认知与表达3
Cognition and Expression Part 3
听说今天新冠检测阳了两个？两个太少了，应该多阳几个（开玩笑）！有没有这种本事的师兄，一边得了新冠，一边打坐进入禅定的？没有的话，说明修行不努力。
COVID and Spiritual Practice
Recently, I heard about two people testing positive for COVID-19. While some might jest that this number is too low, it raises an interesting question: Are there practitioners skilled enough to maintain deep meditative concentration (samadhi) while having COVID? If not, perhaps it indicates we need to intensify our practice.
以前有部李连杰主演的电影《南北少林》，李连杰在里面扮演的角色叫智明，里面有段关于练功治病的片段：一天，智明带着一个师弟去偷看师父练武功，由于当时师父感冒了，做的动作看起很搞笑，智明不解，就问师父：“为什么您做这些奇怪的动作呢？”师父说：“练功的人，生了病就不要吃药，练功就好了。”他们练武功练的是肌肉、骨头、气脉这些外在的东西，被称之为“功夫”。我们练的是心，是内在的功夫。心是产生一切，包括身体、气脉，乃至于外境的根本原因。
This reminds me of a scene from the movie "Shaolin Temple" starring Jet Li. In it, a master demonstrates practicing kung fu to cure illness. While they focused on external kung fu (training muscles, bones, and energy channels), our practice is internal - focused on the mind. The mind is considered the root of everything, including our body, energy, and environment.
如果我们真的把心练得很好，对付这些病痛就不在话下。这会马上产生一个话题：“既然这样，为什么高僧大德还是会生病呢？”其实，修行不是一个简单的过程，其涵盖的领域非常广大。有些高僧大德只是明白了觉性，但由于他禅定的量并不深，或者过去的业障、业力不一定消尽了，虽然悟境可能很深，但一样会生病。而有些人可能根本没有认识本性，但禅定非常好，气脉也调理得非常好，比如拙火修得很好的人，诸如感冒这些小病一来，打坐拙火一烧，病很快就好了，但是，他不一定真的证悟了本性。所以这不是绝对的，好像修行好就什么都要好。
If we truly master our minds, dealing with illnesses should be an easy job. However, this raises another question: Why do highly accomplished monks and spiritual leaders still get sick? The answer lies in the complexity of spiritual practice. Some may have great insights but lack deep samadhi or still carry karmic burdens. Others might excel in meditation techniques like tummo (inner fire) without having fully realized their true nature. Therefore, we can't assume that good practice guarantees perfect health in all aspects.
有些人问：“开悟了以后，还有这个执著吗？”很多开悟的人执著厉害得很，他开悟了以后去串习相应的见地，慢慢把这些执著化掉。化的方式，跟我们修单空、修禅定的压制方式不太一样。我们现在把贪嗔痴慢疑当作敌人，通过守戒、禅定，以及对付贪嗔痴慢疑的相关观修法，来狠狠地跟它们斗争。这些都属于对治型的修法。大圆满的禅定不是这样对治修行的：你就看着它，“原来你跟我是一伙的”，贪嗔痴慢疑就真的跟你一伙了，悟境越来越大，修起来特别的快。这是悟后起修。
Enlightenment and Attachments
Many wonder if enlightenment eliminates all attachments. Interestingly, even enlightened individuals can have strong attachments. The difference lies in how they approach these attachments post-enlightenment. Instead of suppressing negative emotions through concentration or mere emptiness meditation, advanced practices like Dzogchen take a different approach. Practitioners learn to observe these emotions without judgment, transforming them into allies for faster spiritual growth.
禅宗说真正的修行要悟后才能起修，前面的不算。实际上我们不能这么去算，如果悟后才能起修，那我们绝大部分的修行就完蛋了。目前，对我们来说，次第的修行是很重要的。而且，如果我们不破坏皈依，发心准确，所做的所有修行都不会白费。一旦证悟以后，你会发现前面做的东西叫功不唐捐，对你的悟境有很大、很具体的帮助。所以，并不是悟后起修才是对的，悟前修行都是浪费，这些说法很片面性。
While some traditions, like Chan, emphasize that true practice begins after enlightenment, this view can be limiting. Our current gradual practice is crucial. As long as we maintain proper motivation and don't abandon our spiritual refuge, our efforts contribute significantly to our eventual realization.
大家在书上或网上看到了一些故事传说后，要小心，因为里面说的一些关于佛法的神奇故事、传说，或是一些平常的描述，很多都是胡说八道，多是人的臆想，且讲得很片面、很狭隘。要真正了解佛法，要了解它的各种宗派、修行人的具体情况，那是一个很深邃又庞大的领域。我就在那里折腾了几十年，我觉得也就沧海一粟。尽管只是从缝里面看到一点点，但也足以让我得出一个结论：“厉害！”只这么一个结论，我没办法那么全面的、深刻的、仔细的把浩瀚的佛法表述出来。
Caution with Spiritual Stories
We should approach miraculous stories and legends about Buddhism with caution. Many are products of imagination and present a narrow view of the tradition. Buddhism's depth and breadth are truly vast - even after decades of study, one might feel they've only scratched the surface.
换句话来说，对我们看到的东西，听到的传说，要持谨慎态度！甚至有些东西，是打着高僧大德的名义来说的，搞得大家不知道该怎么去看待和表达。如果遇到这些事情，我觉得在不了解的情况下要采取回避的态度，来个闷声大发财，这是最好的处理方法。
When encountering claims or stories attributed to revered figures that we don't fully understand, it's often best to maintain a respectful distance and refrain from hasty judgments or interpretations. This approach of mindful restraint can be the wisest course of action in navigating the complex landscape of spiritual teachings and anecdotes.
我为什么会说到这些呢？因为经常有人在手机上问我一些情况，里面牵涉到一些高僧大德，是是非非的，这些情况我基本上不作回答。为什么？因为很多事情并不像传说的那样，有些人说的可能是真话，但观察也可能有片面性。
Why Buddhism is Often Misunderstood
I often receive questions about high-ranking monks and respected Buddhist teachers, along with various conflicting accounts about them. I typically don't respond to these queries. Why? Because the reality often differs from the rumors, and even truthful accounts can be one-sided.
我想说的是，佛法的领域非常宽广、深邃、广大，但往往被人搞成了迷信，简单的崇拜，道德约束，或者有人根据自己的角度得出一些结论，但基本都是很片面的，甚至是错误的。
Buddhism is incredibly vast and profound. Unfortunately, it's frequently reduced to superstition, blind worship, or mere moral guidelines. People often draw conclusions based on limited perspectives, resulting in oversimplified or incorrect interpretations.
我手机里的联系人有很多是佛教徒，他们有自己的朋友圈，成群结队地发表他们对佛教的看法，以及各种各样高僧大德的开示，或者这样那样的关于佛法的法句，但很多都是胡说八道。
Many of my contacts are Buddhists who share their views on Buddhism in their social circles. They post teachings from revered monks and various Buddhist sayings. While some of these are genuinely insightful, much of it is, frankly, nonsense. It saddens me to see even some of my own students endorsing this misinformation.
有些的确是高僧大德的开示，是很好的，但有些真的就是胡说八道，跟着我学佛的一些佛教徒去点赞的都有。我看到之后觉得有点悲哀，这样下去是不行的，佛法以这种方式繁荣实际上可能会毁了佛法。那会不会真的毁掉佛法呢？换一个角度去看也不会，不管是真是假，至少他在说佛法，总比说贪嗔痴慢疑、让大家去看AV片要好。
This trend is concerning. While it might seem like Buddhism is flourishing, this kind of misrepresentation could potentially harm its essence. However, from another perspective, even misguided discussions about Buddhism are preferable to promoting harmful behaviors or negative emotions.
从这个角度来看也没问题，但其中比较准确的、比较有实际意义的佛法就不是很多。不仅如此，其中还夹杂着大量的大话、空话、曲解。把佛法过于简单化和世俗化了。The problem lies in the lack of accurate and practically meaningful Buddhist teachings amidst this noise. Much of what's shared is a mix of empty talk, misinterpretations, and exaggerations. It oversimplifies and secularizes Buddhism in an extreme manner.
经常都在谈明心见性，网上很多博主在解释“色即是空、空即是色”，我一看就觉得哭笑不得。他说的不对吗？也不是完全不对，就是背书。如果要他仔细解释，马上就露馅了，更别说他们能教你如何去实施。
For instance, many online personalities try to explain profound concepts like enlightenment, or"form is emptiness, emptiness is form." While they're not entirely wrong, they're often just reciting without true understanding. If pressed for detailed explanations or practical applications, their lack of depth becomes apparent.
话谁都会说，谁都可以复制粘贴佛经上，或高僧大德的开示上的内容，但是，有时候，把复制粘贴的话组合起来就要出问题。
It's easy to copy and paste Buddhist scriptures or quotes from respected teachers. However, combining these out of context can lead to misunderstandings.
佛法是有次第的，有极强的针对性。佛陀说法有四种意趣：平等意趣、别时意趣、别义意趣、补特伽罗意趣。如果对这四种意趣不熟悉，佛法里讲的很多东西会显得自相矛盾，进而让人误以为佛法是在胡说八道，导致很多的纷争。
Buddhism has a specific structure and is highly nuanced. Buddha's teachings were given with four specific intentions: intention directed towards identity, intention for a particular time, intention for a particular meaning, and intention for a particular person. Without understanding these, many Buddhist teachings may seem contradictory, leading to confusion and disputes.
我以前经常开玩笑：如果我来扮演攻击佛法的反派，让跟着我学习的人扮演佛教徒，我会把他们说到头都抬不起来。不过这不是代表佛法错误了，而是关系到大家对这个问题的涉猎、理解是否全面和细致。你们不信吗？可以找一群人来跟我来讨论佛法，看他们是否会哑口无言？这并不是我比你伟大，或者我神在哪里。关键是什么呢？你们一天只拿两个小时研究佛法，而我一天花八个小时；你们只研究了一年，而我研究了几十年，你们当然干不过我！
The Complexities of Understanding Buddhism
I often joke that if I were to play the role of a critic attacking Buddhism, and my students were to defend it, I could easily leave them speechless. This isn't because Buddhism is flawed, but because understanding it requires comprehensive and nuanced knowledge. If you doubt this, gather a group to discuss Buddhism with me, and you'll see how challenging it can be. This isn't about personal greatness; it's about dedication. If you spend two hours a day studying Buddhism while I spend eight, and you've studied for a year while I've studied for decades, naturally, your understanding will be less comprehensive.
我在此解释这些，是想告诉大家：如今，在朋友圈、网络上，可以随便看到这些东西，但要带着审视、思考的观点去看，不要被乱七八糟的结论或者攻击性的东西所误导。不管是批驳佛法，还是赞美佛法，或者是赞美某个人、推崇某个人，都要以观察的目光去看，既不否定，也不肯定，然后自己去闻思去修行，这是最正确的。
I'm explaining this to emphasize caution when consuming Buddhist content online or in social media. Approach everything with a critical and thoughtful eye, whether it's criticism or praise of Buddhism, or admiration for specific individuals. Don't immediately accept or reject; instead, observe, reflect, and then pursue your own study and practice. This is the most appropriate approach.
并不是我们一定要听到哪句话、听到哪个人正确或错误以后，我们就马上成就或者堕地狱，没有那么严重。如果我们随意地去赞叹、推广，这些东西万一是错的，比如攻击佛法，你随便去点赞一下，这也叫随喜。就像随喜放生、做善事有功德一样，随喜了反佛法也有其相应的过失。这时一定的，否则，显然是不公平的、不科学的。
It's not as if hearing one correct or incorrect statement will lead to immediate enlightenment or damnation. However, carelessly endorsing or sharing information, especially if it's incorrect or anti-Buddhist, can have consequences. Just as there's merit in supporting good deeds, there can be negative effects from supporting misrepresentations of Buddhism.
我们要谨慎，但也不用那么害怕到什么也不敢去看。你可以看，但看了以后不轻易去评价，不要轻易被所看东西的蛊惑。是对是错以后再说，对于会马上影响到自己抉择的东西，不做结论就行了，这样是最好的处理方式。为什么看到一个事情就一定要做出结论呢？这往往是心性比较浮躁的表现。说得不好听，一般是素质很低的人才轻而易举去做结论，人家一蛊惑一带节奏就跟着起哄。
We should be cautious, but not so fearful that we avoid all information. You can engage with various viewpoints, but avoid rushing to judgment or being easily swayed. For matters that might immediately influence your decisions, it's best to withhold conclusions. Why must we form an opinion on everything we encounter? This often reflects a restless mind. To put it bluntly, it's usually those of lower intellectual caliber who jump to conclusions and are easily influenced by others' opinions.
特别对藏传佛法，网上的很多说法都是不对的。攻击、曲解的很多，所以不能去听信这些。现在的互联网上，一些攻击高僧大德的文章写得头头是道。特别是攻击藏传佛教，还有攻击藏传教派的一些教义。这些人完全不懂，纯粹在胡说八道，所以千万不要去信。
This is particularly true for Tibetan Buddhism, which is often misrepresented or attacked online. Many criticisms come from a place of complete ignorance. Don't trust these baseless attacks.
并不是说，我是藏传佛教徒就替藏传佛教说话，根本不是的。我也是汉传佛教徒，总的来说我就是一个佛教徒。不管你是哪门哪派，只要说得对我都听，完全是这样的态度。我们一起交流的师兄和跟着学习的师兄，也要应该采取这样的态度。比如，我们现在在泰国，信奉南传佛教的地方，面对出家人，我也同样非常地恭敬、崇敬。
I'm not defending Tibetan Buddhism simply because I practice it. I'm also a practitioner of Chinese Buddhism; fundamentally, I'm a Buddhist. I'm open to the truth from any school or tradition. This is the attitude I encourage in all my fellow practitioners. For instance, when we're in Thailand, a Theravada Buddhist country, I show great respect to their monastics.
以前我在柬埔寨的吴哥窟，见到那些小沙弥都会退到旁边去跟他行礼，因为他们是出家人。所以，不要总是根据一些派别和说法去判断。甚至藏传佛教内部都开始互相指责，这是非常不对的。你修自己的，你管别人什么事？万一你搞错呢？
Previously, at Angkor Wat in Cambodia, I would step aside and bow to even young novice monks out of respect for their ordination. So, don't judge based solely on sect or specific teachings. Even within Tibetan Buddhism, there's sometimes internal criticism, which is deeply inappropriate. Focus on your own practice; why concern yourself with judging others? What if you're mistaken in your judgment?
好，我们继续拉回来讲今天的课题。昨天讲到了两种认知的比较：唯物认知（也就是大脑的认知）和心识认知。
Alright, let’s refocus on today’s topic. Yesterday, we discussed the comparison between two types of cognition: materialistic cognition (that is, brain cognition) and consciousness cognition.
我们现在主流的认知都是大脑认知。当然，大脑不能单独认知，它是认知主体，还有其他帮忙的，比如物质媒介和神经系统等。另一种是心识认知，心识认知认为大脑是帮忙的，不是认知的主体。这两种认知有很大的差别。
Our mainstream understanding is now centered around brain cognition. Of course, the brain cannot cognize independently; it is the subject of cognition, assisted by other elements such as material media and the nervous system. Another type is consciousness cognition, which regards the brain as an assistant, not the primary subject of cognition. There is a significant difference between these two types of cognition.
讨论这些差别有什么意思呢？我想告诉大家，作为佛弟子，修行就是为了追寻心识认知。我们要去搞清楚心识认知是怎么回事。信奉大脑认知的人也在努力追寻。他们在努力干什么呢？科学。通过六根放射出去观察外界，然后对外界进行分析、拆解、组合，诞生所谓的科学。还通过意识（意根）产生逻辑思维，这是大脑认知所做的努力。
Why discuss these differences? As Buddhist disciples, our practice aims to pursue consciousness cognition. We need to understand what consciousness cognition truly entails. Those who believe in brain cognition also strive for the truth they believe in through science. They observe the external world through the six senses, then analyze, dissect, and combine their observations, giving rise to what we call science. They also engage in logical thinking through consciousness (the mental sense), which is the effort made by brain cognition.
对于心识认知，我们也通过外境去掌握一些规律，但是，我们不会在外境这方面多做功夫。为什么？究竟来讲，我们认为外境都是非量，一切都是虚幻的，特别是修行人。大家还记得《大圆满前行引导文》里面的一个修行人，他住在一个山洞里面，连门口的一簇荆棘都不愿意去割掉。按照现代人的说法，他怎么这么懒呢？一室不扫，何以扫天下？连荆棘都不除，你还要去扫天下？
For consciousness cognition, we also recognize some patterns through external objects, but we don’t invest much effort in them. Why? Ultimately, we consider external objects to be non-valid; everything is illusory, especially for practitioners. Recall the practitioner in ‘The Great Perfection Preliminary Guide’ who lived in a cave and was unwilling to cut even a clump of thorns at the entrance? Modern people might ask why he is so lazy. If one doesn’t sweep one’s room, how can one sweep the world? If he doesn’t remove the thorns, how can he sweep the world?
他不是的，他认为这些没有意义，外面不管是天堂也好，岩洞也好，其实都是虚幻的外境，所以他不搞科学。佛陀不太提倡我们搞科学的原因也是这样的。后面也会讲到这些。把心思拉回来搞心识。既然认为心识是根本，回过头去把心识观察清楚，就找到了真理。所以，昨天讲了两种认知的比较，后面还有很多。其实是我随便写下来的，有点混乱，但我尽量跟大家讲清楚。如果花时间把它理一下，可以写成两本书去糊弄别人。
The practitioner did not see it that way; he understood that such actions were meaningless. Whether it’s heaven or a cave, all external objects are illusory, so he did not engage in scientific exploration. This is also why Buddha does not advocate for us to engage too much in the scientific approach. We will discuss this further later. Buddha encourages us to focus on consciousness. Since consciousness is considered fundamental, by turning inward and observing consciousness clearly, we find the truth. So, yesterday we talked about the comparison between two types of cognition, and there’s much more to come. I wrote it down casually; it’s somewhat messy, but I try to explain it clearly to everyone. If I took the time to organize it, it could be written into two books to “fool” others.
大脑认知，是以大脑为认知主体，要借助很多的工具去认，这样是永无尽头的，永远都找不到真理。因为二元对立。在缘起上的认知，刚刚已经说过了，缘起认知很多都是不全面的。比如，我们没办法看到很多紫外光。再比如，太阳光可以照射到地球上，但飞船到了太空，宇航员是看不到太阳光的。这很奇怪，太阳光经过大气层的折射，在地球上的我们才看得到太阳光。大家应该知道这些吧？
Brain cognition, with the brain as the subject, relies on many tools for cognition. This process is endless; one will never find the ultimate truth due to dichotomy. As I’ve already mentioned, cognition based on dependent origination is often incomplete. For example, we can’t see a lot of ultraviolet light. Another example is sunlight. We can see it shine on the Earth, but astronauts in space can’t see sunlight. We can only see sunlight after it’s refracted through the Earth’s atmosphere.
当然，我举的例子不一定准确。我想告诉大家：我们的眼睛去看很多东西，会受到限制，因为可见光本身只有一个幅度，超过这个幅度就不行了，所以我们都看不到紫外光、红外线。
Of course, my examples may not be precise. I want to convey that our eyes are limited when looking at many things because visible light itself has only a certain range; beyond this range, we can’t see things like ultraviolet or infrared light.
以前我们经常举例说，我们没办法看到一些修行中的瑞相。比如，生起次第修得很好的人，可以看到净土、本尊，但为什么我们看不到呢？因为我们的认知完全借助六根的基础，它的认知范围是很受限的。也就是说，在缘起上，六根的认知本身都很差劲，即便借助工具把它扩展一些，但也没办法让它产生质的变化。
We often say that we can’t see certain auspicious signs in practice. For instance, someone who practices the stages of generation well can see pure lands and deities, but why can’t we see them? Because our cognition relies entirely on the basis of the six senses, its range is very limited. In other words, cognition based on the six senses is inferior, even if we use tools to expand it a bit, but we can’t make it undergo a qualitative change.
你用望远镜给我看看地狱？能不能用射电望远镜看到饿鬼？不行！看不到就永远不承认这些，甚至会形成矛盾。比如，一些修得很好的人，真的能够看到饿鬼，甚至看到天界。就在泰国，这里有很多阿罗汉是可以直接看到天界的。科学家肯定不信，原因是大脑认知，没有办法。
Can you use a telescope to show me hell? Can you use a radio telescope to see hungry ghosts? No! If you can’t see it, you’ll never acknowledge it, and it might even create contradictions. For example, some well-practiced individuals can really see hungry ghosts and even heavenly realms. Here in Thailand, there are many Arhats who can directly see the heavenly realms. Scientists definitely won’t believe it because brain cognition can’t do it.
