"He may know, he may not know – that is irrelevant. But his information is correct; he is a man of the mind.

"The second word, which goes a little deeper into experience, not just information, is adhyapak. That teacher is not only an informer but he himself is informed. It is not only a mental thing for him; it is part – but only a part – of his heart, too.

"And the third word is upadhyaya which goes a little more deeper into experience. This teacher's information is more alive than the previous two. He has traveled the path, but he has not reached the goal.

"And then finally the acharya, who has reached the goal, and the information that he imparts is his own experience. He is his own authority, his own argument; his own presence is the whole evidence.

"But in English there is only one word, teacher, which is used for all kinds of people. The other word is master, which is not used very much by the English speaking people themselves. But I would like to use the word master, equivalent to the word acharya: One who knows, not only through mind, but through experience.

"Most of the sutras in this part are unpolluted. The disciple has simply noted them down as Bodhidharma must have spoken them.

If you don't understand by yourself, you will have to find a teacher

"Instead of teacher, the word master would be right because a teacher is one who teaches you about things of the outside world. Even if he teaches about the inner experiences, it is borrowed. He may be knowledgeable but he is not knowledge itself. To make the distinction, the translator has made the point in a different way.

If you don't understand by yourself, you will have to find a teacher to get to the bottom of life and death. But unless he sees his nature, such a person is not a teacher.

"It is better to call a man who has reached to the highest peaks of experience a master, and leave the word teacher for those who impart knowledge from one generation to another. And master, also has a dignity of its own."