understanding is completely correct, as correct as that of a Buddha, then there are no afflictions of thought, no habitual afflictions, and no ignorance. Therefore, the failure to sever afflictions of thought is the result of unpenetrating insight.

Differences in insight lead to differences in afflictions of thought. Even within the same fruition level, insights differ, practices differ, afflictions of thought differ, and the time required to progress to the next fruition level also differs. If insights were all the same, there would be no arguments or disputes.