The Anatomy of the In-Between

Continuing the Sentient-Being Nyāsa within the second, the Fetters Aggregate, part eight. One asks: for how long a span does one abide at the stage of the intermediate state? The answer: only for a brief span, since it swiftly seeks rebirth — that is, while abiding in the intermediate state, it searches everywhere, through the six sense-gates, for the very condition of its own rebirth, and swiftly proceeds to where that condition is fulfilled. One asks: if, upon receiving the intermediate state, one immediately encounters the very condition of rebirth, then this condition and that being converge, and rebirth is bound together right there — but if the condition of rebirth one encounters does not converge with it at all, how could it abide there without passing a great span of time? As when a father dwells in the country of Kashmir while the mother dwells in China, or a mother dwells in Kashmir while the father dwells in China — the condition of rebirth being so difficult to bring into convergence, how could the intermediate state still swiftly proceed to bind rebirth together? The answer: one should understand that a sentient being's own karma, in making a father and mother, is of two kinds — fixed and not fixed — and that a father or mother may, accordingly, be either alterable or unalterable. If both father and mother are alterable, the being proceeds instead to wherever some other father and mother are converging, and binds rebirth together there. If the father is alterable but the mother is not, then that very woman, however chaste and virtuous her own nature, upholding the five precepts and complete in her own deportment, will nevertheless certainly unite with some other man, so that the one in the intermediate state may swiftly proceed to bind rebirth together. If the mother is alterable but the father is not, then that very man, however worthy and good his own nature, upholding the five precepts and complete in his own deportment, will nevertheless certainly unite with some other woman, so that the one in the intermediate state may swiftly proceed to bind rebirth together. If neither father nor mother is alterable at all, then, before that very sentient being has yet died, by the force of his own karma, his own father and mother, though they may possess every condition for remaining apart, will nevertheless feel no attachment to remaining so at all, and will certainly give rise to a mutual desire to come together in union.

At the very moment they proceed toward each other, along whatever path they travel, poison cannot harm them, blades cannot wound them, fire cannot burn them, water cannot drown them, and every other kind of cause that might otherwise bring an untimely death is powerless to obstruct them, and union is certainly achieved — so that, once that sentient being has died, he proceeds, the very moment he receives the intermediate state, directly to where rebirth is bound together. One asks: if every sentient being's own desire were constantly heightened, it might be granted that the intermediate state could swiftly proceed to bind rebirth together — but, for those whose desire is not constantly heightened, how could the intermediate state still proceed to bind rebirth together in the very same way? A horse's own desire is heightened in spring, but not at other times; a cow's own desire is heightened in summer, but not at other times; a dog's own desire is heightened in autumn, but not at other times; a bear's own desire is heightened in winter, but not at other times — how, then, could a sentient being, the very moment he receives the intermediate state, cause that union to occur and thereby proceed to bind rebirth together? The answer: by the very superior force of the karma of that sentient being abiding in the intermediate state, the desire of his own father and mother is caused to become heightened even out of its proper season, and thus, proceeding toward each other in union, rebirth is bound together for him.

Other masters say: rebirth may also be bound together within a merely similar-seeming kind, and so no fault is incurred at all — that is, a horse's own desire is heightened in spring, but not at other times, while a donkey's own desire is heightened at every time; one destined to be reborn as a horse, being out of season, is instead reborn as a donkey. A cow's own desire is heightened in summer, but not at other times, while a wild ox's own desire is heightened at every time; one destined to be reborn as a cow, being out of season, is instead reborn as a wild ox. A dog's own desire is heightened in autumn, but not at other times, while a jackal's own desire is heightened at every time; one destined to be reborn as a dog, being out of season, is instead reborn as a jackal. A bear's own desire is heightened in winter, but not at other times, while a brown bear's own desire is heightened at every time; one destined to be reborn as a bear, being out of season, is instead reborn as a brown bear. Although such a being's own outward form resembles that of some other species, its own common class of being remains, exactly as originally destined, unaltered, since no intermediate state whatsoever can be altered in this respect. The intermediate state thus abides only for a brief span before certainly proceeding to bind rebirth together, since it swiftly seeks rebirth. The Venerable Śarmadatta says: the intermediate state abides, at the very most, for forty-nine days, since rebirth is certainly bound together by the forty-ninth day. The Venerable Vasumitra says as follows: the intermediate state abides, at the very most, for seven days, since that body is so feeble and weak that it cannot abide for long. One asks: granting that, should the condition of rebirth converge within these seven days, rebirth may indeed be bound together — but, for however long the condition of rebirth has not yet converged, would this not mean that the being is thereby broken off entirely?

The answer: it is not broken off at all — that is, for as long as the condition of rebirth has still not converged, that intermediate state dies and is reborn again and again, without any genuine break in continuity whatsoever. The Great Virtuous One says: there is, in fact, no fixed limit to this at all — that is, for one whose own condition of rebirth converges swiftly, that intermediate body abides only for a brief span; for one whose own condition of rebirth has not converged for a long span of time, that intermediate body abides for that same long span of time, right up until the condition converges and rebirth is finally bound together — and so an intermediate body's own span of abiding has, in truth, no fixed limit at all. One asks: what is the size of the intermediate being's own bodily form? The answer: a desire-realm intermediate being is the size of a child of five or six years,

while a form-realm intermediate being is of the full, complete size he possessed in his own death-existence. One asks: if a desire-realm intermediate being is the size of a child of five or six years, how could he possibly give rise to the distorted perception of craving and aversion toward his own coming father and mother? The answer: although his own bodily size is small, his own faculties are sharp and forceful, capable, exactly as in his own death-existence, of performing every kind of undertaking — exactly as a painting of an old man upon a wall, though small in its own size, still displays every mark of old age. One asks: what is the size of a bodhisattva's own intermediate-state body? The answer: it is of the same size he possessed in the very prime of his own death-existence, adorned upon his own body with the thirty-two marks, further embellished with the eighty minor marks, his body a genuine golden hue, his own halo of light extending a full fathom around him — and it is by this that a bodhisattva, while abiding in the intermediate state, illuminates a hundred koṭis of four-continent-worlds all at once, exactly as a hundred thousand suns shining together all at the same time, his own Brahmā-voice profound and exquisite, a joy for all to hear, exactly like the clear, resonant call of the kalaviṅka bird,

his own wisdom and vision utterly unobstructed, free of every kind of defilement. One asks: if a bodhisattva's own intermediate state is genuinely as described, how, then, is Dharmasugata's own verse to be reconciled? As it states:

