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.
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.
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.
Listeners need to discern the true intention behind such expressions, as the same words can describe actual states, views, or similar experiences.
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.
In conclusion, we need to carefully distinguish between these different types of expressions.
Although there are three categories of expression, we shouldn't rigidly assign meanings to any specific phrase or text.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
For instance, when we hear profound instructions or see sublime dharma phrases, we might only be able to memorize and recite them as knowledge.
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.
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.
In Chan dharma combat, all expressions must be states. Otherwise, it's just verbal entanglement.
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.
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."
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.
Excerpted from: Cognition and Expression Part Three
