The Significant Gap Between Understanding and Realization

If one sees that all appearances are not appearances, then one sees the Tathagata. If someone understands in this way—that everything they perceive (like the images displayed on a TV screen) is, at all times and in all places, an illusory manifestation of the substance and function within the Tathagatagarbha (like the TV screen itself)—then has this person realized the Tathagatagarbha? Not at all; they are still far from it. Hearing about it and imagining it are still vastly distant from actual realization; the gap between them is precisely the practice of the six paramitas of a Bodhisattva.

All the above content represents the most rudimentary understanding of the conscious mind, akin to hearsay—albeit heard from Buddhist scriptures or some book—and is not actually realized. It is not directly observed through experiential proof. No matter who says it, it remains mere intellectual understanding. When one truly realizes it in practice, it is unknown at which Bodhisattva stage (bhumi) one might be. The content discussed in the sutras, or repeated by others, once articulated by others, no longer belongs to personal experiential realization. Personal experiential realization would entail knowing very specifically and precisely, not in a general, vague, or ambiguous manner. To realize what specific role the Tathagatagarbha plays within the five aggregates, one must engage in Chan (Zen) meditation, diligently investigating it through actual practice, step by step, exploring and probing the process in detail. Without putting in the effort, relying solely on one’s own feelings and guesses, even if one understands a little, in reality, one remains utterly ignorant of the specific functions of the Tathagatagarbha—completely bewildered. Thus, all ignorance remains, and no wisdom is born.

Believing that all phenomena are like images on a TV screen is not equivalent to experiential realization or direct proof; it cannot be called realization because there is no evidence. Believing that all phenomena are created by the Tathagatagarbha and that we all live within the One True Dharma Realm is not enlightenment. If a single phrase from the Buddha could so easily enlighten sentient beings, the Dharma would be far too simple. A three-year-old hearing such a phrase might vaguely grasp a little and be considered enlightened; then becoming a Buddha would be effortless. The karmic obstacles accumulated over countless kalpas would pose no hindrance, and the vast ignorance would mean nothing. In reality, such ease does not exist.

Without engaging in Chan meditation, without investigation and verification, without collecting evidence and data, how can the manas (the mental faculty) confirm these claims as truth and accept them? Genuine realization requires knowing the detailed workings of the eighth consciousness (alaya-vijnana)—specifically, how it gives birth to all phenomena and the five aggregates, eighteen realms of sentient beings. One must understand and know all of this; the six paramitas of a Bodhisattva must be cultivated. It is not about understanding certain parts of the content, especially when those parts are conveyed by the Buddha or others. No matter how much one comprehends or elaborates on them, if it is not personally investigated, contemplated, and realized through one’s own effort, without direct experiential observation, the mind remains unsettled, filled with doubt. Such understanding may be a year, thirty years, a hundred years, ten thousand years, or even an incalculable kalpa away from true realization—it is impossible to say. Intellectual understanding is useless; it can vanish in an instant. Even the conscious mind does not know or realize the details, let alone the manas. In critical moments, it is the manas that takes charge. If the manas has not confirmed it, ignorance remains. All intellectual understanding at the time of death becomes like child’s play, vanishing like a bubble, unable to determine the destination of future lives.

Continually asking oneself “why” inwardly and resolving all such “whys” might bring one closer to the periphery of realization, but it still may not constitute realization itself. The Dharma is precisely this sacred and beyond conjecture.