'The white elephant, its own marks dignified and fine, complete with six tusks and four feet, with correct awareness entered its mother's own womb, reclining there as a sage retired within a forest.' The answer: this need not even be explained away at all, since it is not drawn from the Tripiṭaka — a verse composed in mere literary form may or may not accord with truth. Were it necessary to explain it away regardless, one should seek out its own underlying intent, which speaks with reference to a dream-sign that then appeared — that is, within that very country, to dream of such a sign was taken to be an auspicious omen,

and it is for this reason that the bodhisattva's own mother dreamed of this very sign, wishing to have it interpreted. Every brahmin who heard of it declared, with one voice, that this sign was most auspicious indeed — and it is for this reason that Dharmasugata composed his own verse in this way, which likewise carries no contradiction with reason. The bodhisattva had already, across ninety-one aeons, never once fallen into an evil destiny — how much less, then, in his own very last body, would he receive this intermediate state and enter his mother's womb in the form of an animal? A wise person ought not, therefore, rely upon this literary verse and thereby claim that the intermediate state the bodhisattva received had the form of a white elephant.

One asks: are the intermediate being's own faculties complete, or incomplete? The answer: every intermediate being's own faculties, in every case, are complete, since the very first reception of a ripened result must, of necessity, be perfect and exquisite.

There are those who say: an intermediate being's own faculties may also be incomplete, matching whatever faculty is incomplete at the corresponding stage of his own coming death-existence — exactly as an image stamped by a seal appears exactly as that seal itself appears, so too does the intermediate state correspond to the coming death-existence, and, exactly as that coming death-existence's own faculties may be incomplete, so too are the intermediate being's own. Of these, the position stated first is the sound one — that is, at the stage of the intermediate state, since one searches everywhere, through the six sense-gates, for the very place of his own rebirth, his own faculties there must, of necessity, be without any deficiency at all. This statement refers to the eye and the rest, not to the male or female faculty, since a form-realm intermediate being possesses neither of these faculties at all; as for a desire-realm intermediate being, this is likewise indeterminate — for one destined to be reborn by way of the egg-born or womb-born modes,

while abiding at the stage of the intermediate state, he does indeed possess the male or female faculty, becoming incomplete only once he actually arrives within the egg or the womb — for, were this not so, there could be no sense at all in which he is destined for an egg-born or womb-born rebirth.

One asks: what is the outward shape of every intermediate being? The answer: an intermediate being's own outward shape matches his own coming death-existence — that is, whoever is destined to be reborn in the destiny of hell

possesses an outward shape exactly resembling a hell-being's, and so on, up through: whoever is destined to be reborn among the gods possesses an outward shape exactly resembling that very god's own, since the intermediate state and the coming death-existence are both, alike, drawn forth by one and the same karma. There are those who say: whoever, dying in a given present body, receives the intermediate state, has an intermediate state whose own outward shape resembles that very present body — exactly as an image stamped by a seal appears exactly as that seal itself appears. This position fails to accord with reason, for what reason? What could an intermediate body received by one dying in the formless realm and reborn in the desire or form realm possibly resemble at all? Could it possibly be that a god's own intermediate state has the form of a hell-being, or a hell-being's own intermediate state the form of a god? And, further, one dying in the form realm and reborn in the desire realm ought then to receive an intermediate state that is neither male nor female, while one dying in the desire realm and reborn in the form realm ought then to receive an intermediate state that is indeed male or female — and it is for this reason that the position stated first here is the reasonable one. One asks: if an intermediate being's own outward shape matches his own coming death-existence, then a single dog's own womb, say, might contain the intermediate beings of all five destinies arising there all at once — and, once a hell-bound intermediate being manifests itself there, how could it fail to scorch and consume its own mother's womb, since a hell-being's own death-existence is, for the most part, being scorched by raging fire? The answer: even while abiding in his own death-existence, a hell-being is not perpetually burning — exactly as one who briefly wanders into some intensified region, or into some other hell, may find temporary respite, as the Prajñaptiśāstra states: there are times, within the Reviving Hell, when a cool wind briefly arises and a voice cries out, 'revive, revive!' — and, at that very moment, the beings there are immediately revived once more. If this holds even for one abiding in his own death-existence, how much more so for one still in the intermediate state! And, even granting that such burning were perpetual, exactly as it can neither be seen nor touched, on account of an intermediate body's own extreme subtlety and fineness, so too should its own fire be understood — and, though the intermediate beings of every destiny may dwell together within a single womb, karma itself prevents them from touching or scorching one another, and the mother's own womb is likewise protected, and is thus never actually burned. One asks: for a sentient being who dies in some cramped, narrow place and is reborn in the form realm, how could such a place possibly accommodate the form realm's own large intermediate-state body? The answer: an intermediate being's own bodily form is subtle and fine, entirely unobstructed — why, then, should one fear that a cramped place could fail to accommodate it? And, although an intermediate being's own outward shape matches his coming death-existence, his own undertakings and the rest need not, on that account, be identical at all. One asks: what is the manner of movement of the intermediate beings of every destiny? The answer: a hell-bound intermediate being travels head-down and feet-up toward hell, and it is for this reason that a verse states:

'Plunging headlong into hell, feet above and head returning below — on account of slandering the sages, who delight in stillness and cultivate austerity.' A heaven-bound intermediate being travels feet-down and head-up, exactly as a person shooting an arrow straight up into the empty sky, rising ever upward as he travels on toward the heavenly destiny. An intermediate being bound for every other destiny travels sideways in every case, exactly as a bird flies through the sky toward its own place of birth, or exactly as a painting upon a wall depicting a flying immortal, his whole body traveling sideways in search of his own coming birthplace. One asks: is the manner of movement of every intermediate being, in every case, exactly as described? The answer: one should say as follows — this is not necessarily so in every case; this description was given with reference only to one who has died among humans. One who dies in hell and is reborn again in hell need not travel head-down and feet-up at all; one who dies among the gods and is reborn again among the gods need not travel feet-down and head-up at all. One who dies in hell and is reborn among humans ought to travel head rising upward; one who dies among the gods and is reborn among humans ought to travel head returning downward. As for the intermediate beings bound for the destiny of a hungry ghost or an animal, their own manner of movement should be understood, in each case, according to wherever they are respectively headed. Other masters say: the manner of movement of every intermediate being, in every case, is exactly as described above, for what reason? Because it displays the very distinction of the karma each has committed — that is, since the karma of hell is of the most utterly filthy and base kind, an intermediate being, at the very moment of first receiving that state, must have his head returning downward, though his own manner of movement thereafter, wherever he is headed, becomes indeterminate; since the karma leading to rebirth among the gods is of the most superior and lofty kind, an intermediate being, at the very moment of first receiving that state, must have his head rising upward, though his own manner of movement thereafter, wherever he is headed, likewise becomes indeterminate; and, since the remaining three kinds of karma are neither of the most lofty nor of the most base kind, an intermediate being bound for any of these three destinies travels sideways in every case at the very moment of first receiving that state, though his own manner of movement thereafter, wherever he is headed, likewise becomes indeterminate. There are yet others who say: every intermediate being, at the very moment of first receiving that state, does so precisely as the ripened result of the very karma he has committed, and this in every case displays the distinction of that committed karma — that is, a hell-bound intermediate being is the fruit obtained by the most base kind of karma, and it is for this reason that, whenever he moves, his feet are up and his head is down; a god-bound intermediate being is the fruit obtained by the most lofty kind of karma, and it is for this reason that, whenever he moves, his feet are down and his head is up; and the remaining three kinds of intermediate being are the fruit obtained by a karma of the middling kind, and it is for this reason that, whenever they move, head and feet are level, with neither one above the other. And, although where each of these beings is respectively headed remains indeterminate as to direction, the very posture of head and feet at the moment of movement must, in every case, be exactly as described.

One asks: at the moment an intermediate being is generated, is he clothed, or not? The answer: a form-realm intermediate being is, in every case, clothed, since a sense of conscience and shame is heightened within the form realm,

and this very conscience and shame is itself the clothing of the dharma-body — and, exactly as that dharma-body possesses its own superior clothing, so too does the very body born there, and it is for this reason that this intermediate being is ever accompanied by clothing. A desire-realm intermediate being is, for the most part, unclothed, since conscience and shame are, for the most part, absent within the desire realm — excepting only the bodhisattva, and the nun Śuklā, whose own intermediate states are ever accompanied by the most exquisite clothing. Other masters say: the bodhisattva's own intermediate state, too, is entirely unclothed; only the nun Śuklā and the like have an intermediate state ever accompanied by clothing. One asks: for what reason does the bodhisattva's own intermediate state possess no clothing, while Śuklā's own does? The answer: because the nun Śuklā once offered clothing to the monastic community of the four quarters, and it is for this reason that her own intermediate state is ever clothed. One asks: granting that, the bodhisattva, in a past life, offered exquisite clothing to the monastic community of the four quarters on a scale that Śuklā's own offering of clothing, ground down into the finest particles of dust, could not even begin to compare with — how, then, could the bodhisattva's own intermediate state be unclothed, while her own intermediate state is ever clothed? The answer: this is owing to the difference in the very vow each of them made, distinct from the bodhisattva's own — that is, once the nun Śuklā had offered her clothing to the monastic community of the four quarters, she thereupon made this vow: may I, in birth after birth, ever be clothed, even at the very stage of the intermediate state, never once exposed. And it is by the very force of that vow having thus been drawn forth that, in whatever place she is born, clothing is ever abundant for her — and so the intermediate state she received in her own very last body was ever clothed, and, at the stage of entering her mother's womb, right up through the moment of emerging from it, the clothing never left her body at all, growing larger, degree by degree, exactly as her own body grew larger, degree by degree. Afterward, with correct faith in the Buddha's own teaching, she renounced the household, and the very clothing she had previously worn transformed into a monastic robe; having received full ordination, it transformed further into the five-part robe; diligently cultivating correct practice within the Buddha's own teaching, she before long realized the fruit of arhatship, and, at the very moment of her own final nirvāṇa, her body was wrapped in this very same robe and cremated. The bodhisattva, across three incalculable aeons in the past, cultivated every kind of surpassingly excellent, wholesome conduct, dedicating it all, without exception, toward unsurpassed awakening, for the sake of benefiting and bringing ease to every sentient being — and it is by the very force of this conduct and this vow that, in his own very last body, he comes to occupy the most honored and supreme position among every sentient being, so that whoever encounters him receives some benefit without exception. It is for this reason that the intermediate state the bodhisattva receives, though complete with every excellent mark, is nevertheless unclothed — the force of his own vow being simply different in kind, and this ought not to be raised as an objection at all. Whoever else makes a vow such as the nun Śuklā's own likewise has an intermediate state that is clothed. It should be understood that the position stated first here is the reasonable one — the bodhisattva's own merit and sense of conscience and shame being so heightened that it surpasses what every other being's own form-realm intermediate state could ever attain, and it is for this reason that, at the stage of the intermediate state, he certainly is never exposed at all.

One asks: at the stage of the intermediate state, does one rely upon solid food, or not? The answer: a form-realm intermediate being does not rely upon solid food; a desire-realm intermediate being certainly does rely upon solid food.

