I think that it would be good to start by looking again to review this section on life, on Jivit Endriya, what you call chitta viprayukta samskara, which is called Jivit Endriya. And it's citta viprayukta because... Why is it citta viprayukta? Why is it not associated with mind? Anybody? The mind can what?

[01:09]

Because you can't really know it, because it's my state. Is that part of you? It's not part of mine. It's not a mental state. But it is, yes? Thank you, dear Marie. We can go on that. We can have the movement. We can have the feeling on our society. One comes up to mind. In some faith, you know what comes up to mind.

[02:11]

We share it. We live there. We live there. What she just said, I think I said. And that may not be right. But thank you for reminding me what I said. So what she said was that mind can conjure this up. What Pam said is mind can conjure this up. But doesn't necessarily know it. And I would say also that mind can conjure it up and mind can know it sometimes, but still it's not necessarily mind. Now, Sampreyukta, yes?

[03:16]

Yeah, that's another way to point out why it's chitta viprayukta. So Jiveet Indri is chitta viprayukta because of these two reasons that they brought up. And it's true what you said, within life it's true. But across life I think we have to make a little bit more delicate discriminations. She said that the Javita Indriya will exist through situations where mind won't be there.

[04:28]

Is that what you said? And Eric sort of gave a particular example of that. Namely, in the Neuroda Simopathy, for example, there's still Javita Indriya. But the answer, the simple question, the most simple answer is one that no one gave, and that is, the reason why this isn't why chitta viprayukta is because it doesn't meet the characteristics of chitta samprayukta. Characteristics of samprayukta dharmas should have certain, may have five criteria, which Javit Indriya doesn't have. And one of the, one of the ones, one of the most salient ones that won't, it won't satisfy, is namely, when mind dies, chitta-sampra-yukta dharmas die, and when mind comes up, chitta-sampra-yukta dharmas come up.

[05:39]

They're closely associated. Okay? So the, those dharmas, chitta-dharmas are the ideal example. Mind always comes up with them, and they never come up without mind. Chitta comes up, For example, Samadhi comes up, and Sparsha comes up, and Samya comes up, and Vedana comes up. They always come up together. One doesn't come up without the other one. But Javita India doesn't fulfill that quality, doesn't fulfill the Samkrayutta criterion, and it's not formed. Therefore, we say it's a dharma that's not associated with mind. Not associated doesn't mean it doesn't have anything to do with it. It means it doesn't meet the five criteria called samprayukta.

[06:41]

Samprayukta is a very tight kind of association. So we already know then that that mind can conjure up, or, you know, anyway, mind thinks, OK? Mind thinks. He's thinking, the overall main pattern of mind. That's the definition of karma, which produces a G injury. Jivita. Jivita is ayus. So mind can think this up, and mind can know this or not know this. But anyway, it thinks it up. So it's produced by mind, but it isn't associated with mind in the same way that mental events are. It's produced by mind? Yeah. It's produced by mind in the sense that it's produced by karma.

[07:42]

Jivinandria and Ayurveda are the result of karma. And that the Satrantikas and the Vaipashikas will agree on this. And, of course, Vijnanavadans will also agree with this. Madhyamikas will not agree with this. they'll say that none of this stuff was produced in the first place. All right, so that's... Yes? Yes. that Ayus has no object of support?

[08:50]

Ayus, are you talking about? Well, Ayus does have support. What is it support? No, what is it support? Karma. They mutually support each other, but primarily it's supported by consciousness. See, I mean, primarily it's supported by karma. Now, karma... Consciousness usually isn't considered to be a support except when it just perished. But karma within here is vinyana, too.

[09:55]

OK? That's how he thought about these messages he does. A circle. A circle within a big circle. Vinyana's here, here, using this, producing that. there can be, now it looks like there can be, not only can there be JV injury when mind and mental states are suppressed, but it looks like there can be mind and mental states when JV injury is suppressed. The javit indriya, this particular thing called life here, is not characteristic, although it's produced by all minds.

[11:02]

It's not characteristic. I mean, all the minds produce it. It's not characteristic of all minds. And it can exist without mind. So there's some independence here. So when mind and mental states are suppressed, are not functioning by virtue of... So here's karma, OK? Karma can produce this life thing, OK? And karma can also produce neurotic hemopathy. Now, karma produces both life and it produces neurotic hemopathy. But in this case, this means that what consciousness has produced is the suppression of consciousness. So consciousness can produce life and the suppression of itself. Consciousness can also then take away life and continue itself.

[12:11]

It's all generated by consciousness. Consciousness will be generating life and itself, generating life and the suppression of itself, generating the end of life and the continuation of itself. Then from the continuation of itself, generating life again and the continuation of itself and the suppression of itself while life keeps going and then the end of life. So these various patterns are possible. That's why Javita Injurya is not associated with mind. When you suppress mind and mental states, all the associated dharmas get suppressed, but not Javid Indriya. When you give rise to mind, mental states come up, but not necessarily Javid Indriya. So there's this complex sort of undulating interweaving of these phenomena. And the key here will be to account for the phenomena of death and rebirth, of incarnation and disincarnation.