在究竟上，唯物主义说世界是物质的，那要找到究竟物质才行。但用大脑的这种认知方式去找究竟物质，永远都找不到，却又说世界的根本就是究竟物质。当然，现在究竟物质是什么也没搞清楚，有六十一种基本粒子，有四种力，力的交换叫胶子、玻色子、光子，还有引力子。而这四个力还没统一到一起。究竟物质是什么，其实他们现在也是模糊的。他们认为夸克不可以再分，能量一冲击夸克，就会变成其他的粒子。还有很多的说法，看到后来我都睡着了，这说明我不是科学人才！
Ultimately, materialism states the world is material, so we must find the ultimate matter. But using the approach of brain cognition to find the ultimate matter, one will never find it, yet they say the foundation of the world is the ultimate matter. Of course, what the ultimate matter is remains uncertain; there are sixty-one kinds of elementary particles, four forces, and the exchange of forces is called gluons, bosons, photons, and gravitons. And these four forces have not been unified yet. They think quarks cannot be divided further; when energy impacts a quark, it turns into other particles. There are simply too many theories to consider. I often ended up falling asleep at the end, which tells me that I’m not suited for science.
但是，我知道这样的方式是没办法找到究竟物质的，怎么都不行。说得再哲学化一点，他认为大脑认知是一种物质的运动，要观察到另外的东西，必须把观察者纳入这个运动体系里面，不管是通过电磁波，还是通过其他方式，都必须纳进来。一纳进来以后，就成了一个整体，失去了观察对境。光实际上是纳不进来的，只能反弹回来，或者是破坏对方的观察对境。也就是说，去观察对方一定要有个东西去观察，凭空看不行，凭空看只有觉性才行。
I am certain that this way, we cannot find the ultimate matter, no matter what. To put it more philosophically, they think brain cognition is a kind of material movement. To observe something else, the observer must be included in this system of movement, whether through electromagnetic waves or other means. Once included, it becomes a whole and loses the object of observation. Light, in fact, cannot be included; it can only bounce back or alter the object of observation. That is to say, to observe something, there must be something to observe; you can’t just look at nothing. Only awareness can look at nothing.
我们观察一个东西——物质，在唯物世界里，不可能没有物质去观察另外一个东西，这是不能有的，叫“超距作用”。力和力中间怎么发挥作用呢？比如万有引力，地球和月亮相互的吸引力，中间得有东西沟通。不管是磁场也好，引力场也好，总得有个东西，不然就不是“唯物”。唯物的意思就全部都是物质。中间怎么发挥作用呢？推测有一种东西叫引力子，在地球和月球或者太阳的中间进行力量的交换，否则，为什么太阳对地球有引力，让它们在旋转的时候不抛出去呢？就是因为有引力，而那个引力子到现在都没找到。我肯定永远都找不到。就算找到了，后面可能还会找到引力子更里面、更深层次、更细微的东西。
When we observe something—matter—in a material world, it’s impossible to observe another thing without matter; this is called ‘action at a distance,’ which is not allowed. How do forces interact with each other? For example, the mutual gravitational attraction between the Earth and the Moon, there must be something to communicate in between. Whether it’s a magnetic field or a gravitational field, there must be something; otherwise, it’s not ‘material.’ Materialism means everything is material. How do they interact in between? It’s speculated that there’s something called a graviton, exchanging forces between the Earth and the Moon or the Sun; otherwise, why does the Sun have gravity on the Earth, preventing them from being thrown out while rotating? It’s because of gravity, and that graviton has not been found yet. I’m sure it will never be found. Even if it is found, there might be something even more inside, deeper, and finer than the graviton.
所以，人类靠大脑运作的这种方式，是没办法找到究竟物质的。就算找到很多东西，现量也看不到，因为现量得借助机器。人类其实没有真正的现量，现量是在规定的层面上。比如，我们眼睛看到太阳，我们能现量看到太阳吗？看不到，你看到的是太阳光，太阳光要射八分钟以后才看到，所以，你看到的那一坨只是太阳的光。那算不算现量呢？你只是现量见到了太阳光，现量是见不到太阳的。
So, the way that humans solely rely on the brain cannot find the ultimate matter. Even if many things have been found, they can’t be seen directly because so-called direct perception relies on machines. Humans actually don’t have true direct perception; our direct perception is on a defined level. For example, our eyes see the Sun; can we directly see the Sun? No, what you see is sunlight, which takes eight minutes to reach us, so what you see is just the light of the Sun. Does that count as direct perception? You just directly see the sunlight; you can’t directly see the Sun.
假设每个人都戴墨镜去看太阳，而且都看习惯了，然后会认为墨镜里面看到的太阳才是现量、是正确的。而不戴墨镜的人，看到的是非量还是现量呢？所以，现量是有范畴规定的。
Suppose everyone wears sunglasses to look at the Sun, and they get used to it, then they will think that the Sun seen through sunglasses is direct perception, which they will also think to be correct. But for those who don’t wear sunglasses, is what they see non-valid or direct perception? So, direct perception is defined within a certain scope.
但是，按照中观说的，只要眼睛看到的全是非量，是虚幻的东西。心识认知派，即佛教的唯识才会这么去看世界。而且，既然我们承认心识是本体，回过头来，只要找到自己的心识，就找到了本体，就找到了这个世界成立的究竟真理。这是两种认知的差别比较。
But according to the Madhyamaka, everything seen by the eyes is non-valid, but illusory. The consciousness cognition school, that is, Buddhism’s Mind-only, sees the world this way. Moreover, since we acknowledge that consciousness is the essence, by turning back, as long as we find our own consciousness, we find the essence, we find the ultimate truth on which this world is established.
This is a comparison of the differences between the two cognitions.
我们再看下面：
Let’s look at the following:
用物质合成大脑认知，目前在理论和实验上都无法实现。我们认为我们的大脑具有认知能力，是物质合成跟运动造成的。实际到现在为止，它只是个推测。有没有什么数学理论能够证明，我们用物质建立一个模型，组成一个大脑，能够产生认知力？目前是没有任何实验能证明的。
The concept that brain cognition is synthesized from matter remains unproven in both theory and experiment. We believe our brains possess cognitive abilities due to the synthesis and movement of matter, but this is, as of now, merely speculative. Is there any mathematical theory that can demonstrate the creation of a brain model from matter that exhibits cognitive power? No such experimental evidence exists to date.
现在有人就认为AI、电子计算机具备认知力。其实AI是没有认知力的，它只是计算能力。所以，目前在理论和实验上都没办法能够制造一个具有认知力的大脑，即制造生命。如果我们有能力制造一个具有认知力的大脑，并确定它是我们制造出来的，那佛法就是错的，唯物主义是对的，即生命是可以从物质运动组合中直接诞生。啊，那将是一个很大的事件，但实际并没有。
Some people attribute cognitive abilities to AI and computers. However, AI lacks true cognitive abilities; it possesses only computational capabilities. Thus, both theoretically and experimentally, it is currently impossible to create a brain with cognitive abilities, or in other words, to create life. If we were capable of creating a brain with cognitive abilities and could confirm its artificial origin, then Buddhism would be disproven, and materialism would be validated, suggesting that life could indeed emerge directly from the combination of material movements. Such a discovery would be monumental, yet it has not occurred.
很多人认为精子和卵子结合即产生认知，是物质产生精神的证明，但这个不能成为证明。我们会认为父母结婚，精子和卵子结合，胎儿就开始有认知了。我们会认为精子和卵子是没有生命的，但两者结合，再加上母亲的子宫，然后在里面产生了精神，但这没办法成为证明。为什么？因为精卵的结合可能只是心识认知的一个外在体现而已。这是心识认知派对唯物主义的一种反驳。
Many believe that the union of sperm and egg instantly results in cognition, citing it as evidence that matter can produce spirit. However, this is not a valid proof. Common belief holds that when parents conceive, and sperm and egg unite, the fetus begins to exhibit cognition. We consider sperm and egg to be inanimate, but their union, facilitated by the mother’s womb, supposedly gives rise to spirit. This, however, cannot serve as proof. Why? Because the fusion of sperm and egg may simply be an outward expression of consciousness cognition. This stance challenges materialism’s view.
什么意思呢？唯物主义认为精子和卵子结合在一起，就有生命、认知力。但佛教说不是的，那只是阿赖耶识在里面的一种呈现而已。换成一种比较通俗的说法，那个时候心识进入胞胎里面，其实是这个人的阿赖耶识和父母的阿赖耶识产生了重叠，以精卵和子宫来体现。心识进入胞胎这种说法，只是希望让大家听得懂的说法，实际不存在心识进入胞胎。
What does this mean? Materialists argue that life and cognitive abilities arise from the combination of sperm and egg. Buddhism disagrees, explaining that this is merely a display of the Alayavijnana. In layman’s terms, at conception, consciousness enters the embryo, essentially overlapping the individual’s Alayavijnana with that of the parents, as manifested through the sperm, egg, and womb. The notion of consciousness entering the embryo simplifies the concept for general understanding; in reality, consciousness does not enter the embryo in such a manner.
我们不能把“阿赖耶识”想成是一个东西，像电影里面表现的黑乎乎的东西，或者像雾一样的东西，死了以后就从人身上出来，嗡，飞飞飞，看到医院，甚至胡说八道，看到别人怀胎就‘’砰‘’一下钻进去，那个叫“夺舍”。或者是看到父母在那造小人，就‘噹‘’’一下进去，这些都是不对的。
We must not conceptualize ‘Alayavijnana’ as a physical entity, like the shadowy forms depicted in films or as a mist that emerges from a person upon death, buzzing and flying about, or absurdly, seeing someone pregnant and ‘bang’ diving in, known as a ‘walk-in.’ Nor is it correct to imagine seeing parents in intimacy and then ‘bang’ diving in.
但是，在中阴投胎的时候，确实对投胎者可能会有些阿赖耶识的印象，并不是表现为一个心识这么进去。在投胎者的阿赖耶识里面，呈现的认识可能是看到父母在做爱，那时候他可能会喜欢老妈，‘’砰‘’一投胎进去就成为儿子，如果喜欢老爸，‘’砰‘’一下就成为女儿。如果喜欢老妈，而这一世又是个女的，‘’砰‘’一下进去成为儿子，后果你们自己去想！
During the intermediate state of rebirth, the individual may indeed perceive impressions of Alayavijnana, but not as consciousness entering in such a literal sense. The rebirther’s Alayavijnana may present a vision of the parents in union, leading to a preference for the mother and rebirth as a son, or for the father and rebirth as a daughter. If one prefers the mother but is destined to be reborn as a girl, ‘bang,’ they become a boy, with imaginable consequences.
为什么会这样呢？人有时候自爱过度就会这样。比如有些练健美的，或者一些女的，经常跑到镜子前去搔首弄姿，往脸上抹很多化妆品，每天看自己好多遍，无形中间这是一种观修，这种观修就是爱自己的身体（同性的身体）。本来应该爱异性的身体，但她爱同性的身体胜过于异性的身体。
This phenomenon can occur when individuals excessively love themselves. For instance, bodybuilders or women who frequently admire themselves in mirrors, applying makeup and loving their reflection, are engaging in a form of meditative reflection, favoring their own body (the same sex body) over the opposite sex body.
女性应该爱父亲的身体，但不是的，她反而爱母亲的身体，因为她看自己的身体看惯了。突然看到一个这样的身体，长得前凸后翘，S腰、筷子腿，就认为那样才好看，而恰好有个女的是这个样子，“唉呀，好羡慕啊”——她前世本来是女性，应该羡慕男性，‘’砰‘’一下投进成了男胎，结果女性成了男胎。好多都是这样，以此类推（众笑）！
Women should naturally favor their father’s body, but instead, they may favor their mother’s body due to familiarity with their own form. Upon encountering a curvaceous body with an S-shaped waist and slender legs, they may find it beautiful, leading to envy if they encounter a woman with such features. This envy, based on past life preferences, can result in a woman being reborn as a male fetus. Such cases are not uncommon.
这并不会有多大的问题，你问：“那咋办呢？这能不能学佛啊？”别说这样的，比这个错误犯得大得多的，都可以学佛。
However, this should not be seen as an obstacle to learning Buddhism. Even those who have made far graver errors can still pursue Buddhist teachings.
所以，精卵结合只是一个可能，是阿赖耶识呈现出下一个生命前的一个外在体现而已。这是我们心识对投生的一种认知，并不是精卵结合就能够产生心识。
Therefore, the fusion of sperm and egg is merely one possibility, an external manifestation of the Alayavijnana preceding the next life. This understanding of rebirth within consciousness cognition does not equate the union of sperm and egg with the production of consciousness.
因为精卵结合可能只是心识认知的一个外在体现而已，如心识借助眼根产生视觉一样。我们看东西，不能凭心去看，如果凭心去看，那就不得了。也就是说，我们不用眼睛去看，而要直接用心去看。连周星驰都知道里面的差别——这是开玩笑的。电影《大话西游》里，至尊宝想知道紫霞在他的心里干了什么，用心去看，而不是用眼睛去看，才发现紫霞在他的心里流下了一滴眼泪。当然，这是演电影，瞎扯淡的，只要扯到大家感动就行了。
Just as consciousness cognition uses the eyes to produce vision, the union of sperm and egg may be an outward expression of consciousness cognition. We cannot use the mind to see; if we could, it would be extraordinary. Even Stephen Chow humorously alludes to this in ‘A Chinese Odyssey,’ where the Monkey King seeks to know what Zixia did in his heart, looking with his mind rather than his eyes, discovering that Zixia shed a tear within his heart. Of course, this is fictional, meant to entertain the audience.
实际上，你要直接用心去看全部的缘起，谁才做得到这样呢？佛陀才可以做到完全用心去看，而我们是没办法的，心已经被扭曲了。我们去看的时候，一定要通过眼根去，这是我们的视野受到障碍、时空受到限制的一个原因。
In truth, directly perceiving all dependent origination with the mind is beyond our capability. Only the Buddha can achieve such a feat; our minds are too distorted. We are constrained to perceive through the eyes, limited by space and time.
我们并不是眼睛去看，而是心识借助眼根产生视觉。这个举例就像阿赖耶识借助父母的精卵，产生我们的下一个身体一样。我的表达好像不是很清楚，大家听起来有点烧脑，但听惯的人一听就知道了。对于刚刚来听课的人，现在可能很麻烦，听不懂，只能勉强地听，谁叫你们平时不努力？
In essence, we do not see with our eyes; consciousness cognition uses the eyes as a tool for vision. This is analogous to the Alayavijnana utilizing the parents’ sperm and egg to create our next physical form. My explanation may be complex and challenging to grasp, but those familiar with these concepts will understand. For newcomers, it may be difficult to follow, but perseverance is key.
心识认知不是用眼睛在看，而是心在看。但唯物主义不是说心在看，也不是说眼睛看，而是用后脑看——大脑认知。
Consciousness cognition does not perceive through the eyes but through the mind. Materialism, on the other hand, attributes perception to the brain.
心识也借助了大脑、借助了眼根，虽然心识认知是一个比较好的哲学观点，但是，要实现心识认知认为的究竟认知，即实现完全地用心去看世界，那要靠修行。
Consciousness cognition also depends on the brain and the eyes. Although it offers a compelling philosophical perspective, realizing the ultimate cognition that consciousness cognition aspires to—seeing the world entirely with the mind—requires dedicated practice.
修行就是要把眼睛看、耳朵看的观察方式停下来，真的用心去看，因为用六根看的、思考的全是错的——“六根若是量，圣道复益谁？”周星驰说的用心去看谈何容易，人家修几百年都没办法完全用心去看。念佛是谁？用心去念，心是什么？栽了！
Practice involves ceasing to observe through the eyes and ears and truly perceiving with the mind, for all that is seen and thought through the six senses is mistaken. As the saying goes, ‘If the six senses are valid, who would benefit from the sublime path?’ Stephen Chow’s notion of seeing with the mind is easier said than done. People may practice for centuries and still not fully achieve this. Who is chanting the Buddha? The mind! What is the mind? That’s where you’re stumped!
将一个需要证明的事件用来做证据，恰好是“能立所立应成因”所破。
Utilizing an event that demands proof as evidence is precisely what the syllogism of “the similarity of probative reason and probandum” aims to refute.
心识认知认为，精卵结合只是心识把父母的精卵结合当成重新诞生身体的一个体现而已，并不是精卵结合自己产生的心识。也就是说，心识是否真的能够产生心识，是需要唯物主义拿来证明的。证明的方式，就是借助物质生产出一个大脑来，然后让它具有生命。如果能这样，就证明了物质确实可以组合产生生命。
Consciousness cognition suggests that the union of sperm and egg represents consciousness utilizing the parents’ gametes as a manifestation for rebirth, rather than asserting that consciousness originates from the gametes themselves. Materialism must substantiate whether consciousness can genuinely give rise to consciousness. One approach would involve constructing a brain from matter and animating it with life. If successful, this would demonstrate that matter can indeed coalesce to create life.”
这是需要证明的，如果连证明都没有，却把它当成一个证据来说，在中观应成派里面，叫做能立等同所立。也就是说，“物质组合产生心识”这个事情需要证明，“精卵结合产生心识”这个事情也需要证明，但他们没有证明，就把它当成了结果。
This assertion requires validation, and without evidence, employing it as proof aligns with the concept of ‘the similarity of probative reason and probandum’ within the Prasangika doctrine. Specifically, the notions of ‘matter combining to produce consciousness’ and ‘the union of sperm and egg producing consciousness’ remain unproven and are currently treated as outcomes rather than established facts.
有人说：“我们可以证明物质结合产生心识，比如母亲怀孕，那就是精卵结合的那个物质产生了精神。”这个事情是不能成为证据的，但你把它当成了证据，就叫做能立等同所立。再举个例子，有人说“AI可以产生认知”，我们则说不对，“AI不能产生认知”，因为你没办法证明它有认知，它只是有计算能力。这个证据跟精卵结合产生胚胎、产生认知，其实是一样的，都不能够证明物质组合可以产生生命。
Some argue that it can be proven that matter combines to give rise to consciousness. For instance, during pregnancy, the fetus—a product of the union between sperm and egg—is believed to generate spirit. However, this cannot be accepted as conclusive evidence. Treating it as such aligns with what the Prasangika doctrine terms “the similarity of probative reason and probandum.”
Now, consider the analogy with artificial intelligence (AI). While some claim that AI can produce cognition, we assert that it cannot truly possess cognition. Why? Because AI can produce cognition that remains unproven; it merely exhibits computational abilities. Similarly, the evidence supporting the idea that the union of sperm and egg produces an embryo and cognition does not substantiate the broader claim that matter alone can create life.
所以，这个证据叫做“根据相同应成因”，我们要去破它。有没有听昏啊？学过中观四大不共应成因的人不会昏，没学过的肯定昏了。大家简单地记住：物质组合能够产生认知力，这个事情到目前为止，理论和实验都是没有的，证明不了。它不是科学，它是猜想。但是，我们现在绝对把它当成了科学，而且把它体现为哲学层面。
Therefore, this syllogism is termed the ‘argument from the parallelism of similar reasons,’ and we must refute it by engaging in critical examination. Feeling a bit confused? Those well-versed in the four unique syllogisms of Prasangika won’t share your confusion, but those unacquainted with these principles might find themselves puzzled. Remember this succinctly: the combination of matter to produce cognitive power remains unproven by both theory and experiment to date. It stands not as established science but rather as speculation. Curiously, we now treat it as if it were scientific, even embodying it within our philosophical discourse.
哲学层面怎么说的？初中课本都在教我们：世界是物质的，物质是运动的，精神是物质运动产生的结果。这个哲学观点真是可怕，基本上是万恶之源！以这个观点来产生后面的很多事情，这些事情我就不想说了。大家如果连这个都没有感同身受，说明你的大脑认知真是很有问题。没有听出里面的意味吗？我面对的一群佛教徒怎么这么成熟呢？
Philosophically, how does this viewpoint play out? Imagine middle school textbooks teaching us that the material world is always in motion. According to this perspective, spirit emerges as a result of this dynamic matter. But here’s the catch: this philosophical stance can be quite unsettling—it’s essentially considered the root of all evil! Many consequences flow from this idea, some of which I won’t delve into. If you find it hard to grasp, it might signal a genuine challenge in how your brain processes information. Can you see the implications? And why are Buddhists so remarkably mature?
心识认知本来，逻辑上用中观见解可以自洽。
Consciousness cognition can recognize its essence, which, logically, can be proved to be self-consistent by using Madhyamaka’ view.
心识能不能够认知本来呢？心识是可以认知本来的。心识认知这种观点，不是以物质组成的心来认知世界，而是心本身来认知世界，这就叫做心识认知本来。
Can consciousness recognize its essence? Absolutely. The viewpoint of consciousness cognition doesn’t posit that a mind composed of matter perceives the world. Instead, it asserts that the mind itself directly apprehends reality—this is what we term ‘consciousness cognition recognizing its essence.’
那要怎样才能认知本来呢？用中观的见解可以自洽。为什么呢？我们在思考的时候，是用头脑在思考，用眼睛在看，好像大脑和眼睛很物质化，因为认为它们是物质。而用中观去分析：大脑和眼睛，根本就没有实质，完全是虚幻的。大脑和眼睛的物质本身，它到底是什么？都没有来处。比如我们用离一多因去分析，是什么东西组成了大脑？你找不到！是什么东西组成了眼睛？是眼睫毛？眼的晶体？乃至于光是什么？我们看东西一定要有光，你都找不到。如果用离一多因去分，它啥都不是，都找不到来源。
But how does consciousness achieve this self-awareness? Here, we turn to Prasangika’s view, which offers a self-consistent analysis. Why? Consider our cognitive processes: when we think, we engage our brains; when we see, our eyes come into play. Intuitively, we associate the brain and eyes with materiality because we perceive them as matter. However, Prasangika’s lens reveals a different truth: the brain and eyes lack inherent substance; they exist as complete illusions. So, what constitutes their fundamental matter of origin? Upon close scrutiny, we find no origin at all. For instance, let’s dissect the brain using the syllogism of ‘Neither One Nor Many.’ What fundamental components compose the brain? Nothing! And the eyes—what are they truly made of? Eyelashes? The lens of the eye? And what about light? We rely on light to perceive our surroundings, yet we do not really know what light really is. Applying the same syllogism, we encounter emptiness—the absence of an identifiable source.