One asks: what, exactly, is the solid food of a desire-realm intermediate being? There are those who say: a desire-realm intermediate being, arriving wherever there is food, thereupon eats that very food, and, arriving wherever there is water, thereupon drinks that very water, and, by this very food and drink, sustains himself. This position fails to accord with reason, for what reason? Because intermediate beings are so exceedingly numerous that they would be exceedingly difficult to provide for at all — as the scripture states, exactly as when rice is poured from a sack and the like into a granary or a cauldron, its own grains packed so densely together,

so too are the intermediate beings received by the beings of the five destinies, scattered everywhere, their own number surpassing even that — and, were they to make use of food and drink in this ordinary manner, then every kind of food and drink existing anywhere in the whole world, sufficient only to supply a single kind of dog, could not even provide for that one kind of intermediate being alone, how much less could it possibly satisfy every other kind as well? And, further, an intermediate being's own body, being so exceedingly light and subtle, ought to be torn apart and destroyed were it to receive any coarse and heavy food at all. One should instead say as follows: an intermediate being feeds upon fragrance alone, not upon any coarse substance, and it is for this reason that the foregoing fault does not arise — that is, whoever possesses merit partakes of the light, subtle fragrance of pure flowers, fruit, and the like, and thereby sustains himself; whoever lacks merit partakes of the light, subtle fragrance of filthy, foul, rotten food and the like, and thereby sustains himself. And, further, the fragrance such a being partakes of is exceedingly small in quantity, and so, however numerous intermediate beings may be, they are still able to be provided for.

The intermediate state thus bears several distinct names: it is named the intermediate state; it is named the gandharva; it is named the seeker of existence; and it is named the mind-made. One asks: for what reason is it named the intermediate state? The answer: because it dwells after a death-existence and before a rebirth-existence, its own self arising precisely between these two existences, and, being gathered within desire-existence and form-existence, it is named the intermediate state. One asks: every other kind of existence, too, arises with its own self precisely between two other existences — why, then, should these not also be gathered within the three existences and named the intermediate state? The answer: whichever existence dwells between two other existences yet is subtle and fine, difficult to see, difficult to make out, difficult to discern, is given the name intermediate state; every other existence, though it too dwells between two other existences, being coarse and heavy, easy to see, easy to make out, easy to discern, is not named the intermediate state. Further, whichever existence dwells between two other existences, being itself a realm, a birth, yet not gathered within any destiny, is named the intermediate state; every other existence, though it too dwells between two other existences, is gathered within a realm, a birth, and a destiny alike, and is therefore not the intermediate state. Further, whichever existence dwells between two other existences, having already relinquished the preceding destiny yet not yet arrived at the subsequent destiny, is spoken of as the intermediate state; every other existence, though it too dwells between two other existences, has either not yet relinquished the preceding destiny, or has already arrived at the subsequent destiny, and is therefore not the intermediate state. One asks: for what reason is the intermediate state named the gandharva? The answer: because it sustains itself by feeding upon fragrance — this name belonging solely to a desire-realm intermediate being. One asks: for what reason is the intermediate state named the seeker of existence? The answer: because it seeks, through the six sense-gates, its own coming existence — that is, while abiding in the intermediate state, the mind's own continuity in seeking a future existence is forceful and sharp in a way it is not while abiding in any other existence, and it is for this reason that the intermediate state alone receives the name seeker of existence. One asks: for what reason is the intermediate state, further, named the mind-made? The answer: because it is born from mind alone — that is, sentient beings are, in some cases, born from mind, in some cases, born from karma, in some cases, born from a ripened result, and, in some cases, born from sexual desire. As for those born from mind: this refers to the very first humans at the beginning of an aeon, and every intermediate being, together with beings of the form and formless realms, and transformation-bodies. As for those born from karma: this refers to the hell-beings, as the scripture states, hell-beings are bound fast by their own karma, unable to escape or be freed from it — they are born through karma, not through any pleasure of the mind. As for those born from a ripened result: this refers to birds in flight, and spirits and the like, since it is by the very force of their own ripened result being so light and agile that they are capable of flying through the sky, or passing unobstructed through walls and barriers. As for those born from sexual desire: this refers to the six heavens of desire, and to humans and the rest. Since every intermediate body's own being is born from mind, riding upon mind as its own vehicle, it is for this reason named the mind-made.

The World-Honored One, within his own scripture, states as follows: it is by the convergence of three matters that entry into a mother's womb is achieved — that father and mother both possess a defiled mind and come together in union; that the mother's own body is, at that time, in a fit condition, free of illness; and that, at that very time, a gandharva is presently manifest. This gandharva, at that time, has two minds, one turning into the other, presently manifest as he enters his mother's own womb. Here, as for the convergence of three matters: this refers to the father, and the mother, together with the gandharva — these three matters converging together. As for father and mother both possessing a defiled mind and coming together in union: this refers to father and mother both giving rise to sexual craving and thereupon joining together in union. As for the mother's own body being, at that time, in a fit condition, free of illness: this refers to the mother, giving rise to craving, her body and mind both delighted and at ease, which is named a fit bodily condition. The Vinaya-masters say: owing to the mother giving rise to craving, her body and mind become turbid and clouded,

exactly as water in spring and summer flows turbid and clouded, unable to hold itself steady, and this is named a turbid, clouded body. The mother's own womb being pure, free of wind, heat, and phlegm mutually intensifying and pressing upon one another, is named free of illness — and it is by this that, across the nine or ten months, the fetus is sustained and held, prevented from any harm. As for the phrase 'at that time': this refers to the fact that, among women, there is a certain unclean matter, a flow of blood and fluid occurring regularly, month by month — should this be too abundant, conception cannot occur, on account of its own thinness and wetness; should this be too scant, conception likewise cannot occur, on account of its own dryness and thickness; only when this blood and fluid is neither too scant nor too abundant, neither too dry nor too wet, does conception occur, and this is named 'at that time' — since this is precisely the time at which the intermediate being enters the womb, that is, when the mother's own blood and fluid, at its very last moment, has but two drops remaining, and the father's own semen, at its very last moment, has but one drop remaining, and these, turning together, converge to form conception. And, as for 'a gandharva presently manifest':