[13:25]

Yes? So is Jividendria lacking in Uttarala? Currently, I think it is. Last week, I thought it wasn't. Last week I thought that Jivid Inrya was in Antara Bhava. This week I think it isn't. Anybody in the class will think it is again. If you want me to decide, let me know. I'll try. Is that what you were talking about? Consciousness continuing, but Jivid Inrya stopping? Right. In Antara Bhava... So in Antara Bhava... So the death consciousness comes... But that death consciousness doesn't put an end to five skandas. There's five skandas in the antra bhava too. But there's not warmth. And the reason why I think now that there's not warmth in antra bhava is because in this discussion on page

[14:43]

I don't know what page you're on. But anyway, in the discussion between the Vaibhashikas and the Sartrantikas, maybe we can quickly go through this, listen carefully, because this is going to go fast. The Sartrantikas say that Ayus is not a thing in itself. So here's what the Sartrantikas would say. They say there is something called called consciousness or thinking, which is karma. That produces, again, further vijnana and warmth. So I don't see the necessity of this. as a thing in itself, aside from the fact that karma produces vijnana and want.

[15:53]

The Vaipaśikas say, if you have karma directly producing vijnana, then this vijnana will be vipaka, will be retribution, will be neutral. Then all the vijnanas for a whole lifespan would be neutral. But that can't be so. Therefore, they have to have some intervening vipaka state, retributable state, not retributable, but retributive state, to absorb the neutrality. So they want to put something in here so that the karma won't directly produce the vinyana. They don't want this vinyana to be vipaka. So structurally speaking, they feel they need this. They need it to be something real rather than just For them, what the theory needs is real. If the theory needs it, it's a real thing. It's light. It's a real, real important issue. Sautantikas don't need this theory.

[16:54]

So they can see that karma directly produces vinyana. Of course it does. The Pai Vajrakas agree also, but they want this in between so that this vinyana doesn't have to be neutral itself. It doesn't have to be a result. So, the Sotrantikas take this out and Linda Bhavatshikas say, well, what would you, what is, you know, what we call a life or Javita India, what do you call that? I mean, what do you have to do that function? They say that what they would call that is that at the moment of birth, this first consciousness, the power of karma indues that stream of consciousness. that series, with this kind of power. What do they call it? It is a power of karma, of action, from the previous existence that's imbued to the being at the moment of conception.

[17:58]

And this power projects this stream for a certain length of time. it sets a certain trajectory for warmth at the moment of conception. And that trajectory can be shortened, as we'll discuss. It can be shorter than that. It can't be longer than that. Okay? So that's what the Vaibhashikas would say. I mean, that's what the Sartramtikas say. Vaibhashikas say that there's actually a thing called life that's produced. And then that again produces these other phenomena and it goes along with them. What is moral? I didn't say warmth wasn't a dharma.

[19:10]

So what do you know what dharma is warmth? So what dharma is warmth? The Vaibhashikas bring it up. So for them it must be a dharma. Which dharma is it? It might be energy, but it also might be, instead of being a mental phenomenon, it might be a form, it might be something physical. So that's a good question. What is warmth? If the Abhashikas are bringing it up, it must be composed of dharmies or be equal to a dharmia. I think that if we just keep this in mind, it may come up as we talk.

[20:19]

We're going to try to find out what this is and what life is. Yes? It's not only temperature, right? I usually associate with what it is. Well, all the four great elements, all right, one of them is fire. And so fire has when you see fire as a physical thing, it has warmth to a great extent, or it has fire element in it to a great extent. But all physical experience entailed the experience of fire. So even in a state where there wasn't Javid Indriya,

[21:29]

the being could relate to physical phenomena. And in that relationship to physical phenomena, the being would have the capacity to experience through the essential dynamic or through the essential quality called fire. So if a being was in Antara Bhava, and didn't have warmth in this sense, still they could relate to warmth. I mean, still they could relate to physicality through the dimension, that aspect of relating to physical phenomena, which is called the essential quality or the essential capacity of fire. Just seeing a color or smelling something, fire is involved, this kind of fire, this kind of warmth.

[22:31]

We're talking now about a special warmth that happens at conception. And this warmth is discriminated from vijnana, by something in addition to vijnana. And this warmth and this vidjnana interact and are mutually supported and are supported by, according to the Vaibhashikas, this thing called life. Now the Satramtikas don't see the need for this thing called life. So for them, this warmth and this consciousness must be part of what has to do with this power which they see engendered at the moment of conception. So warmth must be associated with this phenomenon called life. And life is the phenomenon that sort of seems to determine the kind of, seems to go with a lifespan or go with a lifespan.

[23:46]

if we call the warmth the power tentatively you can maybe say that the warmth is the power that's imbued at the moment of conception or that warmth is inextricably related to the power that's imbued to the being at the moment of conception which goes to the duration of the lifespan Yes? Who said you beat a child's retribution?

[24:57]

The Baiboshikas wanted to be retribution because they wanted to take this place out. They wanted to absorb the retribution. Right? Okay. Yeah, according to the Baiboshikas, do you have to do that? Yeah, well, I'm trying to, I guess I should be clear that I was trying to explain it without using Javid Indriya, trying to explain what usma is, what warmth is. If you say that there's a thing called Javid Indriya, then start talking about warmth. It's a different discussion.

