Theoretical Realization and Practical Realization
Chapter 7: Characteristics and Pitfalls of Intellectual Understanding
1. When severing the view of self (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) or realizing the mind (明心, ming xin), if there are no changes in body and mind, the world, or one's experience both at that moment and afterwards, then it is merely an intellectual understanding (解悟, jiewu) of severing the view of self and realizing the mind. The manas (意根, yigen) does not affirm it, so it is not actual realization (证悟, zhengwu). If the manas is not enlightened, it cannot eradicate beginningless ignorance (无始无明, wushi wuming), cannot give rise to wisdom, and thus wisdom cannot be liberated. It cannot eliminate afflictions (烦恼, fannao) and habitual tendencies (习气, xiqi), cannot sever the clinging to self (人我执, renwozhi) and clinging to dharmas (法我执, fawozhi), and certainly cannot transform consciousness into wisdom (转识成智, zhuanshi chengzhi). It cannot eliminate defiled karmic seeds (染污业种, ranwu yezhong), forever preventing purity, and thus one can never attain Buddhahood.
Realizing the mind, on one hand, is the enlightenment of the conscious mind (意识心, yishi xin). This enlightenment is not merely intellectual; it is reasoned, evidential, and conclusive. This is the state of direct perception (现量境界, xianliang jingjie). When this happens, the manas simultaneously attains realization. When the manas affirms the state of direct perception and simultaneously realizes it, it knows that the five aggregates (五蕴, wuyun) originally belong to the Tathagatagarbha (如来藏, Rulaizang) and are not one's own. Consequently, it relaxes its grasp on the five aggregates and ceases to control the body. Instantly, the body experiences lightness, ease, and comfort (轻安, qing'an), and the mind becomes exceptionally clear and bright. At that moment, changes occur in body and mind, distinct from before. The better the meditative concentration (定力, dingli), the greater the changes; the lighter the afflictions, the more profound the experiential feeling (觉受, jue shou). However, these experiences of body, mind, and language cannot be fully described.
If it is merely the conscious mind's intellectual understanding, lacking sufficient evidence, filled with speculation and imagination, and not a state of direct perception, it cannot convince the manas. The manas then does not know that the five aggregates belong to the Tathagatagarbha and does not know that the five aggregates are not its own. Consequently, it continues to grasp and control the five aggregates as its own, resulting in no transformation of the body or mind, no spiritual tremor, and no difference from before. This is the state of intellectual understanding. During intellectual understanding, the manas still clings to the body and the perceiving mind (觉知心, juezhi xin). The body does not change, the perceiving mind does not change, afflictions persist as before, the mind cannot become pure, ignorance remains uneradicated, and confusion and inversion continue.
2. Changes in the five aggregates are controlled and determined by the manas. During genuine severing of the view of self and realization of the mind, the manas comprehends the principle, ceases to control the body, knowing the body is not its own, and the body thus exhibits a response of liberation. The manas also ceases to control the perceiving mind, knowing it is not its own, and the perceiving mind feels as if relieved of a heavy burden, giving rise to various extraordinary states. Sleep is controlled by the manas, so sleep also changes thereafter. Afflictions are initiated by the manas, so at this point afflictions become lighter. There are also many wondrous states, though they cannot be disclosed one by one.
Direct observation is far more convincing than theory. Those capable of direct observation possess both meditative concentration and wisdom. Theory, however, may not be correct, and even if correct, may be irrelevant to oneself. Direct observation, affirmed by the manas, can transform body, mind, and the world, enabling one to attain the merit and benefit (功德受用, gongde shouyong) of liberation of body and mind. Once the manas affirms it, those useless theories become unnecessary. Our study of the Dharma should not only involve learning theory but also actual observation, direct observation, personally verifying the correctness of the theory. Then the theory becomes our own state of direct perception, the mind constantly resonates with the theory, principle and phenomena are unimpeded (理事无碍, lishi wu'ai), and in the future, all phenomena will be unimpeded (事事无碍, shishi wu'ai), which is great liberation. Mere theoretical knowledge cannot liberate us; please remember this point.
3. Knowing is Easy, Doing is Hard: The Result of Intellectual Understanding
"Knowing is easy, doing is hard" – the key is where this "knowing" is established and which consciousness knows it. If it is only established in the conscious mind, then "doing" is out of the question; it's merely talk, incapable of action, lacking mastery. If the manas does not know, it cannot dispel the inner darkness of ignorance and cannot take corresponding action; thus, "doing" becomes extremely difficult.
If the conscious mind knows the selflessness of the five aggregates (五阴无我, wuyin wuwo) but lacks even a trace of the merit and benefit of liberation, then a Stream-enterer (初果人, chuguo ren) absolutely cannot be someone whose conscious mind merely knows the selflessness of the five aggregates. The manas must know it. Only then can severing the view of self have merit and benefit, enabling preliminary liberation and creating a clear demarcation from ordinary beings. If a Stream-enterer partially attains liberation (分证解脱, fenzheng jietuo), possessing a portion of the merit and benefit of liberation, the principle of the selflessness of the five aggregates must be realized by the manas. If it is only realized by the conscious mind, there will be no merit and benefit, because the manas has not partially attained liberation.
4. The State of Understanding Without Realization
Observer A's experience: Just now, I suddenly felt: no self-image, no image of anything at all; all states are like flowers in a mirror or the moon reflected in water – illusory and unreal. Only the true suchness mind-nature (真如心性, zhenru xinxing) is a mountain of treasures, capable of producing all dharmas, without form, unmoving, pure in nature, yet the mind does not crave, neither gains nor loses, nor possesses a self-image. (Although this is merely understood and felt, the mind has become a bit clearer.)