this refers to the intermediate state manifesting itself, presently, at this very place — neither at any other place, nor before, nor after this moment. As for this gandharva, at that time, having two minds, one turning into the other, presently manifest as he enters his mother's own womb: this refers to the gandharva, at the very moment of entering the womb, giving rise, in succession, to two minds of craving and aversion, toward his father and toward his mother, and only thereby achieving entry into the womb. If it is a male intermediate being about to enter the womb, he gives rise to craving toward the mother and aversion toward the father, thinking to himself: were that man to leave this place, I would then unite with this woman. Having given rise to this thought, a distorted perception then arises, in which he sees that man depart from this place, and immediately sees himself uniting with the woman instead. At the very moment his father and mother unite and the semen and blood are emitted, he thereupon supposes that his father's own semen belongs to himself, and, having seen this, joy arises within him, and he thereupon swoons into a stupor — and it is by this very stupor that the intermediate state becomes coarse and heavy, and, having become coarse and heavy, he thereupon enters his mother's own womb,

seeing himself crouched against her right flank, facing her own spine — and it is at this very moment that the intermediate state's own aggregates cease, and the rebirth-existence's own aggregates arise, and this is named the completion of conception. If it is a female intermediate being about to enter the womb, she gives rise to craving toward the father and aversion toward the mother, thinking to herself: were that woman to leave this place, I would then unite with this man. Having given rise to this thought, a distorted perception then arises, in which she sees that woman depart from this place, and immediately sees herself uniting with the man instead. At the very moment her father and mother unite and the semen and blood are emitted, she thereupon supposes that her mother's own blood belongs to herself,

and, having seen this, joy arises within her, and she thereupon swoons into a stupor — and it is by this very stupor that the intermediate state becomes coarse and heavy, and, having become coarse and heavy, she thereupon enters her mother's own womb, seeing herself crouched against her left flank, facing her own belly — and it is at this very moment that the intermediate state's own aggregates cease, and the rebirth-existence's own aggregates arise, and this is named the completion of conception. Sentient beings of every kind, for the most part, give rise to just such a distorted perception before entering the womb — excepting only the bodhisattva, who, about to enter the womb, perceives his own father correctly as his father, and his own mother correctly as his mother, and, although capable of correct awareness throughout, nevertheless gives rise to a feeling of intimate affection toward his own mother, and it is by riding upon the force of this affection alone that he enters her womb. Every other point of meaning here should be understood exactly as stated before.

One asks: at what place does the intermediate being enter his mother's own womb? There are those who say: the intermediate state, being unobstructed, enters the womb at whatever place he pleases. One asks: if an intermediate being's own body cannot be obstructed at all, how could he possibly come to dwell and abide within this mother's own womb? The answer: it is by the very force of his own karma that he is constrained, and it is by this that he comes to abide there — a sentient being's own karmic force being inconceivable, capable of causing what possesses no obstructing quality at all to nevertheless become obstructed — and so this ought not to be raised as an objection here at all. One should instead say as follows: the intermediate being certainly enters the womb through the very birth-canal itself, since this is the place he desires — and it is by this very principle that, among twins, the one born later is reckoned the elder, for what reason? Because whoever enters the womb first must, of necessity, emerge from it later. One asks: at what place does the bodhisattva's own intermediate state enter the womb? The answer: he enters through the right flank, with correct awareness entering the womb, since he holds no perception of sexual craving toward his own mother at all. Others, further, say: he enters through the birth-canal, since this is simply the natural way of every egg-born and womb-born mode of birth. One asks: at what place does the intermediate state of a wheel-turning king or a solitary-realizer, prior to his own birth, enter the womb? The answer: he enters through the right flank, with correct awareness entering the womb, since he holds no perception of sexual craving toward his own mother at all. Others, further, say: he enters through the birth-canal, since this is simply the natural way of every egg-born and womb-born mode of birth. Other masters say: because the bodhisattva's own merit and wisdom are so supremely heightened, at the moment of entering the womb he holds no distorted perception at all, and gives rise to no sexual craving whatsoever; a wheel-turning king or a solitary-realizer, though possessing merit and wisdom, does not possess it to so supreme a degree, and, though he too holds no distorted perception at the moment of entering the womb, he does still give rise to sexual craving, and it is for this reason that his own entry into the womb must occur through the birth-canal. The Prajñaptiśāstra states: if the father's and mother's own meritorious karma is heightened, while the child's own meritorious karma is inferior, he cannot enter the womb at all; if the father's and mother's own meritorious karma is scant and thin,

while the child's own meritorious karma is superior, he cannot enter the womb at all — it is only when the father's, mother's, and child's own meritorious karma are all equally matched that entry into the womb is achieved. One asks: if a wealthy and noble man unites with a poor and lowly woman, or a wealthy and noble woman unites with a poor and lowly man, how could an intermediate being still manage to enter the womb at all? The answer: whenever a wealthy and noble man unites with a poor and lowly woman, he certainly gives rise, within himself, to a perception of his own inferiority, while giving rise, toward that woman, to a perception of her own superior worth; whenever a wealthy and noble woman unites with a poor and lowly man, she certainly gives rise, within herself, to a perception of her own inferiority, while giving rise, toward that man, to a perception of his own superior worth; whenever a poor and lowly man unites with a wealthy and noble woman, he certainly gives rise, within himself, to a perception of his own superior worth, while giving rise, toward that woman, to a perception of her own inferiority;

whenever a poor and lowly woman unites with a wealthy and noble man, she certainly gives rise, within herself, to a perception of her own superior worth, while giving rise, toward that man, to a perception of his own inferiority. It should be understood that the very same holds for the child, with respect to his own father and mother, at the stage of entering the womb — and so, at the moment of entering the womb, there is, in every case, a sense of being genuinely matched.

One asks: an intermediate being, being so subtle and fine, is obstructed by no wall, mountain cliff, tree, or the like whatsoever — but do intermediate beings obstruct one another? There are those who say: intermediate beings, too, do not obstruct one another at all, since, being so exceedingly subtle and fine, they do not even perceive it when their own bodies happen to touch. Others, further, say: intermediate beings do indeed mutually obstruct one another, since, at the very moment they encounter one another, they engage, one with another, in speech. One asks: granting this, how could it still be said that the intermediate state is unobstructed at all? The answer: it is unobstructed with respect to every other thing — not unobstructed with respect to itself. One asks: do intermediate beings, without exception, all obstruct one another? The answer: only those of the same kind obstruct one another, not those of some other kind — that is, a hell-bound intermediate being obstructs only another hell-bound intermediate being, and so on, up through: a god-bound intermediate being obstructs only another god-bound intermediate being.