[26:02]

But anyway, what was your point, Lucia? My first response is that, at the moment, you're not born into the Arup Yudatu. there. You can't go, you can't go into a rupidhatu. You can't be born there. You can't go from an antarabhava to a rupidhatu.

[27:12]

You first have to be born in, to be actually conceived Moment of conception, you cannot go from Antra Baba to Rupadhatu. Rupadhatu is arrived at, you can be born there through meditation, but the meditation comes from Rupadhatu, and then from Rupadhatu comes from Kamidhatu. You can be born in heavens, which is a result from practicing in the meditations in the Rupadhatu. You can be born in heavens of the Rupadhatu, But in that case, you go into antarabhava and go into these heavens. These heavens are not a rupi dhatu. When you're born there, you can practice meditation, a rupi dhatu meditations, and you can go into the heavens, but those heavens are not a rupi dhatu in the sense of being born there as a destiny. You don't go, you aren't, you don't go through Antra Baba to get to those.

[28:25]

They're in the same, they're within the same lifespan. Okay? You're human, you're born in a human destiny, that's your destiny. And from there you go into a Rupadattu, and then you go into those heavens. But beings are not born in a Rupadattu through Antra Baba. I don't remember exactly why that is so. No, I say you can go from Arupidat to Meditations, you can go to Arupidat to Heavens. Yes? You don't see the difference? It's a certain power.

[29:32]

Well, previously, the powers should be the power and should be, I guess, a couple weeks ago, you asked us what makes for the darkness to preserve this? It's a big question now. Do I have that? Well, that's the issue here anyway, is that the Sattranticists say that this power that we're talking about is Prajnapta. They're just talking about this thing called life that we have some concern with. So now they're saying that this is power. They say, let's say this is power. There's some power that comes at the moment of conception. that determines the lifespan. There is a lifespan. Lifespan itself is not a thing in itself. It's part of the phenomenology or whatever of human suffering, of samsara, okay?

[30:47]

Part of the mundane world is this experience of a lifespan. Now they say, well, let's just say, okay, then at the moment of birth, There is a lifespan set by virtue of karma. A certain projective possibility is there. A potential life is imbued at the moment of birth. It's a power. And it's due to karma. In other words, by virtue of your thinking, you have chosen a certain lifespan. By virtue of what you're interested in, what you're looking at, and therefore what you're interested in, By thinking that way, by directing your thoughts in that direction, you have just chosen yourself, a human life with a certain lifespan. But let's just say that. Because people think that way, and also let's say there's a power that makes them go that distance. And that's not a thing in itself.

[31:51]

They say it. I do not deny the existence of ayus. I only say that ayus is not a thing in itself. So they don't say there isn't a lifespan and there isn't something that makes a lifespan different from not a lifespan or a death span. They don't say that. They say, okay, it's just not a thing in itself. In other words, if you try to find it, you won't. If you look very carefully at the situation, you won't be able to grasp this thing called ayus or life. But, okay, so let's say it's a power that comes at the moment of conception. The moment of conception, in other words, does not tell us, as we look at it, anything about lifespan. And yet, there is a subtle implication in the choice of how you are conceived in the form of birth conception. There is an implication there of a lifespan. That implication is due to how you thought about the conception, whether you're interested in human beings copulating, frogs copulating, or gods copulating.

[33:06]

By virtue of your interest, there's an implication there of what kind of lifespan you want. If you choose beings in Jambut Bipa in India, and they're humans, and you think a certain way about them, you choose a 70-year life, or whatever it is, you know. If you choose at this part of the Kalpa, it's a very long life. If you choose at that part of the Kalpa, it's a very short life. And where you are in the Kalpa has to do with what you think too, and when you choose to be born, and when you chose to die. So what they're saying is that when you conceive a birth, although they can't exactly explain in the process of birth how it is that you determine your lifespan. In fact, there's this implication by virtue of which kind of life you chose. That, in one case they say is a real thing. In another case you say it's a power.

[34:12]

And what is the power? It's the power of your thinking. It's an ability to shape what happens because you think you can shape what happens. So that's why you chose birth, is you thought you can do something, and by the way you thought you could do things, that way of thinking that you can do things will continue to do that in a certain way for a certain length of time. So they call it a power. But it's not a thing in itself aside from the karma, you see. It's just the karma. But they want to say, well, there's a certain twist to the karma. And so we call it a certain power in addition to making the birth, which is kind of the crucial thing, there's also this built-in projection. In this thing here, there's also this. You can't see this now, so there's something in here, some power in here, which can do this.

[35:13]

Now, the sātrāntikas say it's just a kind of fiction that we say it's a thing other than just karma itself. But somehow people can't understand that karma can do this and also karma does this in another time and space. So they say it's a power that will do this for you or something. But karma does that, see. So they say that. But that's just talk. Whereas if a bhāśikha is because of their system, they say, well, there's really a thing here, right here, alongside here, that runs along and tells us what to do and tells us how long it will live. Rather than this thing, they also admit this thing comes from karma, and they both come from karma. But they want this to be, it's easier to think about it if you think of this actual thing there that does this. So there's a little bit of a difference there. In other words, the difference would be that Vaibhashika would keep referring to this solid thing. Satramtikas won't even bring it up unless you make them.

