In Chinese, the two characters 「不空」(bù kōng, "not empty") taken alone would lead most people to instinctively read them as "there is something here, this is not voidness, there is a real thing present." When placed into the Buddhist term 「不空如來藏」(aśūnya-tathāgatagarbha, the "non-empty tathāgatagarbha"), that everyday instinct is precisely the deepest trap. This term never refers to something that "eternally exists, with a real self in it"; it points to something else that takes a long time to surface in the mind — deep within what we habitually take to be "afflicted entanglement, heaped-up suffering, pitch-black ignorance," there is a innate, neither-increasing-nor-decreasing liberative merit.
To explain this accurately, the most stable path is not to begin with the two characters 「不空」, but to begin with its counterpart.
I. What This Concept Is Saying
1. Two sides of one whole: 空如來藏 (śūnyatā-tathāgatagarbha, "empty tathāgatagarbha") + 不空如來藏 (aśūnya-tathāgatagarbha, "non-empty tathāgatagarbha")
「如來藏」(tathāgatagarbha, "womb/repository of the Tathāgata, Tathāgata-nature") means this: at the level of sentient beings, there is a place where "that which makes buddhahood possible" is hidden. It is simultaneously designated by the two terms 「空如來藏」 and 「不空如來藏」 because neither side, taken alone, can stand.
The 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra, T310) states it extremely cleanly, with a paired antithetical couplet:
「空如來藏：離於不解脫智一切煩惱。」 「不空如來藏：具過恒沙佛解脫智不思議法。」 「如來藏不離煩惱，名如來藏。」
*"The empty tathāgatagarbha: apart from all afflictions of the wisdom that does not understand liberation. The non-empty tathāgatagarbha: endowed with Buddha's liberative wisdoms beyond the Ganges' sands, inconceivable dharmas. The tathāgatagarbha is not apart from afflictions; that is why it is called tathāgatagarbha."*
The 《究竟一乘寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga, T1611) pushes this structure one step further, correspondingly distinguishing the wisdom of "knowing things as they are":
「空如來藏」就一切煩惱藏可離、可脫、可異而言； 「不空如來藏」就過恒沙、不可思議的諸佛法與如來藏不離、不脫、不異而言； 能如實知煩惱於何處為無，名為「空智」； 能如實知諸佛法於何處具足而有，名為「不空智」。
*"The empty tathāgatagarbha is spoken of with respect to the store of all afflictions — as separable, releasable, and distinct. The non-empty tathāgatagarbha is spoken of with respect to the buddha-dharmas beyond the Ganges' sands, inconceivable, and the tathāgatagarbha — as not apart, not released, not distinct. To know as they truly are where afflictions are absent is called 'empty wisdom'; to know as they truly are where the buddha-dharmas are fully present is called 'non-empty wisdom.'"*
These four sentences are not a tongue-twister. They tell you: becoming a buddha is not two separate tasks (first remove afflictions, then add buddha-qualities), but two sides of the same store — the affliction side can be emptied, the buddha-merit side is not empty. The empty side makes liberation possible (otherwise afflictions would permanently trap us); the non-empty side makes liberation not a matter of "fabricating something new" but of "recognizing what is already innate."
Only together do they form a complete perspective. So when you hear only the four characters 「不空如來藏」 and drop 「空如來藏」, you have already begun stepping into the misreading zone.
2. What exactly is "not empty" — two angles
The two principal texts expound "not empty" with somewhat different emphases, but they do not conflict:
The 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra) angle: focused on "quantity."
「不空如來藏，具過恒沙佛解脫智不思議法。」
Three key phrases are unpacked here:
- 「過恒沙」 ("beyond the Ganges' sands") — not "many," but "so many that even the sands of the Ganges cannot contain them," a Sanskrit-level magnitude; - 「佛解脫智」 ("Buddha's liberative wisdom") — not generic "wisdom," but the supramundane merits of the type that can untie entanglement (the four fearlessnesses, ten powers, unobstructed liberation, etc.); - 「不思議」 ("inconceivable") — not "very mysterious," but "cannot be quantified or defined by discriminating thought."
This sentence concerns the "quantity" of the non-empty tathāgatagarbha — utterly beyond what we can calculate.
The 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) angle: focused on "essential nature."