There are those who say: the inferior obstructs the superior, on account of its own coarse heaviness, while the superior does not obstruct the inferior, on account of its own fine lightness — that is, a hell-bound intermediate being obstructs the intermediate beings of all five destinies; an animal-bound intermediate being obstructs the intermediate beings of four destinies; a hungry-ghost-bound intermediate being obstructs the intermediate beings of three destinies; a human-bound intermediate being obstructs the intermediate beings of two destinies; a god-bound intermediate being obstructs only another god-bound intermediate being.

One asks: which is the swifter — the power of supernormal locomotion, or whatever an intermediate being undertakes? There are those who say: the intermediate state travels the more swiftly, for what reason? Because scripture states that the force of karma surpasses supernormal power itself. Others say: it is the power of supernormal locomotion whose own swiftness of movement is the greater, not that of any intermediate being. One asks: granting this, for what reason does scripture state that the force of karma surpasses the power of supernormal locomotion? The answer: this is stated with reference to being unobstructed, not with reference to swiftness of movement — that is, the Buddha's own supernormal power is capable of obstructing the supernormal power of every other sentient being; a solitary-realizer's own supernormal power, the Buddha excepted, is capable of obstructing every other supernormal power; Śāriputra's own supernormal power, the Buddha and every solitary-realizer excepted, is capable of obstructing the supernormal power of every other sentient being; Mahāmaudgalyāyana's own supernormal power, the Buddha, every solitary-realizer, and Śāriputra excepted, is capable of obstructing the supernormal power of every other sentient being; and the supernormal power of every sharp-facultied one is capable of obstructing the supernormal power of every dull-facultied one. Yet, absent a Buddha, a solitary-realizer, and every disciple, no other sentient being's own incantation or medicinal substance is capable of obstructing an intermediate being, preventing him from proceeding to the very place where he is destined to be reborn —

he will certainly proceed there, binding rebirth together according to his own kind. It is for this reason that scripture states that every kind of karmic force surpasses the force of supernormal power — and, were this treatise composed with reference to swiftness of movement instead, it ought properly to state that supernormal power surpasses the intermediate state.

One asks: are intermediate beings capable of seeing one another? The answer: they are capable of seeing one another. One asks: which sees which? There are those who say: a hell-bound intermediate being sees only another hell-bound intermediate being, and so on, up through: a god-bound intermediate being sees only another god-bound intermediate being. Other masters say: a hell-bound intermediate being sees only another hell-bound intermediate being; an animal-bound intermediate being sees the intermediate beings of two destinies; a hungry-ghost-bound intermediate being sees the intermediate beings of three destinies; a human-bound intermediate being sees the intermediate beings of four destinies; a god-bound intermediate being sees the intermediate beings of five destinies. There are yet others who say: a hell-bound intermediate being sees the intermediate beings of all five destinies, and so on, up through: a god-bound intermediate being likewise sees the intermediate beings of all five destinies.

One asks: are the eyes of one abiding in a death-existence capable of seeing an intermediate being? There are those who say: the eyes of those in the destinies of hell, animals, hungry ghosts, and humans cannot see an intermediate being at all; only the eyes of one in the heavenly destiny are capable of seeing an intermediate being. One asks: among the eyes of the various heavenly destinies, which is capable of seeing which? There are those who say: the eyes of the assembly of the Four Great Kings see the intermediate beings below their own place, excepting only intermediate beings of their own or a higher place, and so on, up through: the eyes of those in the Heaven of Making Use of Others' Emanations see the intermediate beings below their own place, excepting only intermediate beings of their own or a higher place; the eyes of those in the first dhyāna see the intermediate beings below their own place, excepting only intermediate beings of their own or a higher place, and so on, up through: the eyes of those in the fourth dhyāna see the intermediate beings below their own place, excepting only intermediate beings of their own or a higher place. Others, further, say: the eyes of the desire-realm gods cannot see an intermediate being at all; the eyes of the form-realm gods are capable of seeing an intermediate being, though only below their own place, never at their own or a higher place. Were this position held, it would mean that no birth-attained eye whatsoever is capable of seeing the intermediate state of the fourth dhyāna.

One should instead say as follows: no birth-attained eye possessed by anyone abiding in a death-existence, in any case whatsoever, is capable of seeing an intermediate being's own body; only the most utterly pure divine eye attained through cultivation is capable of seeing an intermediate being. One asks: how is this known to be so? The answer: because scripture states it — as the scripture states, whether a man or a woman, complete in pure moral discipline, cultivating every wholesome dharma, upon his or her own death attains a mind-made body resembling the light of white silk, or resembling a bright night, visible only to the most utterly pure divine eye; whether a man or a woman, having broken pure moral discipline, committing every evil dharma, upon his or her own death attains a mind-made body resembling the light of a black ram, or resembling a dark night, visible only to the most utterly pure divine eye. By this it is thereby known that no birth-attained eye possessed by anyone abiding in a death-existence is capable of seeing an intermediate being's own body at all.

The Vinaya states: Devadatta and King Virūḍhaka, together with certain other evildoers, were, in this very body, swallowed into the great hell of unrelenting torment, there to suffer every torment. One asks: did these beings, too, receive an intermediate body? The answer: they did indeed receive an intermediate body, but, since this occurred with such swiftness that it could scarcely be perceived at all, it is spoken of in this way — that is, at the very first thought-moment, the death-existence's own aggregates cease and the intermediate state's own aggregates arise, and, at the very next thought-moment thereafter, the intermediate state's own aggregates cease and the rebirth-existence's own aggregates arise, and it is owing to this very swiftness that it could scarcely be perceived at all. There are those who say: these beings, having committed the gravest evil deeds against the Buddha and the rest, at the very moment of their own death, had bodies of such extreme heaviness that the great earth itself could no longer bear them, and, exactly as sand poured with oil, they sank down at once —

and, once having sunk into the earth, they thereupon died, receiving an intermediate body and afterward being reborn in hell. It is for this reason that they are spoken of as having, in this very body, been swallowed into the great hell of unrelenting torment, this description being given with reference to the very moment of their initial sinking. Other masters say: their own karma being so exceedingly forceful, before their own death had even occurred,

the flames of unrelenting hell itself leapt upward, bound their bodies fast, and dragged them down into hell — and it was only midway along this very path that they finally died, receiving an intermediate body, and only upon arriving in hell did they relinquish that intermediate body and thereby come to be reborn there. This description is given with reference to the very moment of their initial departure, and this too carries no contradiction with reason.