[36:16]

So they say, okay, I don't admit it doesn't exist. Well, what is it? Okay, it's power. It's just not a thing in itself. You say, well, if you say it's a power, then you're stuck too. Well, that's true. But they won't go along with that. They'll say, just shake it off as soon as possible. It's the same with their understanding of, as we saw before, the same with their understanding of this Avvijñaptirūpa, okay? The Sautantikas say Avvijñaptirūpa is an actual thing. The Sautantikas say Avvijñaptirūpa is just a tentative explanation. The Vaibhashikas say it's an actual thing. The Vaibhashikas can show you how this wonderful mechanics of this subtle rupa determines your behavior by interacting or rising out of your karma.

[37:19]

The vaibhashikas, the sattrantakas, can do it just with karma. They don't need to say there's a real thing there. They use all the same functions to explain, but they just don't keep making it into a solid thing. And yet they need to use something to explain all the stuff that this solid thing is doing. So without denying experience or crossing off phenomena, you have to explain them, but you don't have to reify your explanatory gestures. As a matter of fact, you may have to really work at, you know, desubstitizing them. Yes? If I was to say, we need a... And this vinyana is retribution. If we go from consciousness to karma to karma, consciousness to consciousness, when our lives in between, it can't be retribution.

[38:24]

And we can't go from a thought to retribution. So look at BIPOC as probably not also. What did I say when the Vipasha could tell them, you're a Vipyana that follows? Well, they don't really say, they don't seem to be worried about it too much. See, the Trachantikists say, if that is, the thing I said before, the Vipasha, see, they just don't see, they say, I don't see the need for this iris, okay? The Trachantikists don't even, they just think it's extra. As the thing in itself is extra. They know that the function that they're talking about must be there, but they see it as already in common. So they see that Ayu is as extra. They don't see what is necessary for it. Then the Vaibhashikas say, well, if you don't have it, you're going to have problems with this Vipakapala problem.

[39:35]

You're going to have this retribution problem. The next thing the Sautantikas say is, And right after that, they say, use say, then, that action supports warmth, and that warmth supports consciousness. They again say, ayahuas is useless. So they don't seem to be bothered by this problem. At least Pasubando doesn't seem to be bothered by it. Well, I don't know. I think what warmth is, looks like what warmth is, is if it's not equal to, it's closely related to, maybe it's a kind of, now I would say, at this point, now I would say that usma, warmth, is a characteristic of this power. No, take it back.

[40:39]

Now I would just say that usma is a characteristic of this phenomena called life span. I didn't say life because it's not a characteristic of Jividendria or Ayus. But it's a characteristic of this phenomena called a life span. is something that, if we look, we find it at the moment of conception, we find it going away at death. For human beings, you could say, well, it's actually the warmth of the body. But anyway, it's a certain kind of Maybe you could say it's what goes away from the body when the lifespan is over, when the consciousness leaves the body.

[41:50]

But is that temperature? Well, temperature doesn't seem to be, I mean, it seems to be partly temperature. There's a... It's OK. It was brought up last week. It was taken care of, don't we? Well, how we took care of it last week is not necessarily how we take care of it this week. But that's why I say, that's why I don't want it to be actual temperature, okay?

[43:04]

And yet, when a lizard dies, even if it's nice and warm outside. And body temperature doesn't drop a degree. It's 110 in the Mexican desert. And all of a sudden, the lizard grows. And it's dead. So the temperature doesn't drop. But life left. The lifespan is over. Now you have a physical form, which is not that much different from the compost pile right next to it. which is full of all kinds of other life, you know, various kinds of life going on a compost pile, but all of them have lifespans. And now actually what happened is there was a system of life. You know, a whole bunch of life systems are included under the one system called the lizard. Now the lizard system turns off

[44:04]

And it's a big change because now the other systems are the ones that are alive. The cells don't instantly die. If you open up the lizard, look in the cells inside the lizard, when the lizard dies, the lizard's heart stops pounding. Boop. Boop. The lizard stops breathing. Boop. But if you pop open the cells, you'll find it's still alive in there. Okay? So actually it's that the lizard's domination of that situation has changed. The lifespan of what? The lifespan of a certain consciousness's incarnation has ended. But the material itself is not dead. There's still life there. But now if we went into that area and we're looking for life, we'd say, well, now we notice that we have all these cells there. Now those cells that exist at the moment that the lizard died Those cells have probably quite a bit... A lot of those cells have a shorter lifespan than the lizard did.

[45:07]

Most of those cells were not there at the moment the lizard was born. I mean, the lizard system was incarnated. But those cells are new, right? A lot of them are new. And those cells are younger than the lizard that just died, and they'll live beyond the lizard, but they probably won't live as long as the lizard. Some cells... will live quite a bit beyond lizards. For example, bone cells will stay alive for a long time. And hair cells, lizards don't have hair, but anyway, hair cells keep functioning quite a while after life. And tooth cells sometimes also have life for a long time. Some cells will die very quickly, right, almost with the lizard. Others will live quite a while longer. So there is life there, but the the particular life that we're concerned with, that seemed to be the kind of overall life of that scene, that lifespan has come to an end. And in fact, the case of the lizard is interesting because if it were in the Mexican desert, the temperature would not drop.