那现象的来源到底是什么？如果不是物质，要么是上帝，要么是我们的心。所以，心识能够产生一切的这种认知哲学，中观就可以完全自洽。当这一切被分拆完，物质不是真实的，它只能来源于心。
Now, consider the broader question: what underpins all phenomena? If not matter, then perhaps God or our own minds. Thus, the philosophical proposition that consciousness can generate everything aligns seamlessly with Madhyamaka. When we dismantle all constructs, matter loses its solidity; it emerges solely from the mind.
中观可以分析出上帝根本是不成立的，外面的客观精神是不成立的，而我们根本没办法否认我们的心不成立：你在看、你在听，如果这个不是物质、不是上帝，它只能来源于心。笛卡尔说的“我思故我在”，如果把这个“我”字变成心，不是人我的“我”，而是“心思故心在”。如果不是物质，那你一定有心，而且当下就可以证明你有心。如果你在听我讲话，不用耳朵，用什么？你只能用心来听，难道上帝代替你听啊？所以“风动幡动，仁者心动”。
Madhyamaka analysis reveals that God lacks tenability, and the notion of an objective spirit also crumbles. Yet, one undeniable existence persists: our mind. Consider it—you see, you listen. If this isn’t matter or God, it must emanate from the mind.
Descartes famously declared, ‘I think, therefore I am.’ Now, let’s tweak it: not the ‘I’ of a self-grasping individual, but ‘the mind thinks, therefore the mind exists.’ If it’s not matter, then you undoubtedly possess a mind. And you can prove it in the moment. As you listen to my words, not with your ears, but with what? Only your mind. Unless, perhaps, God is lending you an ear? “The wind moves, the flag moves, the sage’s mind moves.”
当下就可以证明，不需要再去找其他逻辑来证明。其实大圆满的开悟就是这样的，你以为我说的很简单吗？你以为大圆满的证悟还需要找个东西来证明吗？如果还要找个其他东西来证明，还能叫自明吗？哥哥们、姐姐们，明白一下行不行啊？你现在正在明，如果不明，你怎么看得到我？你怎么听得到我的声音？只是你不知道‘’那个‘’是什么。
This truth can be proven in the present moment. It requires no elaborate logic; it stands evident. In fact, the enlightenment of Dzogchen mirrors this simplicity. But do you find my words too plain? Does Dzogchen’s enlightenment still demand further proof? If so, can it truly be called self-awareness? Brothers and sisters, grasp this: you are knowing. If you don’t know what you are knowing, how can you see me? Hear my voice? It’s just that you don’t know what “that” is.
什么叫做不知道呢？你知道在用，但是你没办法清晰地知道，没办法安住。往往就是一些轻微触碰，起不到什么作用。所以要通过大量的前期修行，然后找一个上师来指引你怎么安住。首先有见，然后有修，在行为中间又怎么办——见、修、行。最后你发现那个果，本来就在。啊，这是最吊诡的事情，也是一个最让人伤心的事情。
What does it mean by not knowing? You use it, but you can’t clearly know what it is, you can’t remain settled. A mere glimpse doesn’t make that much difference. So, embark on preliminary practices. Seek a guide—a teacher—to help you settle. First, embrace the view; then, engage in practice. Finally, navigate the process—view, practice, action. And in the end, you’ll discover that the result was always there. Paradoxical, yes, and heartrending too.
本来都是佛，还让‘’我‘’辛苦那么多年？真是这样的！所以，中观可以认识本来，这是当下都可以证明的，没办法否定这些。物质可以否定，上帝可以否定，但我们没办法当下否定自己正在看、正在听。活在当下，很多时候就是指这个意思。大家想得通吗？我没说开悟，只说想一下就行了，如果连这个都想不通，你们以为要摇铃打鼓对你说个窍诀？算了，喝茶！如果连我说的这个都听不懂，还想听什么窍诀，拉倒吧！唉，真的可怜！
We are all Buddhas, yet ‘I’ endured countless years to return to my true nature. It’s precisely so! Through Madhyamaka, we recognize our innate essence—an irrefutable truth that can be proven in the moment. Matter may be denied, God dismissed, but our present seeing and listening defy denial. Living in the moment often means just that.
Now, forget enlightenment—I invite you to ponder. Can you? If not, I’m at a loss. And those secret techniques promising enlightenment? Set them aside. Sip your tea! And if my words elude you, what other secrets do you seek? Alas, what a missed opportunity!
实际证明，只能通过修行“各别自证”。
The true proof emerges through practice—an individual-based self-knowing.
逻辑上可以这么去解释我们的心可以认识到本来，但实证就只能通过修行，而且你的修行和自证，在佛法里叫作“各别自证”，这是个很麻烦的概念。心识只能是各别自证，你发现你没有执著了，你发现本体了。当然只能你自己发现，佛陀也知道，菩萨也知道，但普通人是没法知道的。普通人的认知靠什么？靠大脑认知，他没法知道。“哦，原来我们（佛菩萨、众生和我）是一体的”，如果知道那还得了，他也开悟了。
Logically, we can explain that our mind recognizes its essence. However, empirical proof emerges solely through practice. In Buddhism, this process is termed ‘individual-based self-knowing’—a profound yet challenging concept. Consciousness, too, can only be personally verified. The moment you realize that you are free from attachments, you see the essence. But this recognition remains personal. While Buddhas and Bodhisattvas know your realizations, ordinary people lack this insight—they rely on brain cognition. You’ll realize that ‘we (Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, sentient beings, and I) are one.’ If everyone grasped this, enlightenment would be universal.
而且，即使两个人都开悟了，如果自明的程度不深，也没办法互相有他心通，那怎么办呢？斗机锋，这就是禅宗斗机锋的原因。你也悟了，他也悟了，都明白了，但是语言又没法表述，特别是用那种逻辑性的语言，名相性的、学术性的语言，大家都会背，而且很多时候会自我暗示。
Yet even when two realized individuals meet, if their depth of self-knowing remains insufficient and telepathy eludes them, they engage in battles of wits. This is the reason why Chan masters would carry out battles of wits to verify genuine realization. Having attained realization, both participants know ‘what it is,’ yet language falls short—especially logical, nominal, and academic languages. We recite, often self-suggesting.
修行人基本上会自我暗示，因为修行本身都是一种自我暗示。有好多暗示，你本来是一介凡夫，修生起次第的时候硬说“我是金刚萨埵”。这样对不对呢？从修行上来说，它是对的。如果按照人类的现量来说，它是错的，而且是个非量。你凭什么说自己是金刚萨埵？你就是这一堆！瞧我自己，我的肚皮那么肥，金刚萨埵那么漂亮，这是臆想中的一个非量。但这是一种修行，这种非量的修行会摧毁我们的庸俗身体的执著。这个身体也是假的。
Generally, practitioners do self-suggest because practice itself is a way of self-suggesting. Amid myriad affirmations. Consider your journey: once an ordinary person, now asserting ‘I am Vajrasattva.’ From a practice lens, it’s valid. Yet direct human perception deems it invalid. Why claim to be Vajrasattva? You inhabit this human body! Look at me—my ample belly contrasts Vajrasattva’s grace. This imaginative assertion dismantles attachment to our mundane form. Indeed, this body is illusory.
当这两个东西摧毁了以后，最后我们会见到真正的金刚萨埵、无形无相的金刚萨埵，是真正的空性——凡所有相，皆是虚妄。相虚妄了以后，我们会见到本质，那个才是真正的金刚萨埵。见到真正的金刚萨埵以后，产生的结果是什么？了即业障本来空，那是真正的忏悔。
As these illusions dissolve, we see the true Vajrasattva—the formless, featureless essence, the real emptiness where ‘all phenomena are illusory.’ Beyond illusion lies the essence. And what follows this revelation? The realization that karmic obstacles inherently lack substance—true repentance.
也就是说，你以前做的什么罪业，一定要靠身口意去做。这些完全是虚幻的。如果你彻底体会到这个虚幻，罪业就不成立了。这是最厉害的忏悔，六祖称之为“无相忏悔”，色达喇荣五明学院称之为“无垢忏悔续”。无垢忏悔续都不是那么彻底，还用了一些密法气脉上的东西，但无垢忏悔续达到极点的时候，其实就是空性。所以，实际修行时只能通过各别自证。
Consider this: past sins unfolded through body, speech, and mind—all illusory. As you fully grasp this illusion, sins lose their stark reality. This form of repentance, termed ‘formless repentance’ by the Sixth Patriarch of Chan Buddhism or ‘Immaculate Repentance Tantra’ by the Serta Larung Five Sciences Buddhist Academy, delves into emptiness. In practice, you alone verify your journey. Embrace this path—it leads to the heart of truth
如人饮水冷暖自知，造成无法共证取信，所以骗子特别多，这也是传播困难、骗子横行的根本原因。
Just as a person knows whether the water they drink is cold or warm, self-knowing leads to an inability to mutually verify and gain trust. This predicament fuels the proliferation of fraudsters—a fundamental challenge in spreading the Dharma and the prevalence of deception.
各别自证就麻烦了，如人饮水，冷暖自知，然后造成没法共证取信。大部分是没法共证取信的，所以骗子特别多，这也是传播困难、骗子横行的根本原因。每个人都在讲“色即是空、空即是色”，讲是可以的，如果你是法师，你是见解语，没问题，随便讲。但在讲的时候，他给人暗示他懂了“色即是空”，也懂了“空即是色”，那就有问题了。不要说他真正彻底证悟，只要有境界，或者有觉受，那个人都很了不起。
Self-knowing, akin to the water-drinking analogy, presents its own troubles. Most experiences defy mutual verification and trust. Amidst this landscape, the phrase ‘form is emptiness, emptiness is form’ echoes widely. It’s acceptable to discuss it conceptually, especially for Dharma teachers. But beware: implying that one truly grasps these profound truths raises concerns. Realization, even at a modest level, is remarkable. Full enlightenment remains elusive for most.
大部分人根本都不是，很多乱七八糟的觉受捏在一起，色和空，像人们说的黑白绳子一样捆在一起，这种人特别多。这还是一些诚实的修行人，还有很多是读了一些大德的开示，然后在网上扯淡，说得头头是道。但是，这些东西他不能深讲，如果遇到我们这种老奸巨猾的，一听就知道他绝对是个骗子。
Many wander through bewildering experiences, where form and emptiness intertwine like black and white threads. Honest practitioners exist, but so do those who regurgitate teachings without depth. They sound convincing online, yet their shallowness becomes evident when challenged.
但他不怕我们这些人，因为信他的人绝对比信我们的多！这是绝对的，听我们的根本听不懂，而他会说到具体的生活，说到你喜欢的事情上去，迎合你的贪嗔痴慢疑，你被感动得一愣一愣的！网络上有很多这些，大家要小心！不是说不能看，随便看，我觉得什么都可以看，因为阻止你们去看这些不太现实，但是要经过思考，要深深地思考才行。
Curiously, they fear us not. Their followers outnumber ours—a stark reality. Those who listen to us face a steep learning curve. Meanwhile, the alluring narratives they weave resonate with daily life, catering to greed, anger, ignorance, pride, and doubt. Beware of these online pitfalls! Watch freely, but think carefully. Gradually, you’ll discern what truly matters.
勉强用梦做比喻，认为梦中的物质其实是心识的分别，但唯物论者可以用梦也是物质的运动予以反证。
Using dreams as a metaphor can be challenging, especially considering that the material things within dreams are actually manifestations of consciousness. However, materialists counter with the argument that dreams also result from the movement of matter.
我们可以说心识认知有一个比喻，就是梦。我们经常会说梦喻，梦中有物质，但是醒了以后，物质什么都没有。这只能对修行人来讲，学了中观的四大因、五大因，否定了物质，我们会认为梦跟现实差不多，认为梦中的物质其实是心识的分别。但是，，跟唯物论者去说用梦去作比喻，他根本不听的。他会说身体是物质，大脑运动产生的梦，梦恰好是物质运动的结果，会给你反证过来。
Now, let’s explore consciousness cognition through the dream metaphor. We often discuss dreams metaphorically, acknowledging that material things appear in dreams, yet upon waking, they vanish. This perspective aligns with practitioners who embrace Madhyamaka—the view that dreams mirror reality, where material things represent the discrimination of consciousness. However, when we engage materialists using dreams as a metaphor, they remain unswayed. They assert that the body is material, the brain’s movement generates dreams, and dreams precisely emerge from material processes. Their counter-arguments persist.
你们以前听说过这些吗？可能你们只在佛教圈里看书，不看其他的，要看反革命的才能知道什么叫做“革命”！他可以予以反证，除非你相信中观。如果是唯物主义者，他根本就不信中观，你还用梦去作比喻，他会反证过来的。他会说：“梦就是我们物质产生精神的证明，因为是大脑在运动，大脑是物质的，它运动造成了梦。”
Have you encountered these perspectives before? Perhaps your reading circles have primarily revolved around Buddhist texts, but there’s a world beyond—a realm of counter-revolutionaries. To truly grasp the essence of “revolution,” you must explore their arguments. These counter-revolutionaries can adeptly counter-argue—unless, of course, you firmly embrace Madhyamaka. For materialists, Madhyamaka holds no sway. When you employ dreams as a metaphor, they scoff. Their stance? Dreams merely reflect the brain’s material motion—the result of matter in action.
大家听了以后不能道听途说，不能中间截取一段去说，我是说不相信中观的人才会这样子。对于相信了中观的人，如果没有物质，那梦肯定是心识本身。不要说晚上做梦了，白天都是一场大梦，因为物质不具备真实性，所以白天也是一场大梦。
Now that you’ve heard it, consider this: don’t take it at face value. Snippets don’t reveal the whole picture. Those who dismiss Madhyamaka will remain unmoved. But for believers, if matter dissolves, dreams become consciousness itself. Not just nocturnal dreams—even daytime unfolds as a grand dream. Why? Because matter lacks inherent reality.
现在你在听我说话，看着我这个胖胖的样子，你们真的认为这是一场梦吗？如果真的认为是一场梦，说明你有出息。如果不是这样，你就要去观修。所以佛陀说“一切有为法，如梦幻泡影，如露亦如电，应作如是观”，观、观、观……余音绕梁。
As you listen to me now, gaze upon my chubby appearance. Does it feel like a dream? If you sense its dreamlike quality, you harbor potential. If not, practice beckons. The Buddha wisely declared, ‘All conditioned phenomena are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow, a dew, or a lightning, and should be viewed as such.’ Observe, observe—the lingering sound. Within observation lies awakening.
他要你去观，为什么要你去观呢？要你坐下来去观修，让你的心直接觉得它是梦。这是很难的，头脑想它是梦，你们现在已经想到了，但这没有用，这就是为什么要修单空的原因。
Why does it require observation? Because when you sit and meditate, your mind directly perceives that everything is like a dream. Yet, this path is arduous. Conceptually, your brain comprehends what ‘dream-like’ means, but understanding alone won’t suffice. You must delve deeper into the practice of mere emptiness—a gateway to genuinely perceiving the dream-like nature of all things.
那要怎么去实证到物质是虚幻的，心识才是根本呢？只有两条路，禅定与开悟。开悟当然不用说了，禅定也可以，为什么呢？如果到色界，甚至到无色界，到初禅、二禅的时候，你肯定会相信。其实不用到初禅，身体都会经常消失，外境都会消失，那时候你会发现，外境那么坚固的物质都消失了，但是你的认知还在——物质都消失了，认知还在，你当然不会相信认知是物质造成的。
If we want to demonstrate that matter is an illusion and consciousness is fundamental, what are the available methods? Traditionally, in Buddhism, there have been two main approaches: awakening and meditation. Awakening, of course, goes without saying, but meditation can also do it. Why? If you reach the realm of form, even the formless realm, to the first or second dhyana, you will definitely believe. Actually, you don’t need to reach the first dhyana, the body often disappears, the external environment disappears, then you will find that the solid material of the external environment has disappeared, but your cognition is still there—matter has disappeared, cognition is still there; This firsthand experience of consciousness persisting without physical matter can challenge the belief that consciousness is produced by the brain.
现在这么多的逻辑、比量推给你，看了听了以后，为什么你仍然不相信呢？因为人的心是不相信逻辑的、不相信比量的。虽然有时候还是会相信，但这种相信是有限的。我举个例子，跟你说吃了饭以后仍然不饱肚子，你会不干的。吃了饭就是要饱肚子，那是现量。就算跟你分析，“哇，吃了饭是不能饱肚子的……”，你可能会说“嗯，照这个说法，是吃了饭肚子不会饱哦”，但是，只要吃上一口，你马上知道他是骗子。
Many logical arguments and comparisons are presented to you, yet despite being exposed to them, why do you still not believe? This is because people's minds do not fully accept logic and comparison. Although sometimes they may believe, this belief is often limited.
Let me give you an example. If I tell you that eating will not make you feel full, you won't accept it. Eating is supposed to fill the stomach; that's direct perception. Even if I analyze it for you and say, "Eating is not supposed to fill the stomach," you might think, "Hmm, according to this analysis, eating won’t fill the stomach." But as soon as you take a bite, you immediately know that's not true.
因为比量没有现量有说服力。当你禅定到现量的时候，真的发现物质消失了，认知还在，马上就不会再相信唯物主义。当然，这必须要有见解的人，还是要去读些书。有些人去禅定，身体也消失了，但他没有学过佛教的见解，会认为是当时产生的一种状况，让自己进入了恍惚的状态，出定以后，物质又出来了，还是不相信。所以要止和观结合才行。
Inferential comparison does not have the persuasive power of direct perception. When you meditate to a point where you directly see that matter has disappeared, but cognition remains, you will immediately stop believing in materialism. Of course, this must be done with correct views, and you still need to read some books. Many people meditate, and their bodies also disappear in their perception, but without having learned Buddhist views, they may think it's just something that happened at that moment. Once they come out of it, material things appear before them again, and they unfortunately still don’t believe that matter is illusory. Therefore, you need to practice both shamatha and vipassana.
比如古代的人，他们没有唯物主义见，禅定以后就不再相信物质了，但会相信一些精微的物质。精微到什么样的程度呢？精微到太极，至于无极，认为这些东西可以组成为仙人的身体，这是道家。
For example, ancient people didn't hold materialistic views. After meditating, they no longer believed in matter but believed in some subtle matter. How subtle? Subtle to the point of Taiji and Wuji, believing that these elements could form the body of devas. This is Taoism.
如果他学了佛家关于如来藏的观点，再跟禅定一结合，比如禅定达到四禅、三禅，特别是四禅舍念清净，心里面又产生过开悟的这种认知——这种认知跟禅定一结合，禅定让外境消失了，认知赤裸裸地现出来，好了，那就是法性定。
If someone learned the Buddhist view of the Tathagatagarbha and combined it with samadhi, such as reaching the third or fourth dhyana—especially the fourth dhyana, where thoughts are abandoned, and purity is achieved—and they had previously had an awakening cognition, this cognition, when combined with samadhi, makes the external environment disappear, and cognition starkly emerges. This is known as Dharmata samadhi.
因此，禅定与开悟才是实证上灭除唯物的根本方法。但现代社会的散乱让大多数人无法进入禅定。
Therefore, samadhi and awakening are fundamental methods for empirically eliminating materialism. However, the distractions of modern society prevent most people from achieving samadhi.
我们要在内心里面消灭唯物主义，实证上起码要开悟，当然，进入法性定就不用说了。禅定可以极大的帮助我们，那禅定是不是能够破除唯物主义呢？就算没开悟，有很深的禅定也可以。
We need to eliminate materialism within our minds and at least empirically achieve awakening. Entering Dharmata samadhi is crucial. Samadhi can greatly help us. Can samadhi refute materialism? Even without awakening, deep samadhi alone can do it.
但现代社会的散乱让大多数人无法进入禅定，不要说非佛教徒了，整天刷视频，这里玩那里玩。今天已经是第三天，我想问你们：“你们中间有没有人在一座间半个小时没有念头的？”应该有吧？如果这个都没有，太浪费了。也就是坐在那里半个小时一个念头都没有，这是很容易做到的，稍稍努力打点坐都能做得。细微的念头不管，指的是没有粗大的念头，因为非常细微的念头你是控制不住的。你关注到一个目标上半个小时，那个目标可以是虚空，或者是单空，或者是一种如幻的觉受，在上面持续半个小时，中间没被拉跑。
But the distractions of modern society prevent most practitioners from entering samadhi, let alone non-Buddhists, who are constantly watching videos and goofing around. Today is already the third day of the meditation retreat. I want to ask you: "Is there anyone among you who hasn’t had a thought for half an hour during a sitting?" There should be, right? If not, it’s such a waste. Sitting for half an hour without a single thought is very achievable with just a little effort. I am talking about coarse thoughts, not subtle ones, because you can’t control subtle thoughts. Focus on a target for half an hour; that target can be void, mere emptiness, or a kind of illusory sensation. Continue for half an hour without being distracted.