As the scripture states: at that time, Śakra, Lord of the Gods, spoke this very verse before the Buddha:

'Great sage, you should know — I, right here upon this very seat, have regained my heavenly lifespan once again; I pray only that you, World-Honored One, bear this in mind.' One asks: did Śakra, at that time, genuinely die and undergo rebirth, or not? Whichever position is granted, what fault follows? Both alternatives carry a fault. For what reason is this so? If he did die and undergo rebirth, he ought then to have received an intermediate body — how, then, could the whole assembly, at that very time, still continuously behold his own body throughout? And if he did not die and undergo rebirth, how could he speak of having regained his heavenly lifespan at all? The answer: one should say as follows — he did not, in fact, die and undergo rebirth at all. One asks: granting this, it soundly reconciles the objection just raised — but how, then, is what the verse itself states to be reconciled? The answer: this is stated with reference to his having been freed from an evil destiny — that is, the Buddha, for his sake, briefly expounded the essentials of the dharma, and he, thereupon beholding the truth, attained the fruit of stream-entry, becoming forever liberated from every evil destiny, thereafter to be reborn among humans or gods entirely as he pleased — and it is for this reason that, before the Buddha, overjoyed and exultant, he uttered words of affectionate gratitude and spoke this very verse, exactly as a person, freed by another from confinement in prison, delighting and reveling entirely as he pleases, returns to that very person and says: it is by your own kindness that I have regained my very life. Śakra's own case is exactly the same, and so this raises no contradiction at all. Further, this is stated with reference to his having become free of the very sickness of affliction abandoned by the path of seeing — that is, the Buddha, for his sake, briefly expounded the essentials of the dharma, causing him to cut off every sickness of affliction abandoned by the path of seeing, and to abide securely within the very first, sickness-free noble path and its own fruit — and it is for this reason that, before the Buddha, overjoyed and exultant, he spoke this very verse, exactly as a person, having encountered a physician and been cured of a grave illness, freely partaking of food and drink entirely as he pleases, returns to that very physician and says:

it is by your own kindness that I have regained my very life and body. Śakra's own case is exactly the same, and so this raises no contradiction at all. Further, this is stated with reference to his having attained the very lifespan of the four bases of supernormal power — that is, as the scripture states, monks, you should know: what is meant by lifespan? It is precisely the four bases of supernormal power. The World-Honored One, for his sake, briefly expounded the essentials of the dharma, causing him, without even rising from his own seat, to attain the four bases of supernormal power — and it is for this reason that, before the Buddha, overjoyed and exultant,

he uttered words of affectionate gratitude and spoke this very verse. Further, this is stated with reference to his having attained the very faculty of the life of wisdom, and it is for this reason that he spoke as he did — as the scripture states,

among every faculty of life, the life of wisdom is the most excellent of all — that is, the Buddha, for his sake, briefly expounded the essentials of the dharma, causing him to attain this very life of wisdom, and it is for this reason that, before the Buddha, overjoyed and exultant, he uttered words of affectionate gratitude and spoke this very verse. One asks: could it be that Śakra, Lord of the Gods, previously possessed no faculty of wisdom at all, and only now, upon hearing the dharma, came to attain it for the very first time? The answer: although he did indeed previously possess wisdom, it was still contaminated wisdom; only now did he attain undefiled wisdom, and it is for this reason that he spoke as he did. Further, this is stated with reference to his having become free of the five kinds of decaying sign, and it is for this reason that he spoke as he did — that is, among the gods, at the very stage of approaching death, there first appear two sets of five decaying signs, one lesser, the other greater.

What, then, are named the five lesser decaying signs? First, whenever the gods come and go, moving about, the very ornaments upon their bodies emit the five kinds of musical sound, surpassing even the finest human musician's own skill — but, at the stage of approaching death, this sound no longer arises; there are those who say that, instead, an unpleasant sound emerges in its place. Second, the gods' own bodily radiance shines forth resplendently, day and night without cease, their bodies casting no shadow at all — but, at the moment of approaching death, this bodily radiance grows faint and dim; there are those who say that it vanishes entirely, and a shadow then appears in its place. Third, the gods' own skin and flesh are so smooth and fine that, bathing in a fragrant pool, the very moment they emerge from the water, no water clings to their bodies at all, exactly like a lotus leaf —

but, at the stage of approaching death, water then clings to their bodies. Fourth, the gods' own every sensory object is, without exception, of the most exquisite and marvelous kind, and their own faculties drift and flit among them, exactly like a whirling wheel of fire, never able to remain still for even a moment — but, at the stage of approaching death, they fixate exclusively upon a single object, for a long span of time, unable to release it at all. Fifth, the gods' own bodily strength is so vigorous and strong that their own eyes never once blink — but, at the moment of approaching death, their own bodily strength becomes feeble and weak, and their own eyes then blink repeatedly. What, then, are named the five greater decaying signs?