[46:13]

As a matter of fact, the temperature might increase as the beings who now... are the ones who we're aware of as being alive there, they might raise the temperature because those beings might not be dependent on the environment. So the beings, the lizard is a kind of animal that is dependent on its environment. However, the parts of the lizard may not be dependent for their warmth on the environment. But there's some kind of thing that the lizard does that counteracts some organic thing that itself would have heat on its own. So if you take the lizard and you put the lizard in some lower temperature, now that it's dead, its temperature might raise higher than the surroundings. Can you see that? Something might happen to the dead lizard that would raise the temperature higher than the surrounding area.

[47:16]

Its decomposition, in other words, might create more heat than the neighborhood it was put in. Why? Because a different kind of life is happening. In terms of the consciousness of the physical path, something called morph, it is morph and more independent. Once again, in terms of the consciousness of the lizard itself, there is some . There's a human being. I just want to be a blizzard and be alive.

[48:22]

But depending on what the weather's like, . It's really . Consciousness. What you said, I understand what you said in itself. I don't understand how it relates to this thing, but the preface I didn't understand. Just... Does Khadriki understand what he's saying? Like you just talked about how... I was a lizard. In a way, this one is working dead. Does that have something to do with consciousness? Because there are things happening in the lizard.

[49:24]

The consciousness which makes a lizard dies. So there's something going on. Well, what I'm suggesting is that Kusma is not temperature, but it's something that goes away and comes at the birth and death of what we usually call a lizard. And that when a lizard dies, even though the temperature doesn't drop, without it moving or anything, you could tell it was dead. The heart would stop beating and things like that. Then you'd say that it was a dead lizard. and that usma has something to do with both qualities by which a life span of a particular organism is said to be bounded. It might be, what do you say, if we start to get into it, now that we think about it, what it might be is, it might be our old friend,

[50:28]

or something like that. That's what usma might be a special variety of. Some subtle rupa. Or it might even be a combination of vijnapti and avijnapti. Is it the vikapa of discrimination? Well, certainly it's the result of vikapa. It's the result of thinking. But the result of thinking is usually not called vikapa. Vikapa is the activity of thinking. Isn't made enough for discrimination or imagination?

[51:42]

Is made enough for you feeling? Is feeling false discrimination? Feeling is the experience or sensation. It's the result of discrimination and consciousness and karma. But it itself is not what it is. It's not that, you know. I was just wondering, from the point of view of the self-project, couldn't then do the Buddhist without putting it out to all subjects? They're not using Usma as prajnapati. They're using Ayus as prajnapati.

[52:45]

They're using Ayus. They're using this thing called life, but they're not seeing it as a thing in itself. Usma, there's no issue. They're talking about some simple thing that everybody agrees on as some phenomenon. that's characteristic of a consciousness that's incarnated. So although I'm still tentative about this, what I'm suggesting now is that karma gives rise to conception, to birth consciousness. It chooses birth. and it chooses birth in a certain matrix. There's four matrices. If it chooses a womb, then it chooses birth in an egg, an zygote situation.

[53:45]

By virtue of that, a lifespan is projected, is implied by that kind of thought. And a characteristic of this lifespan is Usma. And this lifespan has consciousness the whole time, except when it's being suppressed by trances. And this lifespan has, through it, Usma. So Usma is some kind of characteristic of life, whereas consciousness existed before this decision to incarnate. And now at the incarnation point, a new lifespan is set, and that lifespan is determined and marked off by the existence of Usma, which at the death consciousness stops.

[54:51]

And actually, it may stop, I would suggest, prior to death consciousness, as we'll see. If you need to stop, either it stops at death consciousness or... at the exhaustion of the projection of the karmic thought that gave rise to it. So that's what I'm suggesting at this point Usma is. Now what it is, dharmically, I'm thrashing about to see whether it's maybe Avegnapti or something like that. What it is that you see disappear when somebody dies, maybe you should think about that. But that, I would suggest, that thing that disappears at the point that the person so-called dies, that's Usma. But it's not a sudden thing either, you know. What point are you going to say that the person is dead? So there's a little bit of fuzz in there. And maybe it's not so clear what it should be called.

[55:57]

What about the other three matrices? What about the other three matrices? Yeah. You mean for chicken, or...? Well, what are... What? Isn't it moisture-borne, paint-borne, and... Right, yeah. Well, the same with the... Well, with the chicken, you can tell... Chickens are born to an egg, right? So, with the chicken, you can tell them the chicken died. So it would also have this smell. Is that not your question? There's moisture-borne. With moisture-borne, well, it means, basically it seems to mean through metamorphosis. In other words, the way insects are born, the way frogs and mosquitoes and worms.

[57:01]

What? Through imagination. Magical. Yeah, through magical, you know, through phantom or conjuring. Rocks? Yeah, rocks don't go through this process. They don't do this. Yes?

[58:06]

I want to say that in Bini, I don't think I think that. It's closely associated with so that an epicenter is also being resolved. Please, please. You can say it's closely associated if you want, that's fine. But a person can die, can do this thing which we ordinarily call die and stay warm. And they can stay warm two ways. One way is they could be in a room that's warm and then they'll stay warm. Or they could actually stay warm even in a cold room. Sometimes people do that too. And yet we might say that they're dead. But let me talk a little bit about death consciousness at this point.