「不空如來藏，謂無上佛法，不相捨離相，不增減一法。」
Here three pivotal words deserve more chewing:
- 「無上佛法」 ("unsurpassed buddha-dharmas") — again marking the rank of these merits with "unsurpassed." - 「不相捨離相」 ("the characteristic of not being separable") — the core phrase of the whole concept: these merits and the pure essence of the tathāgatagarbha are not two things pieced together; they are things that have never been apart. "Not being separable" is a precise description of the innate relation — like the light of a maṇi jewel and the jewel, or the gold color of gold. - 「不增不減一法」 ("neither increasing nor decreasing a single dharma") — to avoid two opposite errors: - Not increasing — it is not that it did not exist originally and was later cultivated into being; - Not decreasing — it is not that it existed originally but was worn away by afflictions.
Putting the two texts together, 「不空如來藏」 becomes very concrete: it does not say "there is a thing there," but "there is an innate merit that has never been lost" — inconceivable in quantity (the Ganges-sands number), never lacking in essential nature (already present from the beginning).
3. Three similes — must be read separately, not flattened
The 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) uses three similes whose points differ slightly; they cannot be merged into one vague "roughly like this."
First simile: the maṇi jewel is not apart from its light, form, and marks.
The light, form, and marks of the 摩尼寶 (maṇi, "wish-fulfilling jewel") are not externally added, nor polished in later — they have never been apart from the jewel itself. A true maṇi jewel is essentially "one that emits light, displays colors, and manifests forms"; "emitting light" is not a function of the jewel but part of what makes it a jewel.
This simile supports the side of the non-empty tathāgatagarbha as 法身 (dharmakāya) — it is precisely this "can emit light" quality that is used to explain the Tathāgata's dharmakāya as "immeasurable, intrinsically pure, stainless merit."
Second simile: forms and images are not apart from space.
Forms and images in space seem to float in it, but look closely — they have never for a moment been able to "leave space" and exist. Even the "emptiness" that has color still depends on space.
This simile supports another layer of relation: sentient beings are not apart from the Buddha's wisdom. The existence of sentient beings is not "something other than Buddha-wisdom"; Buddha-wisdom is not something far away waiting for you to be guided to it — it stands within the existential structure of your own body and mind, never separated.
Third simile: the nature of real gold does not change.
After a gold ring is oxidized, covered with tarnish, and fashioned into various ornaments, the fact that "it is gold" has never changed. Wipe off the oxidation layer, and it does not "become" something else — it has always been gold.
This simile supports the point most easily misread: the essence is originally pure, the nature does not change. Afflictions entangle you, behaviors distort you — these are adventitious dust (客塵), not the gold's essence having been worn away.
Taken together, the three similes are the same sentence in three different guises: "innate, never separated, cannot be covered over and changed."
4. Its place in the whole path of liberation
The 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) has a famous four-name enumeration:
同一法義，次第標舉為 法身、如來、第一義諦、涅槃 四名。
*"The same meaning is successively designated by four names: dharmakāya, Tathāgata, ultimate truth, and nirvāṇa."*
This is an extremely explicit positional declaration — 「不空如來藏」 is not merely an abstract philosophical object; its name and the four words "the Buddha's dharmakāya," "the Tathāgata himself," "ultimate truth," and "nirvāṇa" are the same thing called different names on different occasions.
In other words, this concept is not speaking of "one stage on the path of liberation," but of the very place to which liberation returns.
And precisely because it points to the deepest, the conditions for seeing it are the strictest:
- Ordinary beings cannot see it — because they are still within the entanglement of adventitious dust. - The two vehicles (śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas) also cannot see it — the "self-empty" nirvāṇa they have realized has not yet entered this side of the tathāgatagarbha's emptiness-wisdom. - Even bodhisattvas at the ten abodes see it only "in small part" — the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) states this explicitly. - Only a buddha can fully know and attest it — "none of the śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas have ever seen or attained it; only the Buddha knows it and can attest it." - But there is a temporary entry point: "one enters through faith" — even Mahāyāna śrāvakas, though unable to see it for now, can still enter this structure through faith.
5. Two footnotes most often dropped
(1) “Not empty” absolutely does not mean “intrinsic substantial existence.”