First, their own clothing, previously pure, now becomes soiled. Second, their own flower crown, previously flourishing, now withers. Third, both their own armpits suddenly begin to sweat. Fourth, their own body suddenly gives off a foul odor. Fifth, they no longer delight in remaining seated upon their own original seat. Once the first five decaying signs have appeared, the outcome can still be altered; but once the latter five decaying signs have appeared, the outcome can no longer be altered at all. At that time, Śakra, Lord of the Gods, had already had all five kinds of lesser decaying sign appear before him, the greater decaying signs soon destined to appear as well,

and, his own mind giving rise to dread and terror, he thought to himself: who is capable of rescuing me from a decaying calamity such as this — to whom shall I turn, that I might be freed from this coming disaster? Having thought this, he then came to understand of his own accord that, apart from the Buddha, the World-Honored One, no one else was capable of rescuing and protecting him, and he thereupon went at once to where the Buddha was, imploring him, in sorrow, to grant him rescue. The Buddha expounded the dharma for his sake, and he thereby came to behold the truth, causing every one of his own decaying signs to vanish all at once — and it is for this reason that, before the Buddha, overjoyed and exultant, he uttered words of affectionate gratitude and spoke this very verse. As for those who wish to hold that karma ripening in this very life is capable of drawing forth a new common class of being, they say as follows: Śakra, right there upon the very seat where he was hearing the dharma,

drew forth anew the eight faculties, beginning with the life-faculty. As for those who wish to hold that karma ripening in this very life is incapable of drawing forth a new common class of being, they say as follows: Śakra, right there upon the very seat where he was hearing the dharma, simply had his five decaying signs removed, his bodily state returning to what it had been before — and it is by this very principle that there was, in fact, no death and rebirth at all. Other masters say: Śakra, Lord of the Gods, at that time, did indeed genuinely die and undergo rebirth. One asks: granting this, it soundly reconciles the objection previously raised concerning what the verse itself states — but how, then, is the earlier objection to be reconciled? That is, were there genuinely death and rebirth, he ought to have received an intermediate body — how, then, could the whole assembly, at that very time, still continuously behold his own body throughout, with no apparent interruption at all? The answer: every god's own death-existence and intermediate state are, in every case, apparitionally born, and, since an apparitionally born being, upon death, leaves behind no bodily remainder whatsoever, and since the intermediate state itself passes with such swiftness, it is for this reason that the assembly did not perceive any interruption at all in Śakra's own body.

One asks: the Prajñaptiśāstra states that, at the very moment of a god's own birth, his bodily size is that of a child of about five years, apparitionally born, all at once, upon the very lap of some other god — and that other god thereupon supposes this newborn to be his own son or daughter, while this newly born god likewise says that this other god is his own father or mother. Given that his own bodily size is, at that time, so small, how could the whole assembly still behold him as being of his own original, full size throughout? The answer: although he is indeed small at the moment of his own birth, he grows large again immediately afterward, and, the interval being so swift, the assembly simply fails to perceive it. Others, further, say: although the assembly does indeed perceive it, they think to themselves as follows: this Śakra, Lord of the Gods, possesses sovereign mastery over his own supernormal power, and, before the World-Honored One, manifests this very transformation of his own accord,

becoming now larger, now smaller, and this is not to be reckoned any genuine death and rebirth at all. Other masters say: it is not the case that every god, at the very moment of his own birth, has a bodily size that is small, as with Śakra and the like — a god of great majesty and virtue, at the very moment of his own birth, and likewise at the stage of the intermediate state, is, in every case, of the very same size he possessed in the very prime of his own death-existence, and it is for this reason that, although he does indeed die and undergo rebirth, the assembly simply fails to perceive it. Of these two positions, the position stated first is the sound one. As for a scripture speaking of dying and undergoing rebirth, this is spoken with reference to a genuine change in body and mind, as the Prajñaptiśāstra states: at the very beginning of the aeon, there were humans who suddenly began to move about upon their bellies, their own bodily form having changed, and were together called serpents; there were others, further, who suddenly grew a third tusk, their own bodily form having changed, and were together called elephants. One asks: is there death and rebirth involved in such a transformation as this, or not? Whichever position is granted, what fault follows? Both alternatives carry a fault. For what reason is this so? If there is death and rebirth, how could the whole assembly of people fail to perceive any interruption at all? And, if there is no death and rebirth, how could a being of the human destiny simply become, outright, an animal? The answer: one should say as follows — there is, in fact, no death and rebirth involved at all. One asks: granting this, it soundly reconciles the objection just raised — but how, then, could a being of the human destiny simply become, outright, an animal? The answer: it is not that a being of the human destiny is thereby transformed, outright, into an animal — it is merely that his own bodily form differs, before and after, from what it once was; and there are those who say, concerning this, that he remains, throughout, a human being, yet, owing to the rise and decline of his own former karma being unfixed, his own superior meritorious karma at first produces a human form,

while, later, as his own consumption of evil food and his own flattering deceit increase, his own human form and characteristics vanish, and he transforms into an animal instead — exactly as a certain person, bewitched by another's own incantation, comes to resemble a donkey and the like, while genuinely remaining, throughout, a human being. Others, further, say: such a being is, in truth, an animal — having only just died from the Realm of Pure Radiance and Light, and, riding upon some former evil karma, receiving rebirth in the destiny of an animal, the residual force of his own prior merit causing him, at first, to resemble a human, while, later, as his own consumption of evil food and his own flattering deceit increase, his own human form and characteristics vanish, and he reverts to an animal's own form once again — exactly as a frog's own body transforms, before and after: at first it is named a tadpole, its own form black and round; afterward it is named a frog, its own form square and mottled — and yet, before and after alike, it remains, throughout, an animal. It should be understood that this transformation of humans at the beginning of the aeon is exactly the same. Other masters say: such a being does indeed involve death and rebirth. One asks: granting this, it soundly reconciles the objection raised afterward — but how, then, is the objection raised before it to be reconciled? That is, were there genuinely death and rebirth, he ought to have received an intermediate body — how, then, could the whole assembly of people fail to perceive any interruption at all? The answer: at the very beginning of the aeon, every human's own death-existence and intermediate state were, in every case, apparitionally born, and, since an apparitionally born being, upon death, leaves behind no bodily remainder whatsoever, and since the intermediate state itself passes with such swiftness, people simply did not perceive that the very body such a being had received involved any interruption at all. Of these two positions, the position stated first is the sound one, since those who genuinely undergo death and rebirth, for the most part, forget everything of their own former life — and, since such a being still remembers everything of his own former life, this cannot, therefore, be a genuine case of death and rebirth at all.