[59:10]

Is that death consciousness is birth consciousness is a certain decision you make and death consciousness is another decision you make. Death consciousness can be made under various circumstances. Now, in the discussion of death, it says that If you turn to the section on death, it says, how does death take place? Does death take place solely through exhaustion of life? And it says that the Prajnapthi Shastra says that it happens that one dies through exhaustion of life without dying through exhaustion of merit. And there's four alternatives. Death through exhaustion of action that ripens in life, death through exhaustion of action that ripens in the objects of joy, death through exhaustion of two types, and death through the fact of not avoiding harm.

[60:17]

And one must add death due to the abandoning of the created thing called usma, I mean called ayus, ayus samskara. Now, if... there could be there could be death so I would say this what this means is there can be death prior to the there can be the death of the body prior to the decision to die so you could have a the body could the lifespan of the body could come to this place where most people would say it was dead and the decision to die has not been made. That would be one situation. Another situation is that the decision to die could be prior to the natural life span.

[61:26]

The body itself is not dead does not need to die at this point, but the decision to die comes. Now, in this case, if the decision to die comes prior to the exhaustion of life, then the body will also die at that moment. Then they'll happen together. But for most people, When the body dies, that would be death through exhaustion of action that ripens in objects of joy. For most people, when the body dies, that forces the decision to give rise to death consciousness because the objects of joy have been exhausted. In other words, the body, the lifespan has come to an end, and that forces the person to choose death consciousness.

[62:35]

Is that because life has become a drag? Yes. But you can do that even before life is exhausted. He? He doesn't necessarily die. People want you to die. That's right. They couldn't, right? So there's death through exhaustion of that which ripens in life. That's one kind. There's death through exhaustion of things that you enjoy. It's another kind. And there's death through both types, both of these together. And then there's death by not avoiding causes of harm. So death through not avoiding causes of harm, I would suggest, is also, of course, karmic, but it wasn't, in a sense, you could say that it was implied in your original karma, but so subtly that it's a special case, namely that you're going to get in a car accident.

[63:46]

And in those cases, what I'm suggesting at this point is is that, for example, in a car accident, the shock to the system is so great, the transformations of your body are so great that you choose death consciousness at that moment, and your body just, you know, can't keep going. The heart can't keep going. The lungs can't keep going. And you also, at that point, maybe choose death consciousness. Just as, you know, all... But it's different than the exhaustion of the implications of your original choice as a human being. It's a different kind of thing. It could also be due to, for example, as it says here, to excesses of food if you eat too much. Extreme debauchery can also produce this situation. which will cut short the natural trajectory of the birth you've chosen.

[64:52]

So accidents and debauchery. Yes? I'm saying, in a way, I think it does. That the kind of mind you have at the moment of conception is a kind of mind that will tend towards eating too much or driving carelessly. But it's such a special case that it's hard to see that kind of thing, that subtlety, so it's called another way. In other words, the kind of person you are actually, although you've chosen human life which has a usual Usually we expect a certain progress, you know, childhood, middle age, and death. You cut it short because of the way you think.

[65:54]

No, you choose a certain type of being. And this being has a usual trajectory. And that's kind of what you like. Whether you know it or not, that's what kind of being you've chosen to be. but you actually have chosen the particular being you're going to be. So as we saw in this article, which some of us read, you actually choose when to fall off your bicycle, and what you name your dog, and the name of the woman you marry, and where you take your vacations. And if you have identical twin, they'll do all the same things. Okay? So all this stuff is set. Why is it set? Because it's set by the way you think, and the way you think is the way you think. So if you just let it roll, everything will just mechanically fulfill itself and you'll die younger than most people or whatever. You get a certain disease at such and such age and you'll live or not. So it's all mechanically set by the way you thought at birth.

[67:04]

And there seem to be all these different varieties of environments and so on, but they don't mean much because you have a way of thinking about what happens. what's really the main thrust. Yes? What about Aryans? Aryans? So what do you think about them? they may or may not be able to deflect or unmute. Well, that's, of course, the whole point of Buddhism is that through knowledge, it is possible not to do exactly what you decided to do before.

[68:07]

Namely, by virtue of what I thought so far, I'm going to do everything a certain way. And because I do everything a certain way, I'm going to eat too much when I go out to dinner and so on and so forth. And therefore, I'm going to get sick at a certain time of a certain disease. I'm going to eat certain foods by my own choice. I'm going to be married to a woman who's going to cook for me in a certain way and so on. And this is due to my own thinking. And it's all very set. And the whole point of Buddhism is that you can be free of that, of what you've already thought. Because you can see that it's just what you thought. That's all it is. And if you see through it, it no longer has a total determining power over you. However, depending on what kind of thought you see through, whether you see through this kind of thought or that kind of thought, there will be different kind of unfoldments still. So it isn't like all Aryans immediately have exactly the same face.

[69:09]

But rather they relate to the face which is up to the point at which they started seeing that they have. And certain things will still unfold themselves. But they can be free of it. And so it's kind of like, I don't know if I should get this specifically. But you think a certain way here, and that projects something like this here, and that projects something like that, so on, up to this. That's all set by the way you thought here. Because you think this way, you will think this way. Because you think this way, you will think that way. All these other beings are here, you know, also doing their thing. Everybody now has their own thought. And everybody is now producing their next thought because of that. They all thought these various things they thought in this environment. That was their thought they gave rise to in the context of that moment.