In the same passage, the 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra) first clearly breaks down the side of "adventitious afflictions":
「自性清淨……客隨煩惱三種染污，彼皆不實空無所有。」
*"Intrinsically pure... three kinds of defilement from adventitious afflictions — they are all unreal, empty, without any existence."*
This sentence is meant to be paired: "not empty" does not imply "there is a permanent self behind it giving orders." Afflictions are empty, unreal; buddha-merits are not empty, fully present. "Not empty" is said within the interior of emptiness-wisdom, pointing out that the Buddha's liberative wisdom is not a vacuous nothing.
(2) The sentient-being stage and the buddha-ground are not two different things.
「真如有雜垢」是佛性尚未離開諸煩惱纏縛，故名如來藏；轉至佛地、證得法身，則名「如來法身」，具有出世間十力、無畏等無量無邊功德。
*"When suchness is with defilement," the buddha-nature has not yet left the bondage of afflictions, hence it is called tathāgatagarbha; when it turns to the buddha-ground and realizes the dharmakāya, it is called "Tathāgata-dharmakāya," endowed with immeasurable, boundless merits such as the supramundane ten powers and fearlessnesses.*
That is to say: the non-empty tathāgatagarbha is wrapped in afflictions at the sentient-being stage, and naturally manifests as dharmakāya merits at the buddha-ground. The two are the same innate merit in different states, hidden and revealed — not two different things.
II. A Walk-Through in Daily Life
Below, four contemporary everyday scenarios walk through the above definitions step by step. At the end of each scenario, the point most easily mapped wrongly is flagged.
Scenario A: At 2 or 3 a.m., after scrolling through your phone, falling into self-negation
You think this moment's you is that way — the one who fell short in comparison, undisciplined, unlovable. A thought runs: "I'm probably just like this."
According to the 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra), this is called "客隨煩惱三種染污" ("three kinds of defilement from adventitious afflictions") — self-negation, envy, laziness-as-habit: these are guests, not the host. In the words of the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga), this is called "真如有雜垢" ("suchness with defilement") — it simultaneously acknowledges two things:
1. There is indeed defilement (you really are troubled by these things right now); 2. Although there is defilement, beneath it is still suchness.
This is what the maṇi-jewel simile says: the grimy "thing" you see at this moment is not its essence; its essence is "one that emits light, displays colors, and manifests forms." Grime cannot permanently kill the light, and the light is not added later.
What the non-empty tathāgatagarbha tells you is not "you are good enough already" (that is the next misreading), but "beneath that 'not good enough,' there is a purity that has never been destroyed."
The mis-mapping most easily stepped into: reading it as "self-acceptance" or "self-affirmation" — both still repair or reinforce the "self" as center, but the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) goes deeper: this very "self" at this moment is itself part of the adventitious afflictions, not your essence. The perspective of the non-empty tathāgatagarbha is not repairing that "self," but piercing through that "self" to see the underlying structure.
Scenario B: Coming home exhausted after work, feeling you performed badly all day
You had a key meeting in the morning, stumbled on a few key points, and on the way home kept replaying it mentally, the more you think the more agitated.
According to the 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra): "如來藏不離煩惱，名如來藏" ("the tathāgatagarbha is not apart from afflictions; that is why it is called tathāgatagarbha") — the layer bound by afflictions (the meeting mistake + the rumination over the mistake) is adventitious affliction, 彼皆不實空無所有 ("they are all unreal, empty, without any existence") — this moment's frustration, anxiety, self-doubt are unreal, impermanent, and have their moment of vanishing.
According to the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga): the nature of real gold does not change — a gold ring is oxidized, but it is still a gold ring. What the non-empty tathāgatagarbha tells you is another thing that exists simultaneously: your liberative wisdom is innate, and this fact does not depend on today's meeting performance.
This is not performance art or spiritual chicken soup. It is structural cognition: the oxidation layer you see (poor performance, anxious rumination) and the gold essence (liberative wisdom) are not the same layer. The oxidation layer can be cleaned off; the essence has never been lacking.
The mis-mapping most easily stepped into: reading it as "no need to make effort, anyway it's already innate" — wrong. The non-empty tathāgatagarbha says the innate thing is there, not that effort, learning, and correcting behavior are meaningless. In fact, the perspective of the non-empty tathāgatagarbha is what makes effort meaningful: you are not working to "pretend" a stone that cannot shine; you are polishing a maṇi jewel — the former is exhausting, the latter is reassuring.