什么叫做拉跑呢？“单空、单空、单空，哎呀，隔壁这个人怎么这么说话呢？”“单空、单空、单空，哎呀，她长得好丑啊！”“单空、单空，哎呀，她没有我漂亮！”如此持续半个小时，有没有啊？基本上连半个小时都不行。
What does it mean to be distracted? You are practicing "mere emptiness," and it is repeated in your mind: "mere emptiness, mere emptiness, mere emptiness." But suddenly, something cuts in, "Oh, why does that person next door talk like that?" You bring your focus back to "mere emptiness, mere emptiness." Then another thought cuts in, "Oh, she’s so ugly!" "Mere emptiness." "Oh, she’s not as pretty as me!" Can you maintain sitting without a discursive thought for half an hour? It’s nearly impossible.
原因是什么？因为大家没有当真，大家把学佛法都当成找到一位高僧大德，让他加持自己一下，然后自己的病好了、自己的孙子考上大学了，或者供了三根香蕉，明天拉一吨回来……全部都想这些好事！你想想，真有这些好事轮得到你们啊？我先去了，我条件多好啊，我可以买私人飞机过去的！你们想一想，佛陀哪里会嫌贫爱富？所以要当真去做、去修行才行，不去修行的话，你怎么都不行。
Why is that? Because people are not taking it seriously. They treat learning Buddhism as if it’s about finding a high monk to bless them, curing their illness, helping their grandson get into university, or offering three bananas and hoping to get a ton in return. Everyone is hoping for these good fortunes! Think about it, would such good luck really come your way? I’d go first. I’m in such a good position; I could fly there on a private jet! Think about it. Would the Buddha ever be biased by wealth or poverty? You must genuinely engage and practice. Without practice, nothing works.
我们再看下面的内容。关于大脑认知与心识认知的比较，我是乱写的，没有把它列成一条一条的。因为我没有时间，直到今天我还在改，上课前的一两个小时，我才把课件发给大家，而且中间还有错别字。经常有师兄发现上面有错别字。
大脑认知受五官约束，认知范围和范畴有限，
Brain cognition is constrained by the five senses, limiting its scope and categories.
我们的大脑认知受到五官的约束，因为大脑的思维活动仅仅是对五官所提供的信息进行组合与解拆。超出五官能认知的范畴，大脑认知无从谈起。比如，我们无法想一些我们从未见过的东西。大家试想一下你们从未见过的一种颜色，想得出来吗？绝对想不出来。我们能做的顶多就是把我们见过的颜色进行组合而已。或者，你们想一个从来没有吃过的食物？比如甘露。想象一下甘露的味道？要么是矿泉水的味道，要么是可乐的味道，要么是它们的组合。总之，我们能想象的都是我们已经品尝过的味道。
Our brain's cognitive processes are bound by our five senses, as our thoughts merely combine and deconstruct information provided by these senses. Cognition beyond what our senses can perceive is impossible. For instance, we can't imagine something we've never encountered before. Try to imagine a color you've never seen. Can you do it? Absolutely not. At best, we can only combine colors we've already seen. Or try to imagine the taste of food you've never eaten, like ambrosia. You might imagine it tasting like mineral water, cola, or a combination of familiar flavors. Essentially, we can only imagine tastes we've already experienced.
我们没办法思考我们的五根没有接触过的东西，所以，我们的认知范围和范畴都有限。由于我们认为大脑是认知的本体，所以很难去改变大脑本体，但现在有点开始改变大脑本体了。我们怎么改变大脑本体的？马斯克想在头脑里面塞一个芯片进去。但问题是这样真的能改变大脑吗？根本不行！因为芯片是人类大脑的能力发明出来。它的作用是去帮助大脑拓展记忆、搜集、分析和组合等功能，但无法让大脑产生质的改变。
We cannot contemplate things our five senses haven't encountered, thus limiting our cognitive range and categories. Since we consider the brain as the basis of cognition, it's challenging to alter its fundamental nature. However, attempts are being made to change this. How are we trying to change the brain's nature? Elon Musk proposes implanting a chip in the brain. But can this truly change the brain? Not at all! The chip is an invention of the human brain itself. It can help expand memory, data collection, analysis, and combination functions, but it can't fundamentally change the brain.
尽管把AI制成一个芯片植入到大脑里去能极大地拓展大脑的某些功能，从而让大脑变得“见多识广”。但是，这种途径获得的知识能够改变我们的一些质地性的认识吗？不行的！AI芯片插进大脑以后，能让我们看到地狱吗？不可能的。坦白而言，AI芯片插进去本身就是地狱。本质上，舍本求末行不通，它无法从根本上改变大脑认知的属性。AI芯片插进去以后，不用观修，就能让你变得心胸开阔，拥有神通看到六道、净土，具有菩提心？绝对不行，因为AI只是人类的思维能力的一种扩展，本身无法带来质的变化
While an AI chip implanted in the brain could greatly expand certain brain functions, making it more "knowledgeable and experienced," can this acquired knowledge fundamentally change our qualitative understanding? No! Can an AI chip in the brain allow us to see hell? Impossible. Frankly, the AI chip itself and the very act of implanting an AI chip might be considered a form of hell. Essentially, seeking external solutions won't work; it can't fundamentally change the nature of brain cognition. After implanting an AI chip, without meditative practice, can it make you open-minded, give you supernatural abilities to see the six realms and pure lands, or instill bodhicitta? Absolutely not, because AI is merely an extension of human cognitive abilities and cannot bring about qualitative changes on its own.
由于无法改变大脑本身，于是改变外在因缘，大量使用各种工具和数学逻辑，但也很难产生质的变化，所以我们看不到紫外光，看不到六道，也看不到净土。因为大脑认知限制了我们的认知范畴和认知范围。
The human brain has inherent limitations. We attempt to overcome these by altering our environment and using tools like mathematics and logic. However, this approach rarely leads to fundamental changes in our perception. We remain unable to see ultraviolet light, the six realms of existence, or the Pure Land because our brain's cognitive boundaries restrict what we can perceive and understand.
AI的参与，也只是帮助大脑产生了计算、收集、记忆等能力，无法改变大脑的根本认知方式。为什么？大脑认知其实是有个体的，而心识认知不是的。心识走到后来连个体感都没有，所以没有法执，也没有人我执。我们后面会讲到这些。
While AI enhances our brain's capabilities in areas like computation, data collection, and memory, it cannot fundamentally alter our cognitive processes. This is because brain cognition is individualized, whereas mind cognition transcends the individual. As one progresses in mind cognition, even the sense of self dissolves, eliminating attachment to self and phenomena. We'll explore this concept further later.
数学分析也有很多不可调和的矛盾。虽然六根范围内的观察越来越清晰，但缘起层面的观察范围也非常狭隘，看不到六道，也看不到过去未来。
Mathematical analysis, despite its power, has its own irreconcilable contradictions. It may sharpen our observations within the realm of our senses, but our understanding of dependent origination remains limited. We still can't perceive the six realms or see into the past and future.
假设把ChatGPT制成芯片植入头脑里面，你能因此看到过去未来吗？看不到，但是在一定的程度上你可以使用机器推算，比如，现在股市里面炒股的很多都是利用计算机。机器的推算是概率性的，它要收集资料，收集不全的时候，它就要出错。但是，佛陀的神通看的未来不像机器，他说你明天出去以后会倒霉，那是真的要倒霉的。
Consider a hypothetical scenario where we implant a ChatGPT chip in the brain. Would this grant us the ability to see the past and future? No. While it might enable more sophisticated predictions based on data, these would still be probabilistic and prone to error when data is incomplete. This is fundamentally different from the Buddha's supernatural foresight, which can accurately predict specific events.
机器不可能具有看到过去、未来的能力，而且未来它也不会推算得很清楚。比如，我现在为什么会长这么胖？当然可以找一些理由，比如天天喝可乐、吃淀粉、碳水等等，这些叫作近因，但它们也只是一个缘，因为“因”还包括基因等等之类的更加底层的因素。为什么基因和我的胖有关系呢？推理下去，可以无穷尽地推下去。
Machines, no matter how advanced, cannot truly see the past or future, and their predictions will always have limitations. For example, if we ask why someone is overweight, we might point to immediate causes like diet. However, this is a superficial analysis. The true causes are complex, involving genetics and numerous other factors that extend far back in time.
有了AI的帮助，你能像佛陀一样找到我为什么会胖的这些原因吗？不可能的。
Even with AI assistance, we cannot hope to unravel all these interconnected causes in the way that the Buddha could. The depth and breadth of such understanding remain beyond the reach of AI and our augmented brains.
尽管在粗大的物理层面相信因果，但在微细和超时空层面就无法看到因果了，于是，波函数叫“概率波”，无法预计和知道因由的过去和未来叫“偶然”。
Although we believe in cause and effect at the gross physical level, we cannot perceive causality at subtle and super-spacetime levels. As a result, wave functions are called "probability waves," and the unpredictable past and future, whose causes we can't discern, are labeled as "random."
为什么呢？我们的科技、唯物主义，在物理层面上是相信因果的，否则数学就无法成立了。物理层面上，水由H2O组成的因果是有的，可以通过数学模型来推论。其实，我们的科技就是粗大物理层面的因果。但是，到了微细和超时空层面就无法看到因果了，比如到了量子物理学的层面，因果一说就会很麻烦。比如波函数，实际上叫做“概率波”，其实就是没有准确的因果。电子的出现是没法测量和预计的，它们的出现是完全无规则的，毫无章法，连它们的轨迹也都无法观察。
Why is this? Our technology and materialism accept causality at the physical level; otherwise, mathematics would be impossible. At this level, we can see causal relationships, like water being composed of H2O, and use mathematical models to make inferences. In essence, our technology operates within the realm of gross physical causality. However, at subtle and super-spacetime levels, causality becomes elusive. In quantum physics, for instance, the concept of cause and effect becomes problematic. The wave function, also known as a "probability wave," lacks precise causality. The appearance of electrons is unmeasurable and unpredictable, occurring without any discernible pattern or rules. Even their trajectories cannot be observed.
由于无法预计，也不知道因由的过去和未来。由于不知道微细的，也不知道广远的，所以对明天、明年能发生什么事，AI也搞不清楚，出现了什么事，我们就给他个词汇叫“偶然”。你去跟佛陀说偶然，他会看着你笑！在佛陀那里全是因果，“一饮一啄，皆有前因”。
Due to this unpredictability, we cannot foresee or understand the causes of past and future events at this level. Our knowledge of the subtle and the vast is limited, so even AI cannot clearly predict what will happen tomorrow or next year. When unexpected events occur, we label them as "random." If you were to mention randomness to Buddha, he would likely smile at you. In Buddha's view, everything is governed by cause and effect - "Every sip and bite has its prior cause."
波函数叫概率波，它是无法预计的。你去看它时，它就成了波函数塌缩，不看它时，它又成了波函数。大脑或者AI是没办法知道我看不看得到的。你用AI来算计我下一秒看什么，它绝对不行。我一看，塌缩；我不看，不塌缩；我一看，又塌缩……这在微细层面上看不到因果，所以很多研究科学的不相信因果，就是这个原因。
The wave function, being a probability wave, is inherently unpredictable. When observed, it collapses; when unobserved, it remains a wave function. Neither the brain nor AI can determine whether I will observe it or not. AI cannot predict what I will look at in the next second. When I look, it collapses; when I don't, it doesn't; when I look again, it collapses again... This lack of perceived causality at the subtle level is why many scientists doubt the universality of cause and effect.
在观察物质层面的精细方面，叫“科学”，
The detailed observation of the material world is called "science."
大脑认知对物质层面的精细化观察叫做科学。尽管这种观察愈发精细化，但实际上它的范围和范畴很有限，不过我们还是会将其视为“科学”。
Increasingly detailed observation of the material realm by Brain-based cognition is what we call science. Although these observations are becoming more and more refined, their scope and categories are actually quite limited. Nevertheless, we still regard this as "science."
受观察本体和观察方式的约束，无法看到事物产生和发展的更深层原因，所以不相信“因果”。
Constrained by the subject and the method of observation, we cannot see the deeper reasons for the emergence and development of things, so we don't believe in the law of causality.
因为以大脑的认知方式，真的没办法看到因果。无论机器多发达，数学计算的模型多好，也没办法计算前世我是一头猪（假如我前世是一头猪）。你们要怎么肯定我前世是什么呢？佛陀给出了一个最基本的推算：“欲知前世因，今生受者是；欲知来世果，今生作者是!”。尽管这个推算很粗大，但是，佛陀可以把它细化成无数个无法思议的细节。
This is because, with our brain-based cognitive approach, we truly cannot perceive the law of causality. No matter how advanced our machines become or how sophisticated our mathematical models are, they cannot calculate that I was a pig in my previous life (assuming I was). How could you possibly determine what I was in my previous life? Buddha provided a basic inference: "To know the causes of the previous life, look at what is experienced in this life; to know the fruits of the next life, look at what is done in this life!" Although this inference is quite broad, Buddha could refine it into countless inconceivable details.
比如，这花为什么是这个颜色？为什么它在不同的众生面前呈现不同的颜色？比如一朵花，在人类这里是蓝色，在天人那里是另一种颜色，在狗那里又不一样了。所有的有情，业力在他们心识里面的呈现不尽相同，对此佛陀悉知悉解。“悉”是全部的意思，悉知悉解，就是全部都知道，这便是是心识认知的殊胜之处。你若问这个行不行？这就麻烦了，因为这个是各别自证！
For instance, why is this flower this particular color? Why does it appear in different colors to different beings? For example, a flower might appear blue to humans, another color to celestial beings, and yet another to dogs. The karma of all sentient beings manifests differently in their consciousness, and Buddha fully knows this. "Fully" means completely - to know and understand everything - this is the excellence of consciousness-based cognition. If you ask whether this is possible, it becomes problematic because this is individually self-realized!
心识认知认为外境只是识的相分，大脑和感官只是心识作用的工具而已，而且比较简陋。
Mind consciousness cognition views the external world as merely the object aspect of consciousness, with the brain and senses being merely rudimentary tools for the mind's function.
当然，不是我们所有的感官都非常简陋，比如跟狗比较起来，我们的意识要发达很多，但鼻子的嗅觉还是要比狗差很多。如果我们有个狗鼻子，会很厉害的，可以去查走私贩毒，狗鼻子的超强嗅觉，再加上准确的意识判断，很容易逮到罪犯。
Of course, not all of our senses are entirely rudimentary. Compared to dogs, for instance, our mental consciousness is much more developed, but our sense of smell is far inferior. If we had a dog's nose, it would be impressive - we could detect smuggling and drug trafficking. A dog's superior sense of smell, combined with accurate mental judgment, would make it easy to catch criminals.
但是，在心识认知那里，大脑就不是认知本体了，它只是一个帮忙的工具而已，而且是一个比较简陋的工具。
However, in consciousness-based cognition, the brain is not the cognitive entity itself; it's just an assisting tool, and a rather rudimentary one at that.
我们总觉得人类了不起，马斯克的火箭要上天了，要去殖民金星了，但你看香巴拉净土的人对此的反应，估计他们连笑都不会笑，只会觉得这小子不老实。
We often think humans are extraordinary - Elon Musk's rockets are about to launch, aiming to colonize Venus. But imagine the reaction of those in the Shambhala Pure Land; they probably wouldn't even laugh, just thinking this guy is being silly.
拿我们人类自认为了不起的东西跟天人去比，是压根没法比的，因为我们的大脑认知本质上是很鄙陋的。由于我们是井底之蛙，我们会固执地认为我们的这口井就是一切了。束缚于这般固定的时空观，我们现在其实连井边边在哪里都无从得知。
Comparing what we humans consider impressive to celestial beings is fundamentally impossible because our brain-based cognition is essentially quite rudimentary. Like frogs in a well, we stubbornly believe the well we live now is everything. Bound by this fixed view of space and time, we don't even know where the edge of our well is.
随着牛顿、爱因斯坦等科学巨匠们提出的科学理念，我们的时空观也在不停地改变。科学发展到今天的量子力学，可谓极大地改变了我们对时空的认知，但是都没能让我们的认知产生巨大的质的变化。为什么？究其原因，是因为科学不承认心是根本。在这样的思想指导下，人类要有大的进步，几乎不可能！
Our concept of space-time has been constantly changing with scientific ideas proposed by giants like Newton and Einstein. Today's quantum mechanics has greatly altered our understanding of space-time, but it hasn't led to a massive qualitative change in our cognition. Why? The root cause is that science doesn't recognize the mind as fundamental. Under such guidance, it's almost impossible for humanity to make significant progress!
以心的方式去认知，由于它是基于个别自证的，所以在我们生活的这个娑婆世界也很麻烦。那帮修成了的人，十方世界任意往来，而我们最多在泰国和中国之间任意往来，而且还严重受限。这很不公平，我们要去找那些成就者算一下账（开玩笑）！
Cognition through the mind, being based on individual self-realization, is also problematic in our Saha world. Those who have achieved realization can freely traverse countless worlds in all directions, while we can at best travel freely between Thailand and China, and even that is severely limited. It's unfair - we should settle accounts with those achievers (just kidding)!
外境的呈现是内外各种因缘聚合的结果，而因缘的来源是心相续内的各种势力的聚集，要改变外境和认知能力，内外的因缘都必须改变，而且并不在诸如科技和数学逻辑等相分上过分着力。
The manifestation of the external world is the result of various internal and external conditions coming together. The source of these conditions is the accumulation of various forces within the continuum of mind. To change the external world and cognitive abilities, both internal and external conditions must change, and excessive focus should not be placed on aspects such as technology and mathematical logic.
佛教的唯识学认为外境只是心识的一种呈现，大脑是它的工具。外境为什么会呈现出不同的样子？因为种子不一样。种子成熟生发出来时，就会表现为内外的各种各样的势力，一股心的力量。这个心的力量可以在内在表现为受想行识，外界就表现为色。受想行识就是各种各样的感受、情绪。内在的感受和情绪会影响我们对外界的看法和判断。比如对同一个人的看法和判断，有没有情绪左右和干扰，其结果绝对是不一样的。甚至，看者和判断者的性别差异，过往经历的差异，都会造成对同一个人的看法和判断大相径庭。
Yogacara views the external world as merely a manifestation of consciousness, with the brain as its tool. Why does the external world appear differently? Because the seeds are different. When seeds mature and sprout, they manifest as various internal and external forces, a power of the mind. This mental power can manifest internally as feelings, thoughts, mental formations, and consciousness, and externally as form. Feelings, thoughts, mental formations, and consciousness are various feelings and emotions. Our internal feelings and emotions influence our views and judgments of the external world. For instance, our perception and judgment of the same person can be drastically different depending on our emotional state. Gender differences and past experiences can also lead to vastly different views and judgments of the same person.
以前我犯过一个的错误。曾经有一次，我很热情地带着一个朋友去重庆大学里面看竹林。我觉得那片竹林好漂亮，但出乎我意料之外的是，他杵在那里默不作声，因为那片竹林是他跟初恋女朋友分手的地方，是他的伤心地。我们俩对重庆大学竹林的感受差别好大：我看到的是我的青春，他看到的是他的失恋！内在的感受和情绪会左右我们对外境的看法，同样，外境也会带来显著的心所变化。
I once made a mistake. I enthusiastically took a friend to see a bamboo grove at Chongqing University, thinking it was beautiful. Unexpectedly, he stood there silently because it was where he had broken up with his first girlfriend - it was a place of heartbreak for him. Our perceptions of the same bamboo grove were vastly different: I saw my youth, while he saw his lost love! Internal feelings and emotions influence our perception of the external world, and similarly, the external world can bring about significant changes in our mental states.
就心识认知而言，要彻底改变外境和认知能力，内外的因缘都要改变。虽然佛教强调要内观修心，要改变内在，但这不意味着完全放弃对外缘的改变。只有圣者，才可以完全不做外缘的改变；而对普通人而言，完全不做外缘的改变是不行的。你肚子饿了就得吃东西。你一吃东西就是改变外境。
In terms of consciousness-based cognition, to fundamentally change the external world and cognitive abilities, both internal and external conditions need to change. Although Buddhism emphasizes internal observation and mind training, this doesn't mean completely abandoning changes to external conditions. Only sages can entirely forgo changing external conditions; for ordinary people, it's impossible. When you're hungry, you need to eat. Eating is changing the external environment.
一定程度上要改外缘，但是那不是着力处，因为用力之处是心。所以才说不在相分上过分着力，也不去太多地发展科技和使用数学逻辑。大家经常说：“佛陀为什么不教我们发展科技和数学呢？佛陀是不是不懂？”这纯属无稽之谈。佛陀是全知，但他知道这些知识，究竟而言，对我们去发现真理没太大的用。我们要花心思去做的是去改变内在。
To some extent, we need to change external conditions, but that's not where the focus should be, because the point of effort is the mind. That's why it's said not to overly focus on appearances or excessively develop technology and use mathematical logic. People often ask, "Why didn't the Buddha teach us to develop technology and mathematics? Did the Buddha not understand these?" This is nonsense. The Buddha was omniscient, but he knew that ultimately, this knowledge isn't very useful for discovering the ultimate truth. We need to focus on changing our internal state.
