The four reliances

From the Catuhpratisarana Sutra we learn of the Four Reliances.  I have decided to put the reliances in a way that is more understandable, which provides the reader with a clear, more spiritual reading.  

The first reliance with regard to a worthy person is rely on the teaching (dharma) not the worthy person who is teaching.  The second reliance is rely on the spirit not the letter of the teaching.  The third reliance is rely on Suttas/Sutras of final meaning (nitartha) rather than non-final meaning (neyartha).  The fourth reliance is rely on gnosis (jñâna) rather than on discursive thinking (vijñâna).

As one might notice in looking over the Four Reliances,  the intention of the reliances is to push us beyond our everyday conformation biases.  Such biases are those which rely on information that confirms our existing views while avoiding information that goes against our views.  The problem with such biases is that Buddhism’s path goes against the current of our ordinary everyday views of reality.  If we insist on holding on to our biases, we will never understand even a tiny bit of Buddhism.

Also the Four Reliances want us to jettison our basic form of knowing which relies on discursiveness which, in addition, understands little or nothing about gnosis except to deprecate it.  Only gnosis, as a form of knowledge, is capable of producing a profound perceptual change in which our relationship with our body and its senses goes through an upheaval in which, for the first time, we begin to see that the world and our body are an interdependent illusion. 

Perhaps the most important reliance is learning to rely on the teachings of the Buddha found in his discourses than rely on a worthy teacher—even the Dalai Lama.  Most beginners fall into this category who place too much importance on the words of a particular teacher, not even caring if his or her words match up with the words of the Buddha.  As a matter of fact, when we begin buying books of famous Dharma teachers, eagerly reading their interpretation of Buddhism we have ceased relying on the Buddha’s discourses (dharma).  While interpretations can be of immense value in some respects, if we have not first read a major amount of the Buddha’s own discourses, any interpretation, no matter from whom, can be misleading.

Comments

[Huanshen]

This is also a good reminder for Buddhist forums where many (me included) seem to forget that, if Zen is a special transmission outside the scriptures, it does not mean that one should feel free to say anything provided that it “sounds Zen”, especially if it goes against basic Buddhist teachings, at least without a good reason to express a different opinion.