[70:17]

So they all mechanically produced the next thing. There's all these little lineages. And you say, what about these people changing their thing? Well, there's a slight, if any of these people become free, You might say that that would introduce some fuzziness in the situation, which maybe is true. If everybody became free but you, it would be difficult for you to continue your habits untouched. Because then these things wouldn't be fit too. But now you think this because of this. That's what thinking is. Thinking is exactly that. But you think this based on that. That's what you mean by thinking. That's karmic thinking. You thought this because of that and because of this. And all these other people and all these other beings thought this because of that and think this because of that. So the whole thing goes forward like this. Why don't you reach, you know, fold over. At some point, if you look either horizontally or vertically as a thing and see through it and see how it was all just made up,

[71:27]

At that point, there's still all this other stuff is going to fall through. But the next thought you have won't be the same. You won't necessarily think the same in the next thought. Matter of fact, you can give rise to quite a different type of thinking that's free of your past thinking So then this next thought somehow is disconnected. It's not totally determined by this one. It's something else. For example, it's a question mark. Now that question mark does not care anything about stopping the implications of this long, all these things have projections, implications. Which you can see, of course, they do have those implications. And you see it's quite natural that they do. So you just watch them come down. They all still happen. And you don't care to stop them, and they will. If it weren't that way, then people who were enlightened, there'd be this huge rip between them and the rest of the world.

[72:32]

They'd be isolated. And everyone would just cut off from them. But actually, they'd follow through on everything that they've done before in this world. But there's some break here. And the break happens when you completely understand and see how mechanically you behave. And you can see that very clearly at that moment, you have a really good chance of not doing that way anymore. As a matter of fact, when you see mechanically how you think, that sight is not mechanical thinking anymore. that way of seeing is not mechanical. It's just not. You know, there's a difference between, this is an active thought, an active thought, an active thought, an active thought.

[73:37]

The active thoughts produce results, plus also one of the results they produce is the likelihood of giving rise to a certain variety of things. And one will be chose because of the results in the previous thoughts. But at some point, you don't have to give rise to the next kind of active thought. But you still will see that by the nature of the machine, there are certain results that are going to come. You see, you're still going to get sick. So that's why we say, you know, that before our hearts die, if they're not, because our hearts are not going to come back, they have to burn up all the implications of their karma, which would have gone to the next life. Some things you do are retributed in this life. Some things you do are retributed in the next life. And some things you do are retributed in not this one or the next one, but some ones later. If you're going to be in Arhat, at the moment just before you die, or sometime before you die, you have to experience all the results of the life that you're not going to have.

[74:49]

It rushes all to the time between when you're in Arhat. So if you're in Arhat when you're two weeks before you die, and you just happen to have lots of stuff to collect in future existences, then according to this, you'll experience them all in the last few moments of your life. So you might be very hectic there for a while. But although it's hectic, it doesn't really matter that much because you can see through it. To others, you have lots of composure, hopefully, and insight. But to others, they might see these great explosions happening off your face or something, and arms and legs shaking or something. Yes? We can't modify our past karma, no. No, no, no.

[76:04]

Insight has no effect on karma whatsoever. See, this is karma. Here comes karma. That's an example of karma. Unless you don't see it that way. As this thing starts rolling, If some place in this trajectory there's insight, it doesn't stop it from filling itself. However, if there weren't insight, then there would be not only that, but there would be another one going off like that. So it's not that the change is to come. You say, well, that's different from that. But it isn't that it changed it. It's that, how do you say? It changes it from the point of view of some imagination you might have about what else could have happened. That's true. But that's just imagination. OK, good.

[77:18]

How you can show it? How do you show it? How do you show it? How do you show it? So you're asking, how does freedom feel differently, or how is freedom different from bondage? OK? Isn't that what you're asking? What? That's what I think you're asking, because there's some sequence here. And I'm saying, this is cut off from that. Now this is a free act. Still, this free act is surrounded by implications of all the habitual thinking we've been doing our whole life, and all the habitual thinking of all the beings that coexist with us.

[78:27]

So how is that? What's the characteristic of that, the difference from that? Well, one of the characteristics is called no characteristics. In other words, there's not a particularity that you can really say, but to show it. If there were, then it would be locked into that. If this produced only one thing that you could say what it was, then we'd be part of that sequence and we wouldn't really be free of it. So insight doesn't prove itself to other people. It proves it to the person who experiences it. And if other people want to have it prove it to them, they prove it for themselves. If freedom is predetermined, that's quite all right.

[79:33]

What about the people not predetermined? Yeah, well, anyway, if in fact freedom and liberation was predetermined, Well, then if that was your philosophy, then, and there are philosophies like that, you know, in India that coexisted with Buddha. They've said, it doesn't matter what you do. If you're going to get liberated, you get liberated. If you're not, you're not. So what's the problem? What you do, your effort doesn't make any difference. Therefore, just sit back and wait, and eventually you'll either get enlightened or not. Okay? So that's... your question could be answered that way. So if you want it to be that way, then have it be that way. If you want your activity to have nothing to do with freedom, then that would be the way to think. Then sit back and wait and maybe you'll be a Buddha and maybe some other people won't. But if you want to be a Buddha yourself for sure, and you want to make sure everybody answers Buddha eventually, then the way you do it is you say that your practice and your insight will make a difference.