如果我们生在在弥勒时代，佛陀真的可以教我们这些。为什么？弥勒时代的人动辄就八万岁，出嫁的时候已经五万岁了，有足够的时间，什么都可以教。但我们是娑婆世界的人，人寿才一百岁，二十来岁就出嫁了，生养孩子都占据了你大量的时间和精力，你还去学科技和数学这些东西？有时候，即便学了科技和数学，研发了可以飞往金星的火箭，但悲催的现实是，火箭还没到金星，你人已经死了！所以没用的，佛陀就不教你这些到头来没用的东西。
If we lived in Maitreya's era, Buddha could indeed teach us these things. Why? People in Maitreya's era live for 80,000 years, marrying at 50,000 years old, with plenty of time to learn everything. But we're in the Saha world, living only 100 years, marrying in our twenties, with starting and raising a family taking up much of our time and energy. How can we spend time learning technology and mathematics? Sometimes, even if we learn these and develop rockets to fly to Venus, the sad reality is that we might die before the rocket reaches Venus! So it's useless, and the Buddha didn't teach these ultimately useless things.
主要要改变的是内在的因缘：一方面通过大脑与感官集资清障，一方面停下大脑和感官改变认知方向。
The main changes should be made to internal conditions: on one hand, accumulating merit and purifying obscurations through the brain and senses, and on the other hand, halting brain and sensory activity to shift the direction of cognition.
我们要赶紧去改变内外的因缘，以心为主要的改变对境，但是，我们又不能马上走到直接用心的层面，我们就得先依靠大脑和感官进行逐步向内的改变：一方面通过大脑与感官积资净障，比如观修金刚萨埵、修曼扎。修曼扎时会使用诸如珍珠等物品进行供养，别误以为好像是佛菩萨真的需要你的那些廉价的珍珠，绝对不是那样的。修曼扎是利用感官，利用思维，是你的心在接受和积聚供养的力量。所以，你观修得越真切，越有信心，越发菩提心，那个积淀下去的力量就越大，达到一定的程度时，你就能够停下基于大脑和感官的认知，从根本上改变认知方向。
We need to quickly change both internal and external conditions, primarily focusing on training the mind. However, we can't immediately operate at the level of using the mind to carry out the task directly. We must first rely on the brain and senses to make gradual inward changes:
Firstly, we accumulate merit and purify obscurations through the brain and senses. This can be done through practices like Vajrasattva meditation or mandala offerings. When making mandala offerings, we might use items like pearls, but don't mistakenly think that Buddhas and Bodhisattvas actually need these inexpensive pearls. Not at all. Mandala practice utilizes the senses and thought processes - it's your mind that's accepting and accumulating the power of the offerings.
Therefore, the more vividly you visualize, the more faith you have, and the more you generate bodhicitta (the enlightened attitude), the greater the power that accumulates. When this reaches a certain level, you'll be able to halt cognition based on the brain and senses, fundamentally changing the direction of your cognition.
虽然这是我乱写的，但我乱写的一些内容，好多都是正儿八经的，是我自己认为的真知灼见。我前面加了“我自己的”，你要攻击我的时候，我就说“是我自己认为的”，当然你要复议也可以。
于是，认知能力得以改变，时空观改变，产生神通；价值观改变，产生因果观
Thus, cognitive abilities change, the perception of space and time shifts, resulting in supernatural powers; values change, leading to the belief in the law of causality.
你这样去修，慢慢地，认知能力就会改变。大脑和感官停下来以后，认知力就会向内走形成禅定，这时加上见解，认知能力就会得到改变。前面我们讲了禅定的认知和禅修的认知，其实就是停下六根改变认知方向，这样一来，认知能力得到改变。
As you practice this way, gradually, your cognitive abilities will change. When the brain and senses quiet down, cognitive power turns inward, forming meditative concentration. Combined with insight, this changes cognitive abilities. We've discussed meditative concentration and insight meditation, which essentially involve stopping the six senses to shift cognitive direction, thus altering cognitive abilities.
时空观改变就会产生神通，比如神足通、天眼通就随之而来了。有了天眼通，几千里外的东西就像在看眼前的事物一样，看得清清楚楚的。天眼通不是用我们的肉眼在看。那是用什么在看呢？比如做梦的时候，虽然你没用眼睛看东西，但你就是看到了。用天眼通看时，你既没在做梦，也没用眼睛看，但你还是看到了，你是用什么来看呢？用心看。用心看是有层次的：佛有五眼：肉眼、天眼、慧眼、法眼、佛眼。时空观其实跟这些是联系在一起的。
Changes in the perception of space and time lead to supernatural powers, such as the ability to travel at will or divine vision. With divine vision, you can see things thousands of miles away as clearly as if they were right in front of you. This isn't done with physical eyes. So how is it done? It's like dreaming - you see without using your eyes. With divine vision, you're neither dreaming nor using your flesh eyes, yet you see. How? You see with your mind. This mind-seeing has levels: Buddha has five eyes - physical eye, divine eye, wisdom eye, dharma eye, and buddha eye. The perception of space and time is connected to these.
价值观的改变引发因果观。看多了事物发展的以后，会发现其中是有规律的和规律背后的原因。虽然规律和其背后的各种缘起纷繁复杂，但是，会发现在里面起主导作用的是人心的起伏。善有善报、恶有恶报，在心里完全是丝丝如入扣的。
Changes in values lead to the belief in the law of causality. After observing the development of things over time, you'll notice patterns and the reasons behind them. Although these patterns and their underlying conditions are complex, you'll find that the fluctuations of the human mind play a dominant role. The principle that good deeds bring good results and bad deeds bring bad results becomes intricately clear in the mind.
但是，可悲的是，我们的大脑认知是片段性的，极其狭隘，看不到事物背后的因果。为什么？大脑认知是时间性的。人们会发现，在某个时间段内，做了坏事的人活得尚好，而做了好事的人却死得凄惨，由此得出一个结论：杀人放火金腰带、修桥补路无尸骸。类似的观念，如今在网络小视频上泛滥成灾。人们不知道杀人放火金腰带的那类人，后面真的会堕入地狱；当然，他们也不明白修桥补路的这个人为何会无尸骸？是因果不虚，前世造了恶业，今生遭此报应。人们看不到这些，不知道因果报应并不在表面。人类六根的认知范围很窄，时空观也很窄，无论对人对事，都很难根据极其受限的某个时间段得出准确的结论。
Tragically, our brain-based cognition is fragmentary and extremely narrow, unable to see the law of causality behind things. Why? Brain cognition is time-bound. People observe that in a certain period, those who do bad things may prosper while those who do good may die miserably. They conclude: "Murderers and arsonists wear gold belts, while those who build bridges and roads leave no remains." Such notions now flood online videos. People don't realize that those who commit atrocities will eventually fall into hell, nor do they understand why those who do good might suffer - it's due to karmic debts from past lives. People can't see these things because karmic retribution isn't always apparent on the surface. Human sensory perception is narrow, as is our view of space and time, making it difficult to draw accurate conclusions based on limited timeframes.
要判断一个人，要看他的一生，如果只看一半就得出结论，那样是不行的。有诗曰，“周公恐惧流言日,王莽谦恭未篡时。向使当初身便死,一生真伪复谁知？”周公当时被人攻击，说他要篡位，王莽在没篡位的时候非常地礼贤下士，大家都觉得他是好人。如果当时他们都死了，那么二人的故事流传下来，后人一定会说王莽是好人。但造物弄人，结果王莽后半生篡位，成了坏蛋。而周公根本就没有篡位之意，反而让自己的侄子周成王重新起来当皇帝。他倒是成了后人口中一位很了不起的贤臣。
To judge a person, you must look at their entire life. Drawing conclusions based on half a life is inadequate. As a poem says, "Zhou Gong feared rumors when he was slandered, Wang Mang was humble before he usurped the throne. If they had died then, who would know the truth of their lives?" Zhou Gong was accused of wanting to usurp the throne, while Wang Mang was considered a good person before his usurpation. If they had died then, history would remember Wang Mang favorably. But fate intervened - Wang Mang later usurped the throne, becoming a villain, while Zhou Gong had no such intentions and helped his nephew ascend the throne, becoming renowned as a great minister.
我想说的是：看人不要看一时，而要看一世。从心识的观点来说，看一个人，那就不是看一世了，要看更长的时间，只有那样，才能准确地知道他前世今生来世的因果报应。如果只看这一世，会产生认知错误的，因为表面上的现象往往无法体现内在的因果规律。大脑认知没办法认知内在的因果规律，所以，要让人们去相信因果很难，做不到的。当然，这也不能怪他们。说服别人相信因果是不可能的，但你可以先说服自己相信因果。
My point is: don't judge a person based on a moment, but on a lifetime. From the perspective of consciousness, we should look beyond a single lifetime to accurately understand karmic cause and effect across past, present, and future lives. Looking only at this life can lead to misconceptions, as surface phenomena often don't reflect internal causal principles. Brain-based cognition can't perceive these internal causal principles, making it difficult for people to believe in causality. Of course, we can't blame them for this. It's impossible to convince others to believe in causality, but you can start by convincing yourself.
究竟上，心识认知会认为人类认知的所有外境都是非量。所谓的六根“现量”，是一种人为的规定，仅适用于人类大脑认知的范畴。
Ultimately, consciousness-based cognition considers all external environments perceived by human cognition to be invalid cognition. The so-called "direct perception" of the six senses is an artificial convention, only applicable within the realm of human brain cognition.
我们认为的六根现量是一种规定。比如，人类正常的六根中的眼根所看到的现象就被定义为现量。但就佛法的究竟观点来讲，六根都是非量。“六根若是量，圣道复益谁？”
What we consider as direct perception through the six senses is a convention. For instance, what a normal human eye sees is defined as direct perception. However, from the ultimate Buddhist perspective, all six senses are invalid cognition. As it's said, "If the six senses were valid, what use would the noble path be?"
因此，若只是一味努力地去改变外境，而不去改变心，实属愚蠢至极。这也是为什么佛陀会如此地强调和鼓励大家去修心。对此，有人会问：“大家都修心去了，没有人生产粮食，那我们吃什么呢？”这真的是想多了！如果每个人都能够去修心，这里立即就是净土，哪用得着担心吃的问题。
Therefore, it's utterly foolish to solely focus on changing the external environment without changing the mind. This is why Buddha so strongly emphasized and encouraged mind training. Some might ask, "If everyone trains their mind, who will produce food? What will we eat?" This is overthinking! If everyone could train their mind, this place would immediately become a pure land, and there'd be no need to worry about food.
且不说人人都去修心。远古时候，人心善，香稻是自然长出来的。为什么现在的生活这么艰难呢？不要去怪自然环境，人心惟危，人心太坏了。
Let's not even consider everyone training their mind. In ancient times, when people's minds were good, rice grew naturally. Why is life so difficult now? Don't blame the natural environment; human minds are in peril, too corrupted.
人心坏，从很多地方都可以得到体现。我活了差不多60年，尽管这在在历史长河中连沧海一粟都算不上，但已经足以管中窥豹了。我小时候喝的水跟现在喝的水完全不一样。我们小时候生活的那个小县城有条护城河。河水清澈见底，随时可以捧起来喝。现在回去一看……贪心过度就会不断地向外境索取，不断地生产来满足日益膨胀的欲望。贪的人多了就会有工厂，工厂排出的污水就会污染河水，导致水质浑浊不堪。这是恶性循环必然的结果。现在还有多少人敢在野外去喝水啊？基本上会买矿泉水带在身上——糟糕！
The corruption of human hearts is evident in many ways. I've lived for nearly 60 years, and although this is barely a drop in the ocean of history, it's enough to glimpse the bigger picture. The water I drank as a child is completely different from what we drink now. In my childhood hometown, there was a moat with crystal-clear water that we could scoop up and drink anytime. Now when I go back and look at it... Excessive greed leads to constant demands on the environment, endless production to satisfy ever-expanding desires. With more greedy people come factories, whose wastewater pollutes rivers, making the water undrinkable. This is the inevitable result of a vicious cycle. How many people now dare to drink water in the wild? Most carry bottled water - we messed up!
戴墨镜和不戴墨镜看太阳孰为现量？佛教并不鼓励发展科技，因为知道六根范围内的科技，就究竟来说，永远都是非量。如果只在六根范围之内，我们还是可以有非量和现量的区分。比如，大家看太阳的时候，都认为不戴墨镜看到的是现量，戴墨镜看到的是非量。再举一个红绿色盲的例子。面对一个红色的球和一个绿色的球，没有红绿色盲的人都能一致地区分清楚，而一个红绿色盲患者，他的眼根有问题，无法区分红绿色，所以按照这个规定来说，他看到的便是非量。这是一些规定，所谓规定就设定范畴。但是，人类现量是看不见太阳的，我们所看到的实际上是八分钟前的太阳光，因为太阳光到达地球需要八分钟，所以真正的太阳，我们是看不到的。
Which is a direct valid perception when looking at the sun: with sunglasses or without?
Buddhism doesn't encourage technological development because it recognizes that technology within the realm of the six senses is ultimately always invalid cognition. If we stay within the bounds of the six senses, we can still distinguish between valid and invalid cognition. For instance, when looking at the sun, people generally consider viewing without sunglasses as a direct valid perception and with sunglasses as invalid cognition. Another example is color blindness. When presented with a red ball and a green ball, those without color blindness can consistently differentiate them, while someone with red-green color blindness, due to their eye condition, cannot distinguish between red and green. According to this convention, their perception would be considered invalid. These are conventions that set categories.
However, human direct perception cannot actually see the sun. What we see is sunlight from eight minutes ago, as it takes that long for light to reach Earth from the sun. So, we never truly see the current sun.
大脑认知还有一个毛病，大脑认知会产生人我执和法我执。因为大脑属于个体，认知独立唯一，具备了人我执的属性。
Brain cognition has another flaw: it generates attachment to self and phenomena. Because the brain belongs to an individual, its cognition is independent and unique, possessing the attributes of the attachment to self.
什么意思呢？你是一个个体，你只有一个大脑，因此，任何时候，你都会有意无意地保护大脑。你爹妈打你，你一定会去抱着头，不会捂着心；炸弹爆炸的时候，蹲地上时，也是抱着头；在飞机上，当飞机发生比较严重的颠簸时，乘客都会下意识地去护头。你一定要保护这个唯一的大脑。除了这个大脑，你没法外挂一个大脑。
What does this mean? You are an individual with only one brain, so you instinctively protect it at all times. If your parents hit you, you'll cover your head, not your heart. During a bomb explosion, you'll crouch and protect your head. On a turbulent flight, passengers instinctively protect their heads. You must protect this unique brain because you can't "plug in" an external brain.
大脑认知会认为它是一个独立、唯一的东西，这恰恰是人我执的属性。不仅如此，，它还会认为其认知力是不变的。尽管其认知的功能会提升，但它认为始终是有个“我”在认知，这种感受是不变的，这是人我执的一种属性。也就是说，大脑认知有产生人我执的这种基础条件。
Brain cognition perceives itself as an independent, unique entity, which is precisely the attribute of the attachment to self. Moreover, it considers its cognitive ability as constant. Although its cognitive functions may improve and expand, it always feels there's a "self" doing the cognition, and this feeling remains unchanged - another attribute of self-attachment. In other words, brain cognition inherently has the foundational conditions for generating self-attachment.
大脑认知认为外境不同于大脑，是独立于大脑的一种存在，有法我执的属性。
Brain cognition perceives the external world as distinct from the brain, as an existence independent of the brain, possessing the attributes of attachment to phenomena.
站在大脑认知的立场而言，大脑去认知外境的时候，我们不会认为外境就是大脑；而站在心识认知的角度而言，尽管我们会说“一切境相都是心”，但我们绝不会认为“外境都是我的大脑”。其实，即便从大脑认知的角度来说，比如我们所看到的所谓外境，也只是眼睛所采集的视觉信息，经过传输后，在后丘脑的成像。尽管，这个过程从头东尾，没有你想象的那么一个真实的大脑存在，但你还是会坚挺地认为有个真实的大脑，外境是个客观的外境，而且跟这个大脑不一样，这样一来，法我执就出来了。只要一客观，就是法我执。这也正是大脑认知为什么会有人我执和法我执的原因。
From the perspective of brain-based cognition, when the brain perceives the external world, we don't consider the external world to be the brain itself. From the viewpoint of consciousness-based cognition, although we might say "all phenomena arise from the mind," we would never say "the external world is my brain." In fact, even from the perspective of brain-based cognition, what we see as the "external world" is just visual information collected by the eyes, transmitted, and imaged in the posterior thalamus. Although this process, from beginning to end, doesn't involve the kind of real brain you might imagine, you still firmly believe there's a real brain and an objective external world different from this brain. This is how attachment to phenomena arises. As soon as there's objectification, there's attachment to phenomena. This is why brain-based cognition leads to both self-attachment and attachment to phenomena.
大脑认知必定认为大脑一旦死亡，生命便会随之结束，因此不相信轮回。由于大脑认知无法看到心相续的作用，所以只相信物理层面的因果，不相信心之因果。
Brain-based cognition inevitably believes that once the brain dies, life ends, and thus doesn't believe in samsara. Since brain-based cognition cannot see the function of the mind stream, it only believes in cause and effect on the physical realm, not in the causality of the mind.
现在医学上认为人的死亡是什么？脑死亡，脑电波不动了，所以死了。我们认为大脑认知活动的终止，谓之为死亡。而且，死亡以后绝对不可能再重新用这个大脑进行认知，这就成了生命的结束，不会再来，所以不相信有轮回。这个道理非常简单。
What does modern medicine consider death? Brain death - when brain waves cease. We consider the termination of brain cognitive activity as death. Moreover, after death, it's impossible to resume cognition with this brain, which is seen as the end of life, with no return. Hence, there's no belief in samsara. This logic is very simple.
大脑认知也没办法看到心相续的作用。因果是心相续的作用。我们用射电望远镜能看到因果吗？这不太现实的，至少现在还没有这样的仪器；那科技继续发展下去，以后是否能发明出一种可以看到前世的仪器呢？这个不太可能！
Brain-based cognition can't see the function of the mind stream either. Causality is a function of the mind stream. Can we see causality with radio telescopes? This is impossible; at least, we don't have such instruments yet. Is it possible that with further technological development, we might invent an instrument that can see past lives? This seems unlikely!
所以，大部分人只相信物理层面的因果，这也是为什么我们现在极尽所能地研究物理、计算机的原因。物理层面的因果，人们看得到，但心的因果，人们看不到，所以自然也就也不会相信，这是大脑认知的特点。
Therefore, most people only believe in cause and effect on the physical level, which is why we now exhaustively study physics and computer science. People can see cause and effect in the physical realm , but they can't see the causality of the mind, so naturally, they don't believe in it. This is a characteristic of brain-based cognition.
心识认知在朝外认知时，和大脑认知一样，有人我执和法我执。为什么？我们不认为是大脑在看外境，会认为是心在看，但心在看的时候，我的心和他的心是不一样的，我用心看到的和他用心看到的也是不同的。
When consciousness-based cognition engages with the external world, it inevitably develops attachments to self and phenomena, much like brain-based cognition. This occurs because, while we understand it's the mind rather than the brain perceiving the external world, each individual's mind operates differently. As a result, my perceptions and interpretations of the world around me will inherently differ from those of others.
对待我这个胖子，喜欢我的会说：“哎，这个胖子还可以，胖得刚好。”讨厌我的会说：“这个死胖子，胖得像猪一样！”这是不同情绪差异导致的认知差异。看的角度不同也会造成认知差异。有些人可能会觉得我这边脸更英俊一点！
Consider how people might perceive me, a person of substantial girth. Those who are fond of me might say, "He's pleasantly plump, just right." On the other hand, those who dislike me might exclaim, "Look at that fat pig!" These contrasting views stem from different emotional perspectives and personal biases.
Moreover, the angle from which someone views me can significantly alter their perception. Some might even argue that one side of my face appears more handsome than the other!
所以说心识认知，或者更准确地说，每一个心识的认知朝外认知时，会有人我执和法我执，因为阿赖耶识要分个体。但是，如果大家放弃大脑认知和感官认知，把心识认知朝内，让它自认，那结果就不一样了。
When our individual consciousness engages with the external world, it naturally develops attachments to self and phenomena. This occurs because our alayavijnana, or storehouse consciousness, inherently distinguishes between individuals, creating a sense of separate self.
However, the outcome is quite different if we shift our approach. By letting go of our usual brain-based thinking and sensory perceptions, and instead turning our awareness inward, we can achieve a form of self-recognition that transcends these attachments.
我们修行，闻思修，其实就是一个认知逐步由外向内的转化过程。首先通过眼睛看文字，耳朵听声音，大脑思维所见所闻的内容，然后逐渐回过头来放弃这些外在思议化的东西，朝内去探索和认知这个产生感官、产生大脑认知的心。
Our spiritual practice follows a three-step process: listening, contemplating, and meditating. This journey gradually shifts our awareness from the external world to our inner landscape.