Scenario C: Long-term tug-of-war in an intimate relationship
Your partner repeatedly says "you don't love me enough," "I'm not in your heart." At some moments you may indeed have not invested enough, been distracted, been physically and mentally depleted; at other moments you may have genuinely given. The other's disappointment, plus your own doubt about "am I really a good partner," forms a very thick net.
The adventitious-affliction layer: the other's grasping (the feeling of not being loved enough, of being neglected) is the object of the empty tathāgatagarbha — separable, releasable, distinct; your own guilt and self-doubt are also adventitious afflictions, 彼皆不實空無所有 ("all unreal, empty, without any existence").
The non-empty tathāgatagarbha layer: first, yourself — the item "佛解脫智" ("Buddha's liberative wisdom") and your lack of engagement or distraction today are not on the same level. The latter can be corrected; the former does not need to be "manufactured." Then, the other — the other equally has the non-empty tathāgatagarbha; the longing for love behind that is also some expression of liberative wisdom, not merely a wound needing to be soothed.
The simile of forms and images not apart from space has two readings here: this relationship is not two independent individuals fighting over "you give me" or "I give you," but two maṇi jewels that can both emit light but are mutually covered by adventitious dust, trying to see the other's innate purity. What can truly untie this net is not more "I give you," but both parties beginning to see each other on different levels.
The mis-mappings most easily stepped into: - PUA-ing others: "You are essentially good, so you should forgive me" — this abuses the non-empty tathāgatagarbha as rhetoric, utterly deviating from this concept's compassionate foundation. - Taking the other's adventitious afflictions as the other's very self: "Why are you so fragile / jealous / controlling / calculating" — you see the non-empty tathāgatagarbha but cover up the side of "adventitious afflictions, all unreal," thereby flattening the other person. - Expecting the other to always be “non-empty” toward you — the non-empty tathāgatagarbha is never a promise that "he/she will love me forever, remaining unchanged"; that expectation is another layer of self-grasping. The "neither increasing nor decreasing" of the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) refers to the pure essence, not the other's behavior.
Scenario D: An anchor of value in the age of AI
The content you write, the designs you make, the services you provide are often scored by one or two evaluation systems (algorithms, likes, subscriptions, KPIs); one day the algorithm changes, the platform collapses, the KPI shifts, and that "how much am I worth" drops along with it.
The adventitious-affliction layer: the fluctuation of external evaluation systems is the object of the empty tathāgatagarbha — it changes, empties, is separable, releasable, distinct; in the words of the 《大寶積經》 (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra), "彼皆不實空無所有" ("they are all unreal, empty, without any existence").
The non-empty tathāgatagarbha layer: within you there is an innate "coordinate" of liberative wisdom that does not depend on any external scoring. This coordinate is not "self-worth" (that is a modern psychological term carrying the self-centered hue), but what the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) calls 「不增不減、無上佛法、不相捨離相」 ("neither increasing nor decreasing, unsurpassed buddha-dharmas, the characteristic of non-separation") — not increased when liked, not decreased when ignored.
This is not so-called "Buddhist-lying-flat" (佛系躺平) — the retreat of "Buddhist-lying-flat" is itself a mental stance, unrelated to the non-empty tathāgatagarbha. Nor is it "I am deeper than the algorithm" — that is another kind of arrogance. The non-empty tathāgatagarbha is precisely a position that is neither promoted by algorithms nor suppressed by them.
The mis-mapping most easily stepped into: reading this as "digital detox," "Buddhist-lying-flat," or "Adlerian separation of tasks" — these, though not far off, still revolve around the perspective of the "self"; the perspective of the non-empty tathāgatagarbha dismantles half a layer of that very "self"-perspective and sees deeper.
III. Why Contemporary People Need It
1. Countering deep-seated self-negation
Contemporary psychology has put great effort into "self-acceptance," "self-affirmation," and "building self-esteem." But all of these presuppose a "self" that is an object to be repaired or strengthened. When self-negation is so deep that that "self" no longer exists (severe depression, dissociation, individuals long crushed by comparison), conventional affirmation techniques often fail.
