English
Thinking, it is said that "the object of focus is itself." If it is said to be permanent, then the object of focus should also exist when it is not the object of focus, which is to explain "at all times." The reason is the attachment to self and what belongs to self. The reason for the explanation is to be able to control. The so-called "non-producer" means that there is no object of following and reversing. It is also not a blessing. In order to explain this measure of no object, it is said that "the one blessed by me." In order to explain that this "non-self" is also the same, it is said that "whatever is." Someone says that the super-sensory will bless, saying "if not blessed." If impermanent beings bless, then others are unreasonable, so it is explained that with an impermanent mind, it is thought that blessings are obtained, saying "no, with an impermanent mind." If it is also a result arising from the habits of experience, then why does this not depend on others? Thinking that there is no function of the super-sensory, etc., therefore denying the super-sensory is not, but it is explained that for this cause itself, the result arising merely from seeing is pervasive, which is contradictory, saying "because there is no production of fruit." It does not arise merely from that, because the other cause itself is pervasive, and this also produces contradiction, and even if it exists, if there is no pervasive function, then how can there be pervasive ability? The difference in possibility is the difference in habits. The so-called "by what is it without that" is because there is no pervasive function. Even if there is no pervasive function, if pervasion is possible, then it is explained that for all causes, only this is non-existent, saying "only without following." Thinking that because there is no pervasion for the object, therefore there is no pervasion for that, so there is no pervasive function, saying "although the permanent is not pervasive." It means that the permanent itself is the only nature of the producer. Therefore, how can the momentary be the producer of all?