We begin by engaging our senses - reading texts with our eyes and listening to teachings with our ears. Our brain then processes this information, analyzing what we've seen and heard. As we progress, we start to turn our attention inward, slowly letting go of these external concepts and experiences. This inward turn leads us to explore the very source of our thoughts and sensations - the mind itself, the active creator of our entire sensory and cognitive experience.
心识反过来自认时，我们会逐渐放弃大脑认知和感官认知。不要轻易认为“放弃大脑认知和感官认知”简单。这句话好说不好做。你不停地想这是什么，不停地想那是什么。杂念纷飞。所以，大圆满的第一个区分是什么？意识和明智。
When consciousness turns inward to recognize itself, we gradually abandon brain-based and sensory cognition. Don't underestimate how difficult it is to "abandon brain and sensory cognition." It's easier said than done. Our minds are always busy analyzing everything around us, leading to scattered thoughts. Therefore, in Dzogchen, the first distinction is to distinguish between mental consciousness and lucid awareness.
意识属于大脑认知。意识的思维达到很细微的时候，如果这时还产生了些感受，就会让人误以为自己证悟了。这是一个修行的误区，有很多修行人都陷在里面。还有一种感官认知层面比较深的感受，很多时候这种感受这不一定是身体触识的消失，那是很粗大的感受，虽然二者都属于感官认知，但前者属于一种比较深的感受，那种感受会让人觉得那就是空明、是证悟。
Mental consciousness is part of brain-based cognition. When conscious thought becomes very subtle, if some feelings arise at this point, one might mistakenly believe they’ve attained enlightenment. This is a common pitfall for many practitioners. There’s also a deeper level of sensory cognition, which isn’t just the disappearance of bodily tactile consciousness (a coarser feeling). Although both are forms of sensory cognition, the former, being a deeper feeling, might be mistaken for luminous emptiness or enlightenment.
比如在阿赖耶识状态里面，感官认知都停止了，但那还不是证悟。因为这种状态已经比粗大的感官认知精微很多，所以走到这一步的修行人，要去区分阿赖耶识和法性。粗大的感官认知也会引发一些似是而非的感受，比如，有时候身体消失了，觉得外面都空了，不可思议的空，就会觉得是证悟，其实那只是心识感受，是阿赖耶识的感受，都是要被慢慢放弃的东西。
For example, in the state of alayavijnana, sensory perception ceases, but this doesn't equate to enlightenment. While it's much more subtle than sensory cognition, it's still a mental state that requires further discernment. Practitioners must distinguish between alayavijnana and true reality (dharmata). Even at the level of coarse sensory perception, misleading experiences can occur. Sometimes, when the body seems to disappear and everything feels empty, it might be mistaken for enlightenment. However, this is often just a mental projection, a function of the alayavijnana, which must be gradually transcended.
请大家记住：“放弃大脑认知和感官认知”这句话是很深的！
Please remember: "Abandoning brain and sensory cognition" is a profound statement!
自明空性本体，不再相信大脑死亡就意味着生命结束，会深信轮回和解脱。
When you directly realize the nature of Emptiness through your own mind, you'll no longer believe that brain death marks the end of life. Instead, you'll develop a strong conviction in the cycles of rebirth and the potential for liberation.
如果都放弃了，心就只能自明了，这就是“自明空性本体”。我们会发现，能认知的心识其实是空性的，同时它有能觉知、能认知、能显现的各种能力，这个时候，就不会再相信大脑死亡就是生命的结束。
This realization occurs when we let go of all attachments, allowing the mind to reveal its true nature. We come to understand that our perceiving consciousness, while fundamentally empty, possesses the capacities for awareness, cognition, and manifestation. With this insight, we no longer equate brain death with the cessation of life.
你会知道，大脑死亡不是终点，换个大脑再来过，说不定换的大脑更高级。不仅如此，还会深信轮回和解脱，会知道这个大脑的死亡便是下一个生命的开始。
You'll come to see brain death as a transition rather than an endpoint. The possibility emerges of consciousness continuing through a new brain, perhaps even a more advanced one. Moreover, you'll gain a deep understanding of the cycles of death and rebirth, recognizing that the cessation of one brain's function simply marks the beginning of the next phase in an ongoing journey.
由于认为物理变化的根本也是心之因缘的变化，所以相信心之因果。什么意思呢？如果走到这一步，明白了心的空性以后，我们会发现外境都是心的呈现。不管是山河大地，还是一年四季，这些时空的变化虽然看起来好像是物理层面在变化，但这时，我们已经明白它们只是心的游舞，呈现的只是心的因果。这个时候，我们会相信佛陀所说的一切，就会很自觉、很用力、很当真地去发心、去修行。
We believe that the fundamental basis of physical changes lies in the shifting causes and conditions of the mind. This leads us to trust in the karmic principle of causality as it relates to the mind.
What does this mean? When we reach this stage of understanding, having grasped the emptiness of mind, we realize that all external phenomena are simply manifestations of the mind. The mountains, rivers, and even the changing seasons - while appearing as physical changes - are understood as the mind's play, reflecting only the causality within the mind itself. At this point, we fully embrace the Buddha's teachings, engaging in the development of bodhicitta and spiritual practice with genuine sincerity and vigor.
开悟的人是绝对地相信因果。开悟前，其实都是在强迫自己相信因果，因为害怕报应。很多的佛教徒在考虑是否做坏事时是这样想的：报应是后面的事，先做了再说。但是，如果真的走到开悟那个层面，就不会这样取舍了。有句佛家的行话：“菩萨畏因，众生畏果”。开悟的人知道在心上去造作这些东西的结果是很可怕的。
Enlightened beings have an absolute belief in causality. Before enlightenment, we often force ourselves to believe in it, primarily out of fear of consequences. Many Buddhists, when tempted to misbehave, might think, "I'll deal with the consequences later." However, upon reaching true enlightenment, such calculations disappear. There's a Buddhist saying: "Bodhisattvas fear causes; ordinary beings fear effects." The enlightened understand the profound impact of mental actions and their far-reaching consequences.
以上是两种认知的比较，我随便写了一些，还有好多内容。但已经没时间了，再写的话，这个禅七就没了。
This comparison of two cognitive states offers a glimpse into a much broader topic. However, time constraints prevent further elaboration as our retreat draws to a close.
下面是最后一个问题，今天我们要把它讲完，明天开始讲《维摩诘经》。不然禅七都过去了，维摩诘还坐在那里，显然是不行的，一定要开始讲才行。
Let's address our final question today before we begin our study of the Vimalakirti Sutra tomorrow. We mustn't let the retreat end without delving into Vimalakirti's teachings.
认知的表达：
如何正确表达认知和理解认知的表达，是人类生活中最重要的内容。
Expression of Cognition: The ability to accurately express our understanding and comprehend others' expressions is crucial in human life.
我们常说：别人不懂我说的话，或者误解了我的意思。这就说明要不表达有问题，要不是认知有问题。表达正确了，认知有问题，别人听了会出错；认知正确了，表达错误了，人家听了也要出错。所以，正确的认知与表达非常重要。
We often encounter situations where others misunderstand us or fail to grasp our meaning. This points to issues either in expression or in cognition. Correct expression with flawed cognition leads to misunderstanding, as does correct cognition with flawed expression. Thus, both accurate cognition and clear expression are vital.
就佛教来说，表达和理解表达都非常重要。二者是我们佛法闻思修，特别是闻思的基础。很多时候我们看了书，却不能拿去用，或者看书产生了误解，其实就是因为认知与表达出了问题。因此，为了对闻思修中各种认知情况进行清楚的表达和理解，需要做一些厘清的分类和分析。
In Buddhism, both expressing and understanding expressions are paramount. These form the foundation of our practice of learning, contemplation, and meditation. Often, we struggle to apply what we've read or misinterpret teachings due to cognitive or expressive shortcomings. To address this, we need to develop a clear framework for expressing and understanding the various cognitive states encountered in our spiritual journey, requiring careful classification and analysis.
主要依据佛法的观点，针对和围绕佛法的闻思修，我们接下来谈一些认知与表达。
表达对象太多了，根据佛法的范畴，我们把它们归纳后分为以下七个类别：
1、表达现量；2、表达见解；3、表达觉受；4、表达修行；5、表达见地；6、表达证悟；7、表达境界。
Drawing from Buddhist perspectives, particularly focusing on the practices of learning, contemplation, and meditation, let's explore various aspects of cognition and expression.
Given the vast range of expressive elements in Buddhism, we can categorize them into seven key types:
1. Direct Perception
2. Views
3. Experiences
4. Practice
5. Insights
6. Enlightenment
7. States of Realization
七个表达类别的涵义
表达现量指的是六根现量和修证现量。表达见解指的是中观和唯识。表达觉受指的是修行过程中产生的各种觉受，比如，“我现在打坐打得身体也空了，周围也空了，眼睛看不见东西了......”表达修行指的是正在修的法。比如观修金刚萨埵、大威德金刚、大手印、大圆满。表达见地指的是见解和实修结合后产生的定解。或者，是理论通过实践获得的真知灼见。比如，大圆满修什么？什么都不修——这就叫做表达见地。禅宗里面斗机锋，很多时候就是表达见地。见地里面有见解和实际修行的结合，但也没达到很深。表达证悟指的是对获得证悟时的情状进行描述，譬如大地平沉、虚空粉碎。表达证悟就厉害了。表达境界指的是证悟的境界，或者神通的境界。
Let's break these down:
Direct Perception encompasses immediate sensory experiences and realizations from practice.
Views refer to conceptual understandings, particularly from Madhyamaka and Yogacara philosophies.
Experiences are the felt experiences during practice. For instance, "During meditation, my body feels empty, my surroundings fade, and my vision blurs."
Practice involves describing current spiritual methods, such as visualizations of Vajrasattva, Yamantaka, or techniques like Mahamudra and Dzogchen.
Insights represent the fusion of theoretical understanding and practical experience. An example in Dzogchen might be the realization that there's "nothing to practice" - this is expressing insight. Chan's witty exchanges often fall into this category. Insights blend theory and practice but haven't reached the deepest levels.
Enlightenment expressions describe the moment of awakening, often using vivid imagery like "the earth sank" or "space shattered."
States of Realization refer to the condition of being enlightened or possessing extraordinary abilities.
这七个类别可以进一步归纳和提炼成三大类：见解语、修行语、境界语。
We can further distill these seven categories into three main types:
1. Expressions of View
2. Expressions of Practice
3. Expressions of Realization
这三个语，顾名思义，分别表达见解，表达修行和表达境界。这里所说的境界包括了见地和证悟。
These three encompass theoretical understanding, practical application, and experiential attainment, respectively. Here, "realization" includes both insights and enlightenment.
1、见解语
1. Expressions of View
通过闻思获得的佛法知识和逻辑就是见解。对它的理解和表达，即为见解语。
In Buddhism, views are the knowledge and logic gained through study and contemplation. When we articulate these understandings, we're engaging in “expressions of view.”
见解语的表达主要说的是比量认知。比如下列这些中观和唯识中的知识和逻辑概念：离一多因、缘起性空、境由心现、止观双运、烦恼即菩提、一切即一、能所双亡、全体皆真。我们学习中观、唯识，五部大论都是在学习佛法的理论知识和逻辑概念。没有任何修行经验的人，也可以去对它们进行闻思。闻思以后再把它们表达出来，就叫做见解语。比如用中观的离一多因去分析所有的现象不实有。尽管这时的分析仅仅是语言和思维层面的，但总不能说没开悟的就不能说离一多因，那是不行的。谁都可以表达所学到的知识和逻辑。
These expressions primarily deal with inferential cognition. They include concepts from Madhyamaka and Yogacara philosophies, such as:
● The reasoning of neither one nor many
● Dependent origination and emptiness
● All phenomena arise from mind
● The union of calm abiding and insight
● Afflictions are enlightenment
● All is one
● Transcendence of subject and object
● All is truth
When we study Madhyamaka, Yogacara, and the Five Great Treatises, we're learning Buddhist theory and logic. Even without meditation experience, one can study and express these concepts. For instance, using Madhyamaka reasoning to analyze the lack of inherent existence in phenomena. While this analysis may be purely conceptual, it's still valid to express such views. Anyone can express the knowledge and logic they've learned.
依据说的人的不同，缘起性空可以是见解语，也可以是一种境界语，但多数还是见解语。何谓“缘起性空”？所有的现象没有本质叫缘起性空。这是一个见解。如何分析没有本质呢？离一多因就上去了。何谓“缘起”？任何事物，不可能独立存在，所有事物都是普遍联系的。
Depending on who's speaking, "dependent origination and emptiness" can be an expression of view or realization, but it's most often a view. What does it mean? It's the understanding that all phenomena lack inherent nature. This is a view. How do we analyze this lack of essence? We use the reasoning of neither one nor many. What is "dependent origination"? It means nothing exists independently; everything is interconnected.
大家能在概念层面理解缘起吗？你去找一个独立的事物，你真的找不出来。任何事物和外界都有联系，这就是缘起。缘起还有表层缘起和底层缘起。表层缘起就是我们看到的六根层面，底层缘起就是阿赖耶识的种子在底层运行。
Can we understand dependent origination conceptually? Try to find an independent object - you can't. Everything is connected to the external world. This is dependent origination. There's surface-level dependent origination (what we perceive through our senses) and deep-level dependent origination (the seeds of alaya consciousness operating at a fundamental level).
境由心现、止观双运、烦恼即菩提、一切即一、能所双亡、全体皆真，在思维层面对这些词汇的理解都是见解语。见解语表达的只是知识和逻辑。当然，它们也有可能成为境界语。比如，过去禅宗的修行人说一切现成、全体皆真有可能是境界语。他们之间有人会问：“你证悟到什么？”有人会答：“全体皆真”、“什么都是觉性”，这些都可能是境界语。但是，只要一般人，学修都没多少时间的，来说他能所双亡了，大抵都是是鹦鹉学舌的二百五，只是背书罢了。真正实现了能所双亡的人不会来这说“我能所双亡了”。
Concepts like "all phenomena arise from mind," "union of calm abiding and insight," "afflictions are enlightenment," "all is one," "transcendence of subject and object," and "all is truth" are expressions of view when understood intellectually. These expressions convey knowledge and logic. Of course, they can also become expressions of realization. For instance, when Chan practitioners of the past said "everything is complete as it is" or "all is truth," these could be expressions of realization. They might ask each other, "What have you realized?" and answer, "All is truth" or "Everything is awareness." These could be expressions of realization. However, if an ordinary person with little study or practice claims to have transcended subject and object, they're likely just parroting words they've heard. Those who have truly transcended subject and object wouldn't go around saying, "I've transcended subject and object."
有时候复读也可以勉强叫见解语。复读指的是读诵经论。比如，我拿一本《楞严经》念，从头念到尾。严格来说，那不叫真正的见解，叫复读。真正的见解语是经过反复思考后获得的。
Sometimes, mere recitation can loosely be called an expression of view. For example, reading the Shurangama Sutra. Strictly speaking, this isn't a true view but recitation. Genuine expressions of view come from repeated contemplation.
对佛陀所讲的理论知识和逻辑概念进行记忆、理解，而后再把它表达出来，叫见解语。但是，我们要清楚见解语只是思维层面的，与一个人的修证，甚至与一个人的品行都没什么关系。我一点修证都可以没有，我还可以是个坏人，但我也可以去读《楞严经》，去表达我对他的见解。难道坏人就不准看《楞严经》了吗？正是坏人才要看《楞严经》！
It's crucial to understand that expressions of view are purely intellectual. They don't necessarily relate to one's spiritual attainment or moral character. One can have no spiritual realization, even be a bad person, yet still read the Shurangama Sutra and express views on it. In fact, it's precisely those who need improvement should study such texts!
见解语都是转述教言或者表达比量认知。我们从书籍上读了对离一多因、缘起性空等的阐释，逻辑概念上理解了它们的含义。比如，证悟了缘起性空的心会有什么样的表征。这些都属于见解语。当然，见解语中间也有非量，因为转述和逻辑可能出错，一旦出错，就成了非量。
Of course, expressions of view can also include incorrect cognitions if there are errors in repetition or logic.
很多人喜欢去随意摘引佛法里一些经典经论的语句，比如《心经》。人们写文章，发朋友圈，都喜欢引用它里面的语句，比如，“色即是空，空即是色，受想行识，亦复如是”。严格来说，这样的做法就是断章取义，彻底的转述错误。大家不要认为这没什么，这种断章取义式的转述产生的后果真的很吓人。对待佛法，我们可以不信，但我们还是要有敬畏心，因为稍有不慎，导致的果报特别严重。这不是危言耸听，是实话实说，因果不虚，报应不爽。
Many people like to casually quote Buddhist scriptures, like the Heart Sutra. In articles or social media posts, people often quote phrases like "Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. The same is true of feelings, perceptions, formations, and consciousness." Strictly speaking, this is taking things out of context and a complete misrepresentation. Don't think this is harmless - the consequences of such misrepresentation can be terrifying. We may not believe in Buddhism, but we should still approach it with reverence, as carelessness can lead to severe karmic consequences. This is not alarmism but a statement of fact - no matter one believes or not, karma is infallible, and retribution is certain
有时候，对佛法的转述错误导致果报的可怕程度，远远超过杀人。杀人杀的是性命，但你用错误的佛法去污染别人，祸害的是别人的慧命。两命相较，伤害慧命的后果更为严重和和可怕，而且它持续的时间要长很多。这一世，我受了你的报，被你害了性命，，下一世换个天人再回来报复你。但是，害了慧命，我得长劫在地狱里面受尽无法想象的痛苦，等从地狱里面出来以后，我便会狠狠地报复你。其实，不是我处心积虑想回来报复你，因果就是这样，由不得我们。有因必有果，冤冤相报何时了？
Sometimes, the karmic consequences of misrepresenting Buddhist teachings can be far worse than taking a life. Killing ends a life, but corrupting someone with incorrect Dharma harms their wisdom-life. Comparing the two, harming one's wisdom-life is more severe and terrifying, with much longer-lasting effects. If you take my life in this lifetime, I might return as a celestial being in the next life to seek revenge. But if you harm my wisdom-life, I might suffer unimaginable torment in hell for eons, and upon emerging, I would seek terrible revenge. It's not that I deliberately want to seek revenge, but this is how karma works - it's beyond our control. Causes inevitably lead to effects, and when will this cycle of retribution end?
逻辑错误即成非量。比如，我们在进行一些推论的时候有可能出错。
Logical errors lead to invalid cognition. For example, we might make mistakes when drawing inferences.
当保证转述正确和逻辑正确时，修行人无论修行程度如何，都可以如斯表达，听闻者听取表达时，也不能以是否有觉受和境界去要求对方。
When the retelling is accurate and the logic is sound, practitioners can express these views regardless of their level of spiritual attainment. Listeners should not judge the speaker based on whether they have personal experiences or realizations.
虽然我们没有修行觉受和境界，但可以通过转述或者思维这样的表达去说佛法。意思就是，我们不能去要求给我们讲法的法师：“你有证悟吗？你没有证悟，下来！”他下来，你上去啊？所以，在讲法的时候，只要有见解就可以了。
Even without personal spiritual experiences or realizations, we can discuss Buddhist teachings through accurate retelling or logical reasoning. This means we can't demand of a Dharma teacher, "Are you enlightened? If not, step down!" If they step down, are you ready to take their place? So, when teaching Dharma, having a correct understanding is sufficient.
当然，见解也可能会出错误，这时候就得依法不依人。依法不依人的意思，就是你可以根据教理去检测他说的正确与否。选择上师至关重要，我们要慎重慎重再慎重。法师讲的法可以去听，但听了以后，马上就是：“我听了你讲法，我就马上要变成你弟子。”择师不能这样轻率。你们听了我讲法那么多年，我什么时候承认你们是我弟子啊？我根本都不承认这一套。要做我的弟子？你开玩笑，没有那么便宜哦！
Of course, views can be mistaken. In such cases, we should rely on the Dharma, not the person. This means you can verify the correctness of what's said based on Buddhist doctrines. Therefore, choosing a teacher is crucial, and we must be extremely careful.
It's fine to listen to teachings from various monks or teachers. But it's hasty to immediately think, "Now that I've received your teaching, I must become your disciple." Selecting a teacher shouldn't be so casual. You've listened to my teachings for years, but have I ever acknowledged you as my disciples? I don't accept that system at all. Want to be my disciple? It's not that easy!
只要对佛法有正确的见解，法师或者辅导员是可以讲法的。如果一上去就要求人家开悟才能讲法，佛法会灭的。现在哪里去找那么多开悟的人啊？现在，好多网上号称自己开悟的，全都是二百五。所谓的一些大德，蒙你们绰绰有余，蒙就是蒙好人，蒙我们这些坏人是蒙不了的，我们是专业挑刺的。
As long as one has a correct understanding of Buddhism, monks or instructors can teach the Dharma. If we demanded that only enlightened beings could teach, Buddhism would die out. Where would we find so many enlightened people nowadays? Many people online claim to be enlightened, but they're all fools. Some so-called great masters might fool the gullible, but they can't fool us skeptics - we're professional fault-finders.
2、修行语：修行中，学人会串习见解和修法，因此会产生相应的见地和相应的觉受、境界，把它们表达出来就是修行语。
2. Expressions of Practice: During spiritual practice, students will habitualize themselves to corresponding views and methods, resulting in corresponding insights, experiences, and states of realization. Expressing these is what we call "expressions of practice."