The non-empty tathāgatagarbha offers another angle: you do not work on that "self" being repaired, but pierce through that "self" to see another layer of structure. It does not teach you "you are good enough" (that is adding another layer of tape to something deemed not good enough); it teaches you: the very criterion "good enough or not" is itself part of the adventitious afflictions.
2. Turning "self-growth" from accumulation to seeing
The contemporary buzzwords "self-growth" and "self-improvement" assume you are a blank sheet or blank hard drive onto which things must be added. This assumption has a problem — the more you add, the more tired you get, never enough.
The non-empty tathāgatagarbha flips the perspective: what you do is not "adding things to a blank sheet" but "wiping the dust off a maṇi jewel." This flip is extremely important — because it turns the fatigue of practice from "the fatigue of adding" into "the fatigue of cleaning." The former has no endpoint; the latter is a completely different experience when you know the endpoint is there.
3. In the algorithmic age, finding an anchor that does not depend on external evaluation
This was touched on in the previous scenario, but deserves separate mention: contemporary people have largely outsourced self-worth to external evaluation systems — peers, communities, clients, bosses, platforms. The system's benefit is instant feedback; its drawback is that it can be rewritten, shut down, upgraded or downgraded.
The non-empty tathāgatagarbha offers a different anchor: it says there is a purity-merit on you that neither increases nor decreases. This anchor does not come from self-affirmation (which is still an inward "self"), but from the structural fact "innately so".
Modern neuroscience here has a rough direction of compatibility: the adult brain retains plasticity; the neural bases of many foundational cognitive abilities (attention regulation, empathy, pattern recognition, etc.) are not entirely constructed from zero postnatally; quite a lot of what is limited by existing structures is what can be "practiced out." But this is compatibility, not proof — neuroscience cannot measure the "inconceivable dharmas beyond the Ganges' sands" of which the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) speaks, nor can it confirm that this is the innate "buddha-merit." What it gives you is only the non-conflicting framework that "having certain innate structures is possible"; the full content and direct insight of the true "not empty" must still be experienced on the level of actual practice.
IV. Common Misreadings and Clarifications
1. Reading it as “intrinsic substantial existence” (most common)
Thinking "not empty" means "there is a permanent, real thing called the tathāgatagarbha." This is smuggling the Brahmanical "ātman" into Buddhist vocabulary.
Clarification: The non-empty tathāgatagarbha and the empty tathāgatagarbha are two sides of one body. Its "not empty" is always said within the interior of "emptiness-wisdom" — what is empty is affliction, what is not empty is liberative wisdom. The 《大寶積經》's (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra) sentence "客隨煩惱三種染污，彼皆不實空無所有" ("three kinds of defilement from adventitious afflictions, all unreal, empty, without any existence") is precisely used to balance this "not empty" side: afflictions are unreal — this is the precondition that makes "not empty" rationalizable.
If one insists on a philosophical analogy, the "non-empty tathāgatagarbha" is closer to the "enduring intrinsic structure" in process philosophy — a structural constancy manifested by a process itself, not the constancy of a "thing." This is not the same as the "endurance" of a traditional substance; it is closer to the 《寶性論》's (Ratnagotravibhāga) "non-separation, neither increasing nor decreasing" — but any philosophical analogy is limited, for reference only.
2. Reading it as “soul,” “true self,” “self-nature”
Eastern spiritual circles often translate tathāgatagarbha as "cosmic soul," "your original face," "your essential self." These sound attractive but easily slide into the error of "there is a master inside."
Clarification: Buddhism has never said there is a "master." The store-consciousness (阿賴耶識, ālayavijñāna) is selfless, masterless, illusory. The tathāgatagarbha is not another name for the store-consciousness, but another angle (the possibility of becoming a buddha) from which to see the same structure. Whether store or consciousness, neither is a "self."
In other words, you can treat the tathāgatagarbha as a "very deep open question": one cannot say what it is, but also cannot say it is nothing at all; it is more like "the structure of structures" than something one can point to and show someone.
3. Reading it as “I am destined to become a buddha, so I don’t need to do anything”
This misreading has a specific name — the deviation of "icchantika becomes a buddha." If all sentient beings have the tathāgatagarbha (the non-empty part is innate), then isn't it "I am already a buddha"?
