Choosing an Illuminated Buddhist Teacher

by Venerable Sheng Yen

Question: How does one choose an illuminated Buddhist teacher? 

Answer: The Confucian scholar Han Yu (768–824) once said: “Skills and trades are specialised fields.” Therefore, to enter a field of practice, one needs to find a good teacher who is an expert and excels in his or her own field. This principle applies to all pursuits, whether scholastic, arts, or crafts. It also applies to studying Buddhism. An illuminated teacher of Buddhism may not always be a student of another illuminated teacher, and an illuminated teacher may not produce a brilliant student. But by studying with an illuminated teacher at least one would not be misled onto a wrong path, or be taught the wrong principles. It would, in fact, be much safer than being in a “blind leading the blind” situation. 

But who is an illuminated teacher of Buddhism? It is often hard for a beginner to know whether someone would be a good teacher, especially with regard to their depth of religious experience and meditative cultivation. Such a teacher does not have to be famous, but a teacher who has been widely recognised would be better and more reliable than a self-proclaimed one with no known reputation. When we are in no position to judge whether a teacher is good or not, it would be safer to follow a recognised teacher. It would also be better if a relatively unknown teacher is recommended by a recognised teacher. 

It would also be acceptable to have a  trustworthy teacher to introduce you to another one. In the Avatamsaka Sutra, the lay practitioner Sudhana visited fifty-three great spiritual mentors, each new one being introduced by the previous one. Thus, those fifty-three teachers formed a chain of relationships, and each was an illuminated teacher. Therefore, we know that Sudhana was not blindly seeking teachers, like a sick person frantically searching for a doctor.

Throughout history, there have been those who proclaimed themselves as great lineage masters. They would speak fallacies to puzzle and overwhelm people, reverse right and wrong, and mislead the public. They would freely recruit disciples and followers to exaggerate their strength. If one fails to recognise this kind of situation, it is easy to mistake a famous and deviant impostor as an illuminated teacher. The Confucian scholar Mencius said: “The big peril with people  is that they all want to be other people’s teacher.” Because deviant teachers misguide people, they create turmoil, imbalance, confusion, and disorder in our society. Not only will one who learns their deviant ways, thoughts and skills fail to broaden one’s horizons, one will end up harming one’s own body and mind, and cause tension and conflict in one’s family. It’s a pity that people cannot discern these impostors’ true characters, and their false and evil identities. 

From the Buddhist standpoint the standards of good and evil, as well as honesty and deception, are based on the examination of a person’s self-centredness. A person with strong tendencies of greed and anger would certainly not be a good teacher. Someone who appears to be kind, with pleasant countenance and high morale, but is arrogant, overbearing and rude, is also definitely not a good teacher. 

In Volume 9 of Master Nagarjuna’s Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom (Chinese Dazhidu Lun; Sanskrit Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra) there are four critical points – the four principles of reliance (Chn. siyifa; Skt. pratisarana) that we may apply to our search for an illuminated teacher: 

FIRST: RELIANCE ON THE DHARMA OR TEACHING RATHER THAN THE PERSON  

A good teacher is not self-centred, nor does he or she regard any particular individual as the authority; instead, a good teacher uses the common principles and criteria of Buddhism as the standard. This standard teaching is based on the principles of cause-and-effect and causes-and-conditions. If a teacher violates these principles, he or she is not considered a good teacher. Because cause-and-effect makes us responsible for our own actions, causes-and-conditions teach us not to develop greed or anger towards any phenomenon. Otherwise, even if students see a teacher as a sage, if the teacher propagates the wrong  teachings, he or she is no different from a deviant teacher. 

SECOND: RELIANCE ON THE MEANING OR SPIRIT RATHER THAN THE WORDS  

True laws and principles can be applied everywhere in the world and at all times; they are not different because of the differences in race, regions, or cultural backgrounds. If a teacher claimed that religious taboos or mysterious language were part of the teachings, then what they teach would not be considered as the right laws. The right laws emphasise consistency and connectedness in term of reason and signification; they are not to be constrained by differences of words and languages. For instance, Arabic Muslims stress the importance of the Arabic language, while  Judaism focuses on the Hebrew language; these are contrary to this principle. Buddhists study Sanskrit and Pali for the purpose of investigating the sutras for their original meanings, not because these languages are sacred or have any special spiritual power. In contrast, the importance of Sanskrit and the sound of the words in and of themselves are emphasised in Hinduism, making it different from Buddhism. 

THIRD: RELIANCE ON WISDOM RATHER THAN ON DISCURSIVE THINKING  

Wisdom in Buddhism refers to the realisation by sages of the great wisdom of no-self and unconditional great compassion. Therefore, as long as there is self-centredness, whether for oneself or others, for all sentient beings, or for seeking unsurpassed Buddhahood, and as long as there is a sense of self, whether it is the small-self, large-self, pure-self, or supreme self, it will be impossible to generate true wisdom; one’s understanding will still belong to the scope of knowledge, intellect, and consciousness. Knowledge comes from the functions of differentiation, memory, and reasoning in the learning experience of the self. However, in true wisdom  there are only objective phenomena without subjective referencing; only functioning without reference to any substance or essence. If a person does not teach in accordance to this principle, he or she is not a good teacher. 

FOURTH:  RELIANCE ON THE DEFINITIVE MEANING RATHER THAN THE PROVISIONAL MEANING 

As far as definitive meaning is concerned, there is no Dharma to be taught, no Dharma to be attached to, no Dharma to be learned, no Dharma to be practised, and no Dharma to be attained. Just as the teachings on no thought, no form, and no abiding in The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch indicate, there is no need of any reason and there is nothing extraordinary; just carry on with eating, dressing, living, benefiting self and others, diligently practising without slacking. 

According to these four principles, you should be able to distinguish without difficulty who is a good teacher and who is not. Then, as long as you follow these four principles to investigate and visit the teachers you wish to follow, nothing much can go wrong. With time, even if you can’t find an illuminated teacher, you might become one yourself.