“串习见解”指的是反复思维一个见解，然后引发觉受；“串习修法”指的是反复观修某个修法，比如金刚萨埵、大手印、单空，然后产生相应的见地、觉受、境界。
“The habituation of views" means repeatedly contemplating a particular view, which then evokes certain experiences. "The habituation of methods" refers to repeatedly practicing a specific technique, such as Vajrasattva, Mahamudra, or Mere Emptiness meditation, which then produces corresponding insights, sensations, and states of realization.
见地，是见解与修证的融合。比如，我们学了“如梦幻泡影”这个见解，拿去反复地修，真的产生了梦幻泡影的这种感受，就知道梦幻泡影是怎么回事，然后再用我自己的语言表达出来，就叫做见地。见地深的时候，比如开悟，开悟了以后桶底脱落，觉性赤裸裸地露出来了。我们想去表达它，但又不想用书上的语言来表达，我们想用自己的话把它说出来，也叫见地，是真的有这种领悟。
Insights are the fusion of intellectual understanding and experiential realization. For example, if we learn the concept "like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow" and repeatedly meditate on it until we genuinely experience it, we gain insight. When we then express this understanding in our own words, we're sharing our insight. Deep insights, such as those from enlightenment experiences where "the bottom of the bucket falls out" and naked awareness is revealed, can also be expressed as insights. We might want to articulate this experience without using textbook language, instead describing it in our own words - this too is an expression of insight, reflecting genuine realization.
觉受，是修行过程中产生的很多主观的感受。
Experiential sensations are the various subjective feelings that arise during practice.
境界，指的是修出了一个客观且较为稳固的现量认知。比如，一位修行人，现在随时随地处在空的认知里面，且它鲜有变化，较为稳固。如果只有一点空的觉受，睡一觉起来就没了，或者一个电话打完就没了，那叫有觉受。觉受会消失。
States of realization refer to objective and relatively stable direct perceptions achieved through practice. For instance, a practitioner who consistently experiences emptiness in all situations, with little fluctuation, has achieved a state of realization. If the experience of emptiness is fleeting - disappearing after sleep or a phone call - it's merely an experiential feeling. Feelings will vanish.
有一部分语言和名相用来表达见地、觉受和境界。比如：放松身心、安住观修、意守丹田。放松身心是修行语，这是表达如何去串习自己的观修。安住观修也是修行语，你要怎么去安住。意守丹田也是修行语，要点是去做，去实践。
Some terms and phrases are used to express insights, experiences, and states of realization. For example:
● Relaxing body and mind
● Abiding in meditation
● Focusing attention on the lower dantian
These are expressions of practice. “Relaxing body and mind” tells us how we should go about meditation. "Abiding in meditation" is about how to rest in meditation. "Focusing on the lower dantian" is also a technique that helps you gain meditative concentration. The key of these expressions of practice is to just do it, to put it into your practice.
观一切如梦、不寻不伺、不执一处、身心轻盈、烦恼消融、安乐愉悦、如梦如幻、念起即无、心如晴空、心如明镜。这些都属于修行语，都是做得到的，不会是很难。但是，修行语很容易和境界语有重叠的地方。比如，我说心如晴空，即我保持我的心像晴空一样，没有一个念头。上座时，我串习它，那便是一种修行语。但下座后，我说我心如晴空，跟上座一样，那就变成了境界。无论我遇到什么状况，我根本不作任何判断，让那些状况像天空中的云彩一样，任它来去。我座上座下都如此，就变成了境界语。所以，这句话到底是境界语还、修行语，或者见解语，要进行区分。
Other expressions of practice include:
● Viewing everything as a dream
● Neither pursuing nor rejecting thoughts
● Not fixating on any single point
● Experiencing lightness of body and mind
● Dissolving afflictions
● Feeling peace and joy
● Perceiving phenomena as dream-like illusions
● Recognizing thoughts as they arise and letting them go
● Mind like a clear sky
● Mind like a clear mirror
These are all expressions of practice, achievable without great difficulty. However, expressions of practice can often overlap with expressions of realization. For instance, if I say "my mind is like a clear sky," meaning I maintain a thought-free state of mind, it's an expression of practice when I cultivate this during meditation. But if I say the same thing after meditation, describing my ongoing state of mind, it becomes an expression of realization. If I encounter various situations without making judgments, letting them pass like clouds in the sky, both during and outside of formal meditation, it becomes an expression of realization.
Therefore, whether a statement is an expression of practice, realization, or view depends on the context and the speaker's experience. It's important to distinguish between these categories.
修行语是对修行见解、方法及其相应的觉受、见地和境界的表达。这些表达中有比量、现量和非量之分。
Expressions of practice describe practice views, methods, and their resulting experiences, insights, and states. These expressions can be inferential, direct valid perceptions, or invalid perceptions.
修行人所表达的话里面，有部分是比量推断，表达见解的。有部分是现量，表达觉受或者境界的。也有部分是他自己头脑里面想象的，实际根本没有的非量。比如，某人说自己已经证悟了缘起性空、如梦如幻，但他其实根本没有这样的境界，都只不过是是自己头脑里面的想象罢了。这样就成了非量，表达出来的根本不是真实的情况。
When practitioners speak about their practice:
● Some statements are logical inferences, expressing views.
● Some are direct valid perceptions, describing experiences or states.
● Some might be imaginary, expressing things that don't actually exist.
For example, someone might claim to have realized emptiness and the illusory nature of reality, but if it's just imagination, not genuine experience, it becomes an invalid perception.
“一切有为法，如梦幻泡影，如露亦如电”，这句话可以是见解语。我们用中观的理论去分析它，比如用离一多因、有无生因去分析，一切有为法真的像梦幻泡影，梦不真实，幻也不真实，如泡影、如露亦如电，转瞬即逝。
This expression "All conditioned phenomena are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, or shadows; like dew or lightning" can be an expression of view. We can analyze it using Middle Way reasoning, like the neither-one-nor-many argument, to understand how all phenomena are indeed like dreams or illusions - unreal and fleeting.
但在具体实践过程中，说“一切如梦如幻”时，既可以是表达方法的修行语，也可以是表达见地和觉受的修行语。
In practice, saying "everything is like a dream or illusion" is an expression of practice that can express a method as well as an insight and experience.
修行语的范围很广，涵盖了对修行方法、见地和觉受的表达。一切如梦如幻，就是教你怎么去观一切如梦如幻。比如，如梦观的修法：思考白天像晚上做的梦，把这种感受套用到现实生活的种种情况，觉得都是梦。想象梦醒了以后是怎么样的？梦醒后，梦里的种种什么都没有了。我们又接着想象梦里的种种完全消失了以后是怎么样的？这样一来，如梦幻泡影就变成的了表达方法的修行语。
Expressions of practice cover a wide range, including expressing methods, insights, and experiences. "Everything is like a dream" teaches you how to perceive reality this way. For instance, the dream-like meditation:
● Consider daytime experiences as nighttime dreams.
● Apply this feeling to various life situations.
● Imagine what it's like when a dream ends - everything in it disappears.
● Contemplate what it’s like after everything in a dream vanishes.
This way, seeing things as "dreams, illusions, bubbles, or shadows" becomes an expression of practice.
由于修行语所表达的内容与个人觉受和境界相关，因此表达者在表达时，需要周全仔细，尽量详尽，否则容易辞不达意，误导听众。
Since the content expressed in the language of practice is related to personal experiences and states of realization, speakers must be thorough and careful in their descriptions. They should provide detailed explanations to avoid misunderstandings and misleading their audience.
如果一个人要讲自己的修行语，一定要小心，要尽量讲得详尽，周全。要根据听众的情况，尽量从不同的角度来讲。否则，讲得云里雾里的，会弄翻一帮人。
When discussing one's own practice, it's crucial to be cautious and comprehensive. Tailor your explanations to your audience, approaching the topic from various angles. Vague or unclear explanations can confuse many people.
我们在初步听闻佛法时，一般法师就可以了。但在寻求修行法门时，就要去找有经验的上师了。因为具体修法里面牵涉到如何具体去落实某个法门，有经验的上师，对此他有觉受，他有修行，他有方法，他才能教给你。不然他一教，二不跨五的。他本身也不懂，见解和修行结合不上。即使他拿书上的东西讲给你听，其实都是把见解语背诵给你听。他是一台录音机，你变成另外一台录音机，最多中间连了一根连接线，这样是不行的。所以，修行语的表达者就要小心了。
For basic Buddhist teachings, any qualified teacher can suffice. However, when seeking specific practice instructions, it's essential to find an experienced master. Effective teaching of practice techniques requires personal experience, practice, and methodology. Without these, a teacher might offer disconnected or purely theoretical instructions, essentially reciting from books like a recording. This approach is inadequate for genuine practice.
而听闻者也应该对此非常谨慎。不但要在修行的见解和方法上甑别，更要明白同样的语言可以表达的是不同的觉受和境界，反过来，同样的觉受和境界，也可以用不同的语言来表达。
Listeners should be very cautious about this as well. Not only should they discern the views and methods of practice, but they should also understand that the same language can express different experiences and states of realization. Conversely, the same experiences and states of realization can be expressed in different languages.
这是很麻烦的一件事情。很多时候我们会说：“我没办法去详细地对我的上师讲我的修行，上师讲的东西我好像也用不上”，其实这说明你们之间的修行语不同频。在表达修行语时，如何做到与上师同频？第一步把你在书上看到的理论变成实际的修行。第二步要把实际修行的感受说出来，上师便会针对你的情况进行对接，这样才能指导你修行。与上师正确的沟通方式应该是这样的。大家不要认为上师会拿张纸条给你，上面写了个窍诀，你一看，哗！任督二脉就打通了。那是武侠小说里面的东西。
This is a troublesome matter. Often, we say, ‘I can’t explain my practice to my teacher in detail, and what the teacher says doesn’t seem to apply to me.’ This actually indicates that your language to express your practice is not aligned with your teachers. How can you align yours with your teacher’s? The first step is to turn the theories you read in books into actual practice. The second step is to express your actual practice experiences. The teacher will then respond to your situation and guide your practice accordingly. This is the correct way to communicate with your teacher. Don’t expect your teacher to hand you a note with a secret technique that, once you read it, will instantly open up your energy channels. That’s something from fantasy movies.
之所以很多人读了十几年的书，最后啥都不是，就是这个原因。中间的修行语弟子和上师双方没有对接上，没有获得相应的指导。所以，你要去区分这些。比如，上师说了两句话，但这两句话实际上说的是一个境界；上师只说了一句话，但这句话表达了好多个境界。比如“缘起性空”这个词本身是个见解，但有好多境界在里面。
The reason many people end up with nothing after studying for over ten years is because the language between the disciple and the teacher did not connect, and they did not receive appropriate guidance. So, you need to distinguish these things. For example, the teacher may say two sentences, but these two sentences actually describe a single state of realization; the teacher may say only one sentence, but this sentence expresses multiple states of realization. For example, the term 'dependent origination and emptiness' is a view, but it contains many states of realization.
为什么我会很烦网上搞鸡汤语言的人？有很多修行上的具体东西他不说，尽说一些似是而非的话，你听了以后，就根据你的理解去理解。有时候，你根据他的话去理解，可能对你的心有点安慰，要不也不会称为鸡汤了，说明还是有点营养的，但也可能是毒鸡汤，当时让你舒服一下，后面很快就不起作用了。
Be wary of vague, feel-good advice often found online. Such "chicken soup for the soul" content might offer temporary comfort but lacks substantive guidance for practice. Phrases like "let go of attachments" or "open your heart" are common but unhelpful without specific instructions on how to achieve these states.
现在网上经常见到“不执著”、“要放开你的心胸”等字眼。这些弄死个人啊！放开我的心胸！要怎么放开我的心胸？放开你的心胸是怎么回事？一律不说。而真正的修行语，上师要反反复复地对你说，中间要进行很多的沟通，你才能慢慢地明白，然后体会进去。当你的修行卡在某个地方，停滞不前时，他再跟你去说，可能就通了。这在禅宗那里叫“抽钉拔楔”，就是把那些障碍你修行的钉楔给你拿掉。如果上师不是过来人，多半都要被弄翻的。即使不是过来人，如果他有一定的修行，也可以帮助你。比如，修到一定程度的人，他的单空修得很好，他就可以教你单空，会告诉你是怎么回事。
Genuine meditation instruction involves repeated explanations and ongoing dialogue. A skilled teacher can help you overcome obstacles in your practice, like "removing nails and wedges" in Chan terminology. Even if a teacher isn't fully enlightened, substantial personal practice allows them to guide others effectively in specific techniques. For example, someone who has practiced mere emptiness well can teach you about it and explain what it is.
所以，教授者要小心，一定要有修行才能够教别人修行。还有，受教者也要小心。教的人根本都讲不到修行，只是重复书上那些话，那就没多大意义了？如果你要听那些话，找台录音机来放岂不更好？况且，现在已经AI读经的应用程序了，想听什么就听什么。
In conclusion, teachers must be careful and have genuine practice experience to instruct others. Students must also be discerning. Mere repetition of book knowledge has limited value in real practice. If you only want to hear scriptural recitations, a recording or AI application might suffice. Real practice instruction requires experiential knowledge and personalized guidance.
3、境界语：修行到一定程度之后，修行人会出现很多身心内外的境界，有些与见解一致，有些不一致，有些配合相应的觉受，有些不配合，但之所以能称之为境界，说明是一些相对比较坚固和突出的状况。
3. Expressions of States: As practitioners progress in their spiritual practice, they experience various mental and physical states. Some of these states align with their views, while others don't. Some are accompanied by specific meditative experiences, while others aren't. We call these "states" because they are relatively stable and distinct conditions.
修到一定程度的时候，比如有了出离心，他就会表达境界，“现在所有的这些事物，我都不贪著了”。这是一个境界。都不贪著了！那对成佛贪不贪著呢？还是有点贪著的。这是境界语，有些会与见解一致，有些会不一致，有些会配合相应的觉受，有些不配合。为什么？因为达到很深境界的时候，连觉受都没有。
When practitioners reach a certain level, such as developing renunciation, they might express their state by saying, "I'm no longer attached to any of these worldly things." This is an example of a state. They're not attached to anything! But are they still attached to becoming enlightened? Probably a little. These expressions of states may or may not align with their views, and may or may not be accompanied by specific meditative experiences. Why? Because at very deep states, even experiences disappear.
比如，真正开悟以后的人是没有觉受的，悟境本身是不太有觉受的。悟了以后可以引发很多觉受，但所有的觉受来去自由，跟我手上这块板子挥上挥下是一样的。或者我看这个、看那个，都是一样的。内在的觉受生起，舒适、愉悦，乃至于痛苦都是这样。达到很深的程度，再大的痛苦，其实跟这个都没什么差别。
For instance, those who have truly awakened don't have much meditative experiences in the same way. The state of awakening itself doesn't involve many meditative experiences. After awakening, one might experience various sensations,feelings, but they come and go freely, just like moving this board up and down in my hand. Or like looking at this thing or that thing - it's all the same. Inner sensations arise - comfort, pleasure, even pain - but they're all treated equally. At a very deep level, even intense pain doesn't feel much different from anything else.
有些境界会有相应的觉受配合。比如，有些开悟的人会说：“开悟像脱掉千万层贴肉汗衫一样”。他以此觉受来表达开悟的这种爽快和无负担。但如果遇到悟得透的，他会这么说：“去你的，老子要穿上”，一脚踢翻你！那只好纳头便拜，草贼我又败了！这样的说法有很多，但大家不要去追这些，会把你弄颠的，我们要踏实地一步步修行上去
Some states are accompanied by corresponding meditative experiences. For example, some awakened individuals might say, "Awakening feels like taking off layers and layers of sweaty undershirts." They use this sensation to express the refreshing and unburdened feeling of awakening. However, if you meet someone who has truly penetrated the truth, they might say, "Forget about that, I'm putting them back on!" and kick over your ideas. Then you'd have to bow in defeat, realizing you've lost again! There are many such sayings, but don't get caught up in chasing these experiences. It can drive you crazy. We should practice steadily, step by step.
能够称之为境界，状况就必须比较稳固。不能说今天有了境界，明天它又没了，那就成了觉受，那样是不行的。而且它要突出、要清晰。何谓突出和清晰？比如凡夫境界里的身体沉重感，它是既突出又清晰。不管你想与不想，你那一坨身体的沉重感，无论行住坐卧，任何时候都如影随形。你什么时候能够感觉飘起来？当你飘起来的时候，你就知道“我现在已经过去了”。所以，凡夫的境界是很清晰的、很突出的，证悟了也是一样。
For something to be called a state, it must be relatively stable. It's not a state if it's here today and gone tomorrow - that's just a fleeting sensation. Moreover, it should be prominent and clear. What does prominent and clear mean? For example, in the ordinary state, the feeling of heaviness in the body is both prominent and clear. Whether you want it or not, that lump of heavy body follows you like a shadow in any posture or activity. When do you feel like you're floating? When you start floating, you'll know "I'm dead." So, the ordinary state is very clear and prominent, and the same is true for the awakened state.
前面讲过了见解语基本上都是比量，修行语有非量、比量和现量，境界语有非量和现量。境界语不能说是比量，因为你修成的那个状态是现量的，不可能是比量。为什么说证悟不可思议、非意识和感受不能够触及的？因为境界是非思维性的，也不是感受性的，因为思维会变，感受会丢失。
As mentioned earlier, expressions of view are generally inferential cognitions. Expressions of practice involve non-valid, inferential, and direct valid cognitions. Expressions of states involve non-valid and direct valid cognitions. They can't be inferential because the state you've achieved is directly perceived, not inferred. Why is awakening said to be inconceivable and beyond the reach of consciousness and sensation? Because states are non-conceptual and not based on feelings. Thoughts change, and feelings vanish.
总之，对修行内外结果的表达，即为境界语。如：身心如影、身体消失、大地平沉、虚空粉碎、心如虚空、孤明囧囧。
In essence, expressions of states describe the internal and external results of spiritual practice. Examples include: "Body and mind are like shadows," "The body disappears," "The earth sinks," "Space shatters," "The mind is like empty space," and "Nothing but clarity.”
什么叫“孤明囧囧”？如果真的明白了，就是个境界语，永远都是孤明囧囧，拿都拿不掉。但是，我们去说“这个世界的本质就是光明”，只是理解了，那叫见解语。有时候虽然说不是孤明囧囧，还是有点体会，但对现起却不知道怎么处理。虽然说“万象丛中独露身”就是孤明炯炯，但拨不拨万象？其实是还没成为境界，他有点觉受，还不知道拨不拨万象，就是要不要拿掉外界？那时候是有点觉受，但也可以成为一种不清晰的、模糊的境界。
What does "Nothing but clarity" mean? If you truly understand it, it's an expression of a state - it's always there, impossible to remove. However, if we say "the essence of this world is light" based on mere intellectual understanding, that's an expression of view. Sometimes, even if we don't fully experience "Nothing but clarity," we might have some insight but struggle with how to deal with appearances. We might say "revealing oneself amidst myriad phenomena," but should we clear away these phenomena? This isn't yet a true state - there’s some experience involved at that moment, but it can still be considered as a vague state.
如果是证悟的人，一口就给你回答出来，甚至回都不回答，懒得跟你这些憨人在那扯嘴巴皮、打葛藤，回头走人。还有的要表示深刻一点，即我们经常玩的——良久！你们不要认为“良久”很浅陋，维摩诘就玩了这么一把，一默如雷。
A truly awakened person would answer immediately, or might not even bother to respond, refusing to engage in pointless chatter. Some might dramatically pause for effect - don't underestimate the power of silence. Even Vimalakirti used this technique, his silence as powerful as thunder.
无念晴空、前后际断、无拘无束，这些都是境界语。前后际断，就是没有时间感。无拘无束，手把猪头，口诵净戒，趁出淫坊，未还酒债，这些修证者不受约束的行为，在大圆满、禅宗里面，这种人多得很。这些就是一些境界语。
"Thoughtless like clear sky," "Extremes of past and future cut off," "Unrestrained and free" - these are all expressions of states. "Extremes of past and future cut off" means no sense of time. "Unrestrained and free" describes practitioners who have attained a high level of realization. These individuals might engage in seemingly contradictory behaviors, such as eating pork while reciting precepts or being kicked out of a brothel or in debt to a tavern for liquor. Such actions, though unconventional, are common in Dzogchen and Chan traditions.
虽然境界有高低不同，内外之分，还有次第和究竟的差别，最高处内外一致。最高处即究竟处。这时，毋庸置疑，肯定是内外一致的，即经常说的能所一致、能所双亡。
Although states vary in depth and have internal and external aspects, as well as gradual and ultimate differences, at the highest level, internal and external unite. This highest level is the ultimate state, where subject and object become one or both disappear.
但境界语表达的都应该是稳固的现量，修行人如果没有到达相应的境界，不应该做这样的表达，否则属于大妄语。
Expressions of states should always describe stable, directly perceived experiences. Practitioners shouldn't claim states they haven't reached - that's considered a major falsehood.