Clarification:
- The 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) states explicitly: "suchness with defilement" is the sentient-being stage; "turning to the buddha-ground, realizing the dharmakāya" is the buddha-ground. The former is the hidden store, the latter is the revealed. The innateness of the store does not equal the revealing. The non-emptiness of the maṇi jewel does not equal the maṇi jewel having been polished. - Another core thesis of the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga) is "一切眾生界不離諸佛智" ("the realm of all sentient beings is not apart from the Buddha's wisdom") — this "not apart" means "never departed," not "already become a buddha." "Not apart" says "Buddha-wisdom has never left you," but "you have not yet entered into Buddha-wisdom" is another matter.
Reading the non-empty tathāgatagarbha as "predestined buddhahood" both underestimates the depth of the store and underestimates the amount of work from store to revealing. A gold ring is oxidized but still gold — but this does not mean you do not need to polish it.
4. Reading it as “positive energy” or “self-affirmation”
Contemporary psychology, mindfulness courses, and the religious marketplace are everywhere selling the discourse "you are good, essentially luminous." It sounds similar to the non-empty tathāgatagarbha, but there is one fundamental difference:
- "Self-affirmation" and "positive energy" center on the "self," still reinforcing an image of the "self." - "Non-empty tathāgatagarbha" precisely dismantles this image of the "self," letting you see the innate pure structure beneath it.
A simple contrast:
- Self-affirmation: "I am good." — subject is "I," predicate is "good." - Non-empty tathāgatagarbha: "Beneath this 'I,' there is an innate pure merit that is non-separable." — the subject has changed; the subject is "innate merit," not "I."
This difference seems subtle but has enormous impact. The former crumbles most brittlely when it meets setback; the latter, when it meets setback, actually sees deeper.
5. Reading it as “the world is already perfect, so no need to work to improve it”
This is a misreading that forcibly stretches the non-empty tathāgatagarbha from the individual level to the cosmological level. The tathāgatagarbha speaks of the structural possibility of sentient beings becoming buddhas, not a promise that the world is already perfect. At the levels of world politics, ecology, and social justice, "non-empty tathāgatagarbha" nowhere exempts you from responsibility; on the contrary, while you still see suffering, the sentence "如來藏不離煩惱，名如來藏" ("the tathāgatagarbha is not apart from afflictions; that is why it is called tathāgatagarbha") is itself an invitation to action — wherever affliction is, there the tathāgatagarbha makes its turn.
6. Reading it as “a concept belonging only to one particular school”
Tathāgatagarbha teaching runs from the early sūtras (《央掘魔羅經》 Aṅgulimālīya-sūtra, 《如來藏經》 Tathāgatagarbha-sūtra, etc.) through the 《寶性論》 (Ratnagotravibhāga), the 《大乘起信論》 (Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna), Yogācāra, Chan, Huayan, and Tiantai — it is not the private language of one school. And the literal expression "non-empty tathāgatagarbha" appears mainly in the Ratnakūṭa division (such as the 《大寶積經》 Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra chiefly cited here) and the Yogācāra division (such as the 《寶性論》 Ratnagotravibhāga), as a standard term of tathāgatagarbha teaching.
Afterword
The reason the non-empty tathāgatagarbha is easily read crooked is that its core move (seeing the innate purity beneath affliction) is exactly opposite to our everyday mental habits (taking affliction or external evaluation as our essence). To make this flip, reading the literal words alone will not do; it requires practice over a longer stretch of time.
And the word "信" ("faith") — from the 《大寶積經》's (Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra) entry for Mahāyāna śrāvakas (「此二空智，諸大聲聞由信能入」 "these two empty wisdoms, the great śrāvakas can enter through faith") to the entry of the entire Mahāyāna tathāgatagarbha teaching — has always been the keyword. Not blind faith — but a willingness to first acknowledge "there may be something I do not yet see but that structurally exists," and to let that acknowledgment change the way one views affliction.
You can begin here: when the next adventitious affliction arises ("I am not good enough," "this relationship is hopeless," "this era makes life unlivable," "the world is just like this"), first do not take it as a final verdict, and do not rush to make it better; only take one more look — see beneath this affliction, that innate, liberative thing that has never been killed by it.
This "one more look" does not require waiting until you become a buddha. It can begin right now.