Analysis: Understanding has depth; feeling has depth; the degree of mental clarity has depth. What does depth mean? The depth of understanding refers to whether this recognition lies on the surface of consciousness or deep within the manas. The degree of depth involves both consciousness and manas, indicating the extent to which the manas resonates with the concepts recognized by consciousness, and also involves the degree of meditative concentration. The deeper the contemplative thinking (观行思惟, guanxing siwei), the deeper the concentration; the more the manas resonates with the cognition, the clearer the mind becomes.
Observer A's contemplative experience is still a superficial cognitive understanding of consciousness and a temporary, unstable feeling, easily and quickly lost, especially without sufficient meditative concentration or stability, making it difficult to maintain for long. This understanding and insight have not yet involved the manas; the manas has not realized this state and does not resonate with it. Principles and truths not realized by the manas evoke weak or no resonance at all.
Nevertheless, this is already good. Many people study Buddhism for a long time without any insight; their minds remain dull, lacking deep comprehension of the Dharma, making change difficult. If one can continue to practice and contemplate deeply, encouraging phenomena may arise. Taking this as a starting point, continuing contemplation will eventually lead to realizing the emptiness of the five-aggregate body, realizing selflessness, and realizing the illusoriness of all dharmas.
In daily life, everywhere is the object of our contemplation. As long as one applies the mind diligently, practice can yield achievement. All dharmas are readily available; we need only reach out to take them. However, to obtain them requires certain conditions: the degree of cultivation of the Six Perfections (菩萨六度, pusa liudu).
5. "If one sees all appearances as non-appearances, then one sees the Tathagata." If someone understands it this way – constantly and everywhere recognizing that everything they perceive (like the content displayed on a TV screen) is entirely the magical manifestation of the substance and function within the Tathagatagarbha (like the TV screen itself) – then has this person realized the Tathagatagarbha? Absolutely not; it is still far from it. Hearing and imagining are vastly distant from actual realization; the gap between them is the practice of the Six Perfections.
The above content is all the most superficial understanding of the conscious mind, akin to hearsay. It's merely heard from Buddhist scriptures or some book, not actually realized, not directly observed. No matter who says it, it belongs to understanding. When one truly realizes it, one wouldn't know what stage Bodhisattva they are. That content is spoken of in the sutras, others also speak of it; what others speak of does not belong to personal realization. Personal realization knows things very specifically and precisely, not vaguely, generally, or ambiguously. To realize what specific role the Tathagatagarbha plays in the five aggregates, one must engage in Chan meditation (参禅, canchan), exert actual effort to investigate; the process involves step-by-step exploration and inquiry. Without doing the work, relying on one's own feelings and guesses, understanding a little bit, one fundamentally does not know what specific role the Tathagatagarbha plays; it's all confusion. Thus, all ignorance remains, and no wisdom is born.
Believing all dharmas are like those on a TV screen is not equivalent to actual realization or personal verification; it's not called realization because there is no evidence. Believing all dharmas are created by the Tathagatagarbha, that we all live in the One True Dharma Realm (一真法界, yizhen fajie) – this is not called enlightenment. If the Buddha's words could make sentient beings enlightened so easily, the Dharma would be too simple. A three-year-old hearing this sentence could roughly understand a little and be considered enlightened; then becoming a Buddha would be incredibly easy. Immeasurable kalpas upon immeasurable kalpas of karmic obstacles would fundamentally obstruct nothing; so much ignorance would count for nothing. In reality, such an easy thing does not exist.
Without engaging in Chan investigation, without investigation and evidence gathering, without collecting data and evidence, how can the manas confirm these statements as truth and accept them? Genuine realization requires knowing the detailed workings of the eighth consciousness (第八识, diba shi), specifically how it gives birth to all dharmas, how it gives birth to sentient beings' five aggregates and eighteen elements (五阴十八界, wuyin shiba jie). All this must be understood and known; the Six Perfections must be cultivated. It's not about understanding certain parts that the Buddha or others have spoken of; no matter how much one understands or elaborates, it is not personally investigated and realized through contemplation; there is no direct observation; the mind is unsettled, very insecure.
The distance between this understanding and realization might be one year, thirty years, one hundred years, ten thousand years, or an immeasurable kalpa – it's impossible to say. What the conscious mind understands is useless; it can vanish instantly. Even consciousness doesn't know or realize the details, let alone the manas – how could it know and realize? At critical moments, it is the manas that takes charge. If the manas has not confirmed it, ignorance remains. All the conscious mind's understanding at the time of death is like child's play, vanishing like a bubble, unable to determine the destination of the next life.
Often ask yourself "why" inwardly; answer all the "whys." Perhaps this can touch the edge of realization, but it still may not be realization. The Dharma is thus sacred and cannot be speculated upon.
6. The Pitfalls of Intellectual Understanding
Q: Why is it said that if Buddhist study and practice are all intellectual understanding, the true Dharma will gradually disappear and perish? The vast majority of us can't even touch the edge of intellectual understanding. Isn't intellectually understanding the Dharma also quite good?
A: Let me give an example. Suppose everyone buys a book to learn driving techniques, or listens to someone explain driving techniques in person. Everyone learns the technical knowledge and feels they can drive. Yet they have never personally driven a car, never touched a steering wheel. Then these