你去告诉别人你已经怎么样了，如果你做到了，那没问题。但是，佛教一般都不准说这些。到处宣称自己的境界是一种傲慢。但是，如果你没有做到，却仍旧这样去说，这就是真正的大妄语，那一定要堕地狱的。
If you tell others about your attainments and you've truly achieved them, that's fine. However, Buddhism generally discourages this. Boasting about your state is a form of pride. If you haven't actually attained a state but claim you have, that's a serious falsehood that will definitely lead you into hell.
但听闻者需要从语言和文字的表达中看到表达者的真实意图，因为同样的语言，既可以是表达境界，也可以是表达见解和相似觉受。
Listeners need to discern the true intention behind such expressions, as the same words can describe actual states, views, or similar experiences.
同样的话，有些人表达出来，不一定是境界，也有可能是觉受和见解。这是可以允许的。难道没开悟的人就不能说大地平沉、虚空粉碎了吗？他们在表达时，加一个“他们”在“大地平沉、虚空粉碎”前面，不就就对了嘛。
The same words might express a genuine state for some, but only views or experiences for others. This is acceptable. Can't those who aren't awakened also say "the earth sinks,” “space shatters"? They can simply add "they say" before such statements to clarify.
总之，我们要去详加区分这些东西。
In conclusion, we need to carefully distinguish between these different types of expressions.
虽然表达方式有三种分类，但任何一句语言或者文字，都不能呆板地绑定其内涵。
Although there are three categories of expression, we shouldn't rigidly assign meanings to any specific phrase or text.
这个表达只能是见解语，那个表达只能是修行语，那个表达只能是境界语。不是这样的，任何语言都可能在不同的场景、预警、文化背景中，产生变化。
It's not that certain expressions can only be views, others only practice, and others only states. Any language can change meaning in different scenarios, contexts, and cultural backgrounds.
在不同的语境和场合中，同样的一个表达可以兼有其他两类乃至三类的涵义。在其他一些场合，一个表达只具有一种的涵义。如法师上课讲解经论，如果没有特殊说明，任何表达都可以视为见解语，
In various contexts, the same expression might encompass two or even all three categories of meaning. In other situations, an expression might have only one type of meaning. For example, when a dharma teacher explains sutras and commentaries, unless otherwise specified, any expression can be considered a view.
法师拿着一本经书在上面讲法，他的任何表达都可以视为见解语。比如，他讲佛陀的十八不共法，这些只能是见解语。如果要他去证悟佛陀的十八不共法再来跟你讲佛陀的十八不共法，那是不可能的。但是作为法师，他可以讲，因为是见解语。
When a dharma teacher lectures from a sutra, all their expressions can be seen as views. For instance, if they discuss the Buddha's eighteen unique qualities, these can only be expressions of view. It's impossible for the teacher to fully realize these qualities before teaching them. But as a dharma teacher, they can discuss them as views.
但如果听闻者本身具有修行，见解语也能引觉发受甚至境界。如一些根基成熟者听到一句话，一个指示而当场开悟。
However, if the listener has their own practice, even expressions of view can trigger experiences or even states. Some with a sharp mind might hear a single phrase or instruction and achieve enlightenment on the spot.
虽然有可能法师在上面讲见解语，说一个见解语“应无所住而生其心”，恰好有六祖根器的人躲在下面一听，马上就是境界，也会有这样的事。
It's possible that while a teacher is expressing views, such as "a mind from attachment will reveal its true nature," someone with the same capacity as the Sixth Patriarch might immediately attain a state. This could happen.
很多人争论：如果一个人的上师没有开悟，他作为弟子能不能开悟呢？也有可能，但是非常少。比如六祖就听到了“应无所住而生其心”，而念书那人是无尽藏比丘尼，她是完全不懂的，她念到了“应无所住而生其心”，六祖在旁边一听，马上就深有所悟，起码有觉受。所以，这是有可能的，但这种情况太少了，因为六祖只有一个。
Many debate whether a disciple can achieve enlightenment if their teacher hasn't. It's possible, but rare. For example, the Sixth Patriarch heard "a mind from attachment will reveal its true nature" read by a nun who didn't understand it herself, and immediately had a deep realization. This is possible, but such cases are extremely rare because there's only one Sixth Patriarch.
反之，如果根基不成熟，即使表达者说出修行语或者境界语，听闻者也一样当成见解语。
Conversely, if someone's foundation isn't mature, even if the speaker expresses practice or states, the listener might still treat it as a view.
如果你根基不成熟，虽然有人讲的就是境界语、修行语，指示你修行、辨认法性的，，但是你听了根本没用，最多是记住了这些词句，当成见解。
If your foundation isn't mature, even if someone is expressing states or practice, giving instructions on practice or recognizing the dharma nature, it might be useless to you. At most, you might remember the words as intellectual knowledge.
比如我们听到窍诀或者看到一些高妙法句后，只能将其当成知识来记忆和背诵。
For instance, when we hear profound instructions or see sublime dharma phrases, we might only be able to memorize and recite them as knowledge.
很多人听到一些很高妙的法根本听不懂，没有觉受，也没有境界，但话还是记住了。这就是把上师告诉你的境界语和修行语当成了见解，但没办法，你只能当成见解，因为你的着力点还在思维，你一点禅定的觉受都没有。
Many people hear profound teachings but don't understand them, have no experience, and no state, yet they remember the words. This is treating the teacher's expressions of states and practice as views. But there's no choice - you can only treat them as views because your focus is still on thinking, and you have no experience of meditative concentration.
见解语主要是比量认知，是头脑的思维认知；修行语是表达修行的，是心和感官同时认知，是直接的，但它是二元的；境界语分绝对境界语和过程境界语。证悟是绝对境界，是直接的，且没有对境，表达能所双亡，是究竟境界语。还有过程境界语，就是表达单空的境界。
Expressions of view are mainly inferential cognitions, intellectual understanding. Expressions of practice describe practice, involving both mind and senses simultaneously, direct but dualistic. Expressions of states include absolute states and process states. Enlightenment is an absolute state, direct with no object, expressing the extinction of subject and object - the ultimate expression of state. Process states express experiences of mere emptiness.
禅宗斗机锋时，所说必须是境界语，不然即为言语葛藤；
In Chan dharma combat, all expressions must be states. Otherwise, it's just verbal entanglement.
禅宗里面斗机锋时的对话，全都是境界语。那些禅师所谓道一句来，不是让你背一句话，而是让你表达你的境界。
In Chan dharma combat, when the Chan masters ask you to say it, they aren't asking you to recite phrases, but to express your state of realization.
道不出来，南泉禅师把猫儿都宰了。大家还记得南泉斩猫的故事吗？寺院里的东堂西堂的出家人争一只猫，南泉回去看到就说：“你们出家人还争猫？”他很生气，把猫拎起来就说：“你们道一句来，道不出来我就杀猫！”东西堂两边都不说话，南泉一刀就把猫砍了。怎么办？告他虐猫，一个出家人居然杀生？后来赵州回来了，有人又把这个话同样去问赵州，赵州就把鞋子脱下来顶在头上出去了。南泉对赵州说：“你要是当时在的话，猫儿就不用杀了，猫儿就得救了”。
If you can't say it, there are consequences, like in the story of Nanquan killing the cat. When monks were arguing over a cat, Nanquan held it up and said, "say it, I'll spare the cat. Otherwise, I'll kill it." When no one spoke, he cut the cat in two. Later, when Zhaozhou heard about this, he put his sandals on his head and walked out. Nanquan said, "If you had been there, the cat would have been saved."
这是个很著名的公案，他说“道一句来”，就是让你说境界语。所以，禅宗里面斗机锋全部是境界语，你说不出来就要倒霉，你用见解语就要挨打。六祖有次对众弟子说“我有个东西，无头无尾、无名无字、无背无面。你们谁知道它是什么？”见众人无人应对，神会便站出来说：“是诸佛之本源，神会之佛性。”六祖听了，“啪”一巴掌，明明说没有名字，你还说本源佛性？明明六祖说的是境界语：无头无尾，无名无字，结果他来个本源佛性，变成了见解语，所以要挨打。所以，禅宗斗机锋几乎全都是境界语。
This famous koan demonstrates that "say it" means to express a state of realization. In Chan dharma combat, everything is an expression of state. If you can't say it, you're in trouble. If you use expressions of view, you'll be punished. Once, the Sixth Patriarch asked his disciples, "I have something with no head, no tail, no name, no words, no back, no front. Who knows what it is?" When no one answered, Shen Hui said, "It's the origin of all Buddhas, Shen Hui's Buddha nature." The Sixth Patriarch slapped him. He had clearly said it had no name, yet Shen Hui named it "origin" and "Buddha nature." The Sixth Patriarch was expressing a state, but Shen Hui turned it into a view, so he was slapped. Thus, Chan dharma combat is almost entirely about the expression of state.
师兄弟之间私下交流时，三种语都可能出现，如何区分，则见仁见智。
When fellow practitioners communicate privately, all three types of expressions may appear. How to distinguish them is open to interpretation.
我们就举点例子来说明。如“应无所住而生其心”，可以是见解语，也可以是修行语，也可以是境界语。
Let's use an example to illustrate. The phrase "a mind free attachment reveals its true nature" can be an expression of view, practice, or state.
应无所住而生其心，为什么是见解语？你知道它字面的意思，而不知道它真正的涵义，那就是见解语。或者知道多一点：“心不能放在任何一个地方，这时候的心，就是证悟的心了”，理解的没错，但其实一点体会都没有，这也是见解语。
As a view: You understand the literal meaning but not its true implications. Or you might know a bit more: "The mind shouldn't be fixed anywhere; such a mind is an enlightened mind." This understanding is correct, but without any real experience, it's still just a view.
什么是修行语呢？我们修四夺，夺了以后，心找不到地方，心放在空也不对，放在明也不对，我们拼命去找，有时候觉得好像没有地方放，但是又不敢确定，这就是修行语。我们不能确定我们的心，没法安住。虽然我们接受了很多的指示：“你听的就是它，明白的就是它”，由于你不知道，就没办法真正的安住，没办法真正的清晰，但你不停地做这事儿，这就是修行语。
As practice: When we practice the "four negations," after stripping away everything that can be stripped, the mind can't find a spot to place itself. Placing it in emptiness or clarity doesn't seem to work. We struggle to find a place, sometimes feeling there's nowhere to place it, but we're not certain. This is an expression of practice. We can't confirm the nature of our mind or truly rest in it. Despite receiving many instructions like "What you're hearing is it, what you're knowing is it," we can't truly settle or clearly understand. But we keep practicing - this is an expression of practice.
通过修行，不断的串习，你就会真的知道“应无所住而生其心”是怎么回事了。比如六祖对慧明说“不思善，不思恶”。你们不要被“善恶”这两个词给弄迷糊了，这句话其实就是什么都不想的意思。“什么都不想”就是大圆满里说的“不改其心”。一个“不改其心”，弄得好神秘，简单一点来说，就是你“什么都不想”。
Through continuous practice, you'll truly understand what "a mind free from attachment reveals its true nature" means. For instance, when the Sixth Patriarch told Huiming, "Think neither good nor evil," don't get confused by the term "good and evil" - it simply means not thinking of anything. This is the same as "not altering the mind" in Dzogchen. It sounds mysterious, but it just means "think of nothing.
你什么都没想，但你又没睡着，那个时候其实是什么？有修行的人，那时候会产生反观，或者有一点单空修行的感受。有单空修行的人，身体对他的影响，眼识、光影对他的影响，声音对他的影响，都会消失。那个时候，他会知道心处在本性中间的一些觉受，就此明白和安住下去。所以，这句话既可以是见解语，也可以是修行语。
When you're thinking of nothing but not sleeping, what's happening? Experienced practitioners might engage in self-reflection or experience a sense of mere emptiness. Those practiced mere emptiness might find that the influence of their body, visual perceptions, and sounds disappear. At that point, they might recognize some sensations of the mind resting in its natural state and settle into that knowing. So this phrase can be both a view and a practice.
如果真的做到了“心无所住”，就会真的明白哪有什么“心无所住”啊？知道这些话都是骗人，根本不听。完全知道是怎么回事，那就是境界语。那个时候哪有什么“心无所住”？“心无所住”本身就是一种说法，没有什么真正的“心无所住”。所以，真的彻底明白了，你就真的知道什么是“心无所住”。你真的达到这个境界，你就真的开悟了。
If you truly achieve "a mind free from attachment," you'll realize there's no such thing as "a mind free from attachment." You'll know these words are just deceptions and won't listen to them any more. When you fully understand what's really happening, that's an expression of state. At that point, there's no "a mind free from attachment" - it's just a way of speaking. When you truly and completely understand, you'll know what "a mind free from attachment” really means. If you truly reach this state, you've achieved enlightenment.
“捞摸不到”，可以是修行语，也可以是境界语。
这个词汇主要是指修行语和境界语，但当你完全对它没有任何修行体会时，它就是个见解语。“捞摸不到”是指修行时，你怎么去找心都找不到。我们经常说的“无心”就是“指捞摸不到”。它也可以被表达出来，“我捞摸不到，我已经确定这个心真的捞摸不到”，无心恰恰用，用心恰恰无，我真的明白了，就是境界语了。所以，这既可以是修行语，也可以是境界语。
“Nowhere to find” can be an expression of practice or state. This phrase mainly refers to practice and state, but when you have no practical experience with it, it's just a view. “Nowhere to find” describes the inability to find the mind during practice. Our often-mentioned "no-mind" means “Nowhere to find.” It can also be expressed as, "I can't find it, I'm certain the mind truly can't be found." When you truly understand this, it becomes an expression of state.
“和光同尘”，见解语，也可以是境界语。
这个词汇也可以兼指三个语，但主要是见解语和境界语，很少用“和光同尘”来表达修行语。什么叫“和光同尘”？这都是我随便找的一些句子，找的不是很经典，我们以后慢慢来收集这些经典的语言。
The phrase "Blending light with dust" can refer to all three types but is mainly a view or state, rarely used to express practice.
“和光同尘”，指一个人修证达到非常深的程度时，一点神异相、一点成就相都不会有。到达这个程度时，说这个人有成就相，会被鬼神鄙视。“和光同尘”是说修正高的这个人显得跟普通人完全一样。这是从行迹上来讲的。
"Blending light with dust" describes someone who has reached a deep level of realization but shows no signs of supernatural abilities or accomplishment. At this level, claiming attainment would be scorned by spirits. It means a highly realized person appears completely ordinary. This refers to outward behavior.
还有一种从境界上来讲的。菩萨到世间来度化众生，不会在头上顶个灯泡，脚下踩朵莲花就出来了，所到之处跪倒一片！菩萨不会这样。他就是一个普通人，这样才能度人，所以叫“和光同尘”。
Another interpretation relates to the state of realization. When bodhisattvas come to the world to help sentient beings, they don't appear with halos or lotus flowers under their feet, causing everyone to kneel. They appear as ordinary people to effectively help others.
“和光同尘”也是一种见解。当我们彻底证悟了觉性以后，会发现觉性同那些现起一模一样，即“空即是色”的意思。证悟空是一种觉性，它表现为什么？就是这一切，所以“郁郁黄花就是般若”。你证悟的东西，其实就是这些庸俗的显现，这就叫和光同尘——证悟的“光和尘”，即“体和用”完全一致。
"Blending light with dust" is also a view. When we fully realize the true nature of awareness, we find it's identical to appearances - "emptiness is form." Realizing emptiness is awareness that manifests as everything, hence "vibrant yellow flowers are wisdom itself." What you realize is actually these mundane appearances - this is called “blending light with dust”, where the essence and its manifestation are completely unified.
从见解上，大多数人肯定听得懂“和光同尘”，境界暂时就别提了。硬要说境界，我们也有很多：随时随处一定要显得跟非修行人不一样；我们要表现出冷静、慈悲的模样；脖子上挂很多串念珠；走起路来不看两边，撞得满头都是包。修行人跟非修行人不同的话，有哪些不同？内在认知的不同，世界观的不同，价值观的不同，三观不一样，而外在完全可以一样。作为居士的我们，外在方面，就不要把自己弄与众不同了。
As a view, most people can understand "blending light with dust," but let's not discuss the state for now. If we must talk about states, we have many: always trying to appear different from non-practitioners; trying to look calm and compassionate; wearing many malas; walking without looking around and bumping into things. The differences between practitioners and non-practitioners should be internal: different cognition, worldview, and values. Externally, they can be the same. As lay practitioners, we shouldn't try to make ourselves look different.
生命观不同：作为佛教徒，你不会认为死了什么都没有；世界观不同：你不会认为外界的物质是真实存在的，也不会认为净土不存在；价值观当然也不同：你不会为了一点钱就放弃自己的菩提誓言。我们发誓为了利益众生，就算牺牲自己，也心甘情愿。哪怕这么想一下也是挺伟大的。至于做不做得到另说，至少有见解，境界就算了。
Our view of life is different: as Buddhists, we don't believe death is the end. Our worldview is different: we don't see external matter as inherently existent, nor do we deny the existence of pure lands. Our values are different: we won't abandon our bodhisattva vows for money. We vow to benefit all sentient beings, willing to sacrifice ourselves for them if necessary. Even thinking this way is quite noble, regardless of whether we can actually do it. At least we have the view, even if we lack the state.
这就是见解语、修行语和境界语的一个分类。跟大家讲这些东西是为了利于大家思维。最重要的想告诉大家我们认知世界有三大类：第一类是比量思维，即思维认知。第二类是修行认知。思维认知，夹杂着现量和非量。修行就不会有比量，它不是思维的。我们去感受如梦如幻，这才是修行，而不是你天天死读，见解很多，但永远没法拿到修行中去运用。第三类是境界性的认知，跟修行认知一样，它也夹杂着现量和非量，没有比量。非量的境界性认知是误认，要放弃，但是真正的境界是绝对现量和究竟的认知。
This is a classification of expressions of view, practice, and state. I'm explaining this to help you contemplate it. The most important point is that we have three main ways of knowing the world:
1. Inferential cognition through thinking. Sometimes, it also involves direct perception.
2. Cognition through practice, which isn't inferential or thought-based. Experiencing things as dream-like is practice, not just accumulating knowledge without applying them.
3. Cognition of states, which involves direct perception and non-valid cognition, but not inference. Non-valid state cognition is misidentification and should be abandoned, while true states are absolute direct perception and ultimate cognition.
师兄们，好多人十几年就这么在不清不楚中过去了。如果大家把三个语都搞清楚了，就不会这么冤枉了。首先是学习佛法的见解，利用感官，通过修行，带着佛法见解慢慢去认知你的心和外面的世界。比如，你去夺，让自己的心真的觉得它是虚幻的。
The sad thing is that many people spend years in confusion. If you understand these three types of expressions, you won't waste time. First, learn Buddhist views. Then, using your senses and through practice guided by these views, gradually understand your mind and the external world. For example, mentally negate things by visualizing firing laser beams through them to truly experience their illusory nature.
心相信外面的世界是虚幻的，又会怎样呢？既然是虚幻的，我们就用不着在物理层面搞清楚它是什么了。不搞科学，搞修行。科学一搞起来，没完没了，要去研究到底是量子还是粒子？是光还是粒子？波粒二象性，到头来仍然搞不清楚怎么回事。修行人就会这样：不管你是光还是粒子，你是假的，放弃不必要的折腾。
When your mind believes the external world is illusory, what happens? Since it's illusory, we let it go and start practicing. We know we don't need to develop science. Science endlessly investigates whether things are quantum or particles, light or particles, wave-particle duality, and still can't figure it out. A practitioner thinks: whether you're light or particles, you're false, so abandon unnecessary struggles.
然后反过头来认知内心是怎么样的：没有出离心，好多烦恼；没有菩提心，自私；原没有空性正见，我执深沉。反过头来搞这些，慢慢就清楚了。
Then turn inward to recognize the mind: without renunciation, there are many afflictions; without bodhicitta, there's selfishness; without the correct view of emptiness, there's deep self-grasping. Gradually work on these and things become clear.
回去认的时候，会遇到各种状况和障碍，有很多修行的东西就出来了，对它们的表达就是所谓的修行语。
When you turn inward, you'll encounter various situations and obstacles. Many practice experiences arise, and expressing these is what we call expressions of practice.
经过修行，完全明白了，就是境界语。当然，还有不究竟的境界，比如单空的境界；还有误认的境界：误认为证悟了，那也是一些境界。有时候，误认的境界很牢固，破都破坏不了。境界语纯粹就是现量，也有可能是非量，但不是比量。这三种语其实就是三种认知方式的表达。
When you fully understand through practice, that's a state of realization. Of course, there are non-ultimate states, like experiences of mere emptiness, and mistaken states where one mistakenly believes they've realized. Sometimes these mistaken states are so strong that it is very hard to let them go. Expressions of state are purely direct perception, possibly non-valid cognition, but not inferential.
These three types of expressions are actually expressions of three ways of knowing.
总体而言，佛法的修行就是先通过闻思建立见解语，然后通过修行将它变成修行语，最后达成境界。换句话说，利用见解，变成修行，达成境界。
Overall, Buddhist practice involves first establishing views through study and contemplation, then transforming these into practice through dedicated methods and techniques, and finally achieving states. In other words, use views to develop practice and achieve states.
今天就讲到这里，现在开始回向。
Now let's dedicate the merit.
