Vajrayāna practitioners also cultivate an exceptionally profound practice: seeing the guru as a Buddha..
We will not discuss this practice in detail here, but I would like to emphasize one point: seeing the guru as a Buddha does not mean engaging in blind worship without discernment. There are two common misunderstandings: First, worshipping any teacher indiscriminately without prior examination. Second, even after finding a qualified guru, merely worshipping them without engaging in one's own practice. Neither approach is correct.
Choosing a teacher without careful observation can easily lead to problems. Not every guru is Tilopa or Marpa, and we ourselves are not Nāropa or Milarepa. After hearing many inspiring stories, people sometimes assume that any teacher they meet must be extraordinary. This simply will not work. One must first observe carefully and then make a considered decision.
In Tibet, students traditionally spent many years observing a teacher before formally entering into a guru-disciple relationship. Yet many Chinese practitioners do not even spend a few moments in careful examination. As soon as they hear someone is a “great master,” they rush to follow them. As a result, people are deceived in droves. This is truly regrettable.
Even after taking a teacher, blind devotion alone is insufficient. One must continue learning and contemplation. Why, then, is one instructed to see the guru as a Buddha? Because this practice is grounded in profound Buddhist principles. It is not a matter of inventing an idol to worship.
Chan Buddhism says: “The flourishing yellow flowers are all prajñā; The verdant bamboo is entirely bodhi.” This means that all phenomena are expressions of dharmatā (the nature of reality). It corresponds to the fourth stage of Madhyamaka discussed earlier: all phenomena are determined to share the same nature as mind itself—the nature of equality. To realize this state is extremely difficult. Vajrayāna employs the practice of seeing the guru as a Buddha as a skillful means to help practitioners accomplish it.
If even the yellow flowers are manifestations of the nature of mind, then naturally your guru is also an expression of that same nature, and therefore also Buddha. Thus, seeing the guru as a Buddha has a profound philosophical basis. Unfortunately, many people do not study these principles and instead engage in blind worship. Can blind devotion produce some benefit? Certainly. Yet if one hopes to attain Buddhahood, awakening, or liberation through blind worship alone, that would be quite difficult.
Therefore, most lay practitioners genuinely need to combine theory and practice. Only then can they “walk on two legs.” This is the authentic path of cultivation. One should not lean exclusively toward either side—merely studying texts, merely meditating, or practicing without integrating learning and contemplation. None of these approaches is complete.
Of course, those who remain close to a qualified guru may possess certain advantages. They may not have studied many texts, yet receive direct pith instructions (upadeśa) from the teacher. However, after receiving such instructions, they must still analyze and contemplate them carefully, while maintaining regular communication with the guru. A pith instruction may consist of only a few sentences, a paragraph, or a longer discourse, yet the meaning each person derives from it can differ greatly.
For example, if I say the word “tree,” some people may think of a pine tree, others an apple tree, and still others a Christmas tree. Even with a single word, different people generate different associations. The same applies to pith instructions. When hearing the phrase: “One should give rise to the mind without abiding anywhere,” each individual may interpret it differently.
It is not the case that a guru can simply announce a pith instruction through a loudspeaker and everyone who hears it will become enlightened. In reality, pith instructions function as a personal communication between guru and disciple. Their purpose is to help the disciple recognize the nature of mind. When we analyze, receive, and discuss these instructions with the guru, we are in fact engaging with the very essence of Buddhist learning and contemplation.
Therefore, both the Dharma of instruction and the Dharma of realization must be complete. Theory and practice must be united. Only then do we have a genuine possibility of attaining awakening in this very life. As for the teachings themselves, there are countless profound works within Dzogchen and Chan traditions. Among them are: Longchen Rabjam’s The Trilogy of Rest and The Trilogy of Natural Liberation; Mipham Rinpoche’s Beacon of Certainty and Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen Meditation Manual; The Three Words That Strike the Vital Point. These are all extraordinary Dzogchen scriptures and treatises of immense value.
— Excerpted and compiled from The Relationship Between Buddhist Theory and Practice.
This article is a preliminary translation draft and has not yet been reviewed or proofread by the speaker.
Comments (0)