1. The Stage of Direct Realization (Empirical Actualization)

The stage of direct realization unfolds through a natural developmental process. This process is “natural” because our current state of thought is itself an evolved derivative of the fundamental state of thought. Just as a wave arises from seawater and carries all its essential characteristics, our present state of consciousness inevitably contains the imprint of its origin. It is precisely because of this intrinsic continuity that realization can occur naturally. And it is only by virtue of this natural realization that the first stage of Buddhism could be completed.

This is why people across all cultures, ethnicities, and ages—regardless of gender or background—can engage in realization spontaneously under the subtle guidance of the subconscious. Even in our modern world, people on the streets are engaging in such realization without being consciously aware of it. If one believes otherwise, it only reveals an insufficient understanding of what realization truly entails—this we shall return to later.

It is because people are naturally capable of realization under the subconscious' guidance that realizational experience accumulates over time. This accumulation eventually gives rise to the second stage: theoretical organization and application.

Before exploring the second stage, let us revisit how the first stage unfolds.

Let us begin with a simple example: our current cognitive state possesses two key features—“universal vigilance” and “selective attention.” When we walk down a busy street, and our eyes are scanning in all directions, we are employing selective attention, searching for an object of focus. Why do we possess this ability? Why does selective attention emerge in our cognitive structure?

It arises as our higher-order mental processes develop to a certain point, where selective thinking begins to form. The underlying drive of this selective thinking is to find a point of focus. And why do we seek such a focus? Because focus gives rise to sustained attention, and sustained attention allows one to return.

As we’ve previously discussed, when emerging from the Tathāgatagarbha (Buddha-nature), the immediate impulse is to return. This universal impulse—this will to return—is mirrored in our selective thinking. When we search for an object of focus in our daily life, we are enacting this ancient urge to return to the higher state of thought. In the subconscious, every human being is striving to return to that elevated state.

Through selective attention, we are continuously seeking an object worthy of concentrated observation. This ongoing search is precisely the subconscious realization process. The only limitation is that most people’s thought contents do not yet meet the necessary conditions.

Two essential conditions enable success in realization:

1. Non-complex Continuity of Thought: This means being in a state of simple, uninterrupted thinking—not entangled in complex logic. For example, repeating a Buddha-name (nembutsu) or mantra involves such simple continuity.
2. Sustained Duration: Once this simple continuity is maintained over time, it generates deep absorption and concentrated awareness.

Anyone in society who satisfies these two conditions will inevitably succeed. Through countless lifetimes of realization attempts, ordinary people will eventually fulfill these conditions. It is only a matter of time before they naturally enter Dhyāna (meditative absorption).

Thus, ordinary people do not need formal instruction to realize lower levels of Dhyāna—the subconscious itself already knows the way. However, the subconscious lacks discernment; it cannot distinguish truth from illusion. This is why studying Buddhism gives us the tools to consciously fulfill these conditions.

Once realization is successful and the practitioner enters Dhyāna, another natural process unfolds. Due to the habitual nature of thought, even after descending from a higher state, the lingering influence of that state remains—just as a person newly awoken from sleep still appears drowsy. This is the persistence of cognitive habits.

What habit is retained here? It is the habit of “observing thoughts.” In Dhyāna, this becomes the central task. Because the grasping force of clinging (upādāna) has not been eliminated, thoughts continue to arise. But since Dhyāna is driven by subconscious realization, it cannot reason through these thoughts logically. It only knows that “these thoughts disturb the meditative stillness,” and therefore they are treated as the cause of disturbance.

Hence, the purpose of “calm-abiding and insight” (śamatha-vipaśyanā) is to settle the mind first, and then observe and resolve these arising thoughts.

How is this done? By using one thought to eliminate another. Spontaneously arising thoughts are typically generated by strong clinging—they are the ones that pull us downward into lower cognitive states. Therefore, to maintain stability in Dhyāna, one must observe and dissolve these thoughts. This is done through contemplating notions like “emptiness,” “non-self,” “non-conception,” or “neither thought nor non-thought.” These concepts are characterized by weak clinging force, and are thus capable of dissolving stronger, more delusional thoughts.

This explains how practitioners can remain in deep Dhyāna for months or even years—not by avoiding backsliding altogether, but by skillfully resolving it when it arises. Upon noticing regression, a practitioner brings forth a refined contemplative concept to restore meditative equipoise.

It must be noted, however, that all such contemplations still involve “dwelling within thought content.” That is, the essence of Dhyāna remains rooted in thought.

As a result of this process, a habitual mode of “observing thoughts” emerges. This “watchfulness” becomes second nature. Even when practitioners return to ordinary life, this habit remains intact—they retain the ability to clearly observe the arising and passing of thoughts. At that moment, they dwell not in thought content, but in the ontology of thought—they abide in the essence of thought itself.

Eventually, an external cause will disrupt one of the core structural conditions sustaining that thought-ontology—namely, clinging—and in doing so, allow a return to the fundamental state of thought.

This entire cycle—guided by the subconscious, driven by the urge to return, employing selective attention, fulfilling the two conditions, entering Dhyāna, observing thoughts, and dissolving clinging—is the natural process of empirical realization.

We can see this reflected historically: Dhyāna practice is not unique to China. Across ancient civilizations, from India to Greece, people from diverse races and lands—despite lacking communication—were able to arrive at similar realizational states. This confirms that the wave contains all the features of the sea. Humanity inherently carries the seed of realization. And it is this universality that proves the natural development of the path.

Understanding this natural unfolding is critical, for it guards us against a constructive bias—the mistaken idea that realization must be fabricated or invented like a chemical reaction. Buddhism is not experimental chemistry. We are not creating something new, but unveiling what was always latent.

Yet this global pattern of subconscious realization also introduces a significant issue: experiential divergence. Because each individual's realization is guided by their unique subconscious condition, the outcomes vary widely. Prior to the Buddha, nearly no one attained the fundamental state of thought. Instead, different groups emerged based on partial experiences—thus forming diverse sects. This is a reflection of experientialism, which, though valuable, must not be mistaken for universal truth.

2. The Stage of Theoretical Organization

Experience, while precious, is not enough. The second stage is one of theoretical refinement and application. We must distill raw realization into structured understanding, both to avoid falling into experientialism and to make the teachings accessible.

Modern people, shaped by contemporary educational systems rooted in Western logical paradigms, require a clear theoretical framework. Thus, the reorganization of Buddhist experience must align with modern conceptual structures—disciplinary systems, terminologies, and pedagogies—so that realization can be transmitted effectively across cultures and times.

The heart of Buddhist cultivation lies in the integration of theory and realization. Theory must serve realization, not replace it. Realization is the soul of Buddhism—without it, no doctrine stands.

Buddhist knowledge is profoundly rigorous. Every conclusion is grounded in realization. Therefore, every phenomenon encountered in practice—be it a difficulty, insight, or success—must be accounted for. Unresolved or unexplained experience signals that one’s realization remains blind, still governed by subconscious impulse, not by conscious mastery.

Many practitioners today pursue experiences, aesthetics, and mental states, but lack insight into their origins. They follow feeling, not understanding—just as countless people did before Śākyamuni. None succeeded.

Śākyamuni recognized this problem and initiated the systematic reformation we now call Buddhism. We must understand it both in spirit and in structure—or else, we too will fall into the blind realizations of pre-Buddhist generations.

-Master Qingliangyue