[80:48]

And the way you know is not because of some characteristic that somebody else tells you and you can find in a book. You know it from your own experience. You know that you're free of your past. And how do you know you're free of your past? Because you look at it and you're free of it. You just look and say, I'm free of it. That's all. And you say, well, prove it. Well, the proof is that you're free of it. Not that you can prove it. It doesn't push you around anymore. You actually feel free. You actually don't care what you used to be and also don't care what you will be. No matter what happens, you can adjust to it quite well. How do you prove it? You prove it by, again and again, realizing it. If in the next moment you don't feel that way, Well, okay, then you don't. It was a one-moment realization, and now you have to have another one. And if you don't, you're lousy until you can realize it again. And what if other people see you? Do they think that you realize?

[81:51]

Is there some proof that you have to prove that it's realized? Well, maybe you act a certain way and they say, well, she acts that way, therefore I think she's realized. But somebody else could look at you and say, she doesn't act that way, or she does act that way, but that doesn't mean she's realized. So they choose not to see that you're realized. Once again, if they chose to see that you were realized and saw how you were realized, then they could see an example of realization. And that might be useful to them if they wanted to see an example of realization. But if they don't see it, that's their karma. Karma is actually to look around and not see realization. Everywhere you look, you don't see realization. That's called the opposite of pramudita mahavihara. That's the opposite of the sympathetic joy meditation. Look around and see how each person isn't enlightened one after another.

[82:55]

And that practice is not in the books, the Buddhist books. The one that's in the book, they look around one person after another and see all their spiritual qualities. Try it. You can actually, if you look, you can go around and see all their failings, or you can also go right around the table and see all their strengths. And what's the difference between the two ways of feeling? One is liberating and the other is depressing. One also is the way you already know how to think. You learned it in high school or even before. And it's called the thought that gives rise to gossip. and the other is rather refreshing and if you really get good at it, it's unconditioned. It's an insightful, liberating way to see people and see things and also to see yourself.

[84:02]

So to say, how do you prove that you've broken the thing? Well, the only reason why you The only reason why this is locked is because you think it's locked. And even to think that it's not locked, that you're in a situation called not being locked, that's locked. That kind of thinking that you can be locked or unlocked, and that it's dependent on that kind of thinking, that's how you judge it, that's what's called locked, that's karmic thinking. And when you don't think either of those ways, as we say, when you're not either bound or freed, when you actually can experience it, that's the way your mind's functioning, that's the way it always does function, then, in fact, this thing's broken. And then, although you're in a lifespan, you're free of it from then on.

[85:08]

However, there's depths of insight. So, once again, you can deepen it and deepen it. And then, after you deepen it, this will happen at the beginning of darshanamara, this insight, okay? Then from then on until you perfect your insight, and then after that, you'll notice that although there's still these implications coming through, namely that you still go like this when everybody rings the doorbell, If you review your insight as you're doing this, this stuff does change after a while. This has a lifespan, you know, and it doesn't go on forever. Maybe it'll last the rest of your life. Maybe it'll last 30 more years, but it might not. It might only last six more years, nine more years. If you watch this twitch in response to situations through... the non-karmic eyes, the eyes that see how karma works, this thing loses its support. I mean, it doesn't lose its support.

[86:11]

It only has its support that it's gotten so far. It doesn't get any more energy, and it only goes a certain amount of time longer. And if you're not coming back for any more births, if you think that way, if you're in our heart and you think that way, according to this book, you'll have to get all these twitches done in one lifetime. However, one advantage of being a bodhisattva is that since you have many endless lives, you don't have to do a lot of stuff in this lifetime. So it's possible since you have innumerable lifetimes to immediately have no bad habits right now. So it's ironic. You no longer have to manifest any more bad habits in this life because you have so much time in which to review your bad habits that you can postpone them all till later. No, it's not so much that as that since beings are innumerable, including your own bad habits are innumerable beings,

[87:27]

You don't have to work on any particular one this year or this lifetime. You have to work them all out. But since you have to work them all out, you actually don't need to run into any in this lifetime. In other words, since the number of beings that are bound in samsara are endless, there's no end to the time you'll spend in this practice. It goes on forever. There's no bound to the possibilities of consciousness incarnating itself and tying itself in knots. And since that's the case, there's no end to this joyous practice of liberating these bondages. Okay? No, but it's not lazy because what you then do is, since you know you have plenty of time, is you realize that there's no particular one you have to handle now. In other words, instead of spending all your time trying to save all the people who are bound in the next few weeks or the next few years, you can rather just spend your time with all the people who are liberated, namely everybody you meet.

[88:38]

Do you know what I mean? If you felt that the world was bound and that these innumerable afflictions, innumerable afflictions had to be taken care of in one lifetime, then you'd have to go start finding them right away in your own body and others' bodies. You wouldn't have time to not notice other people. Every person you met, you wouldn't be able to give them any space. You'd have to immediately go right to all their problems. And since you all personally have innumerable afflictions, suffering sensitive beings in your own body and mind

[89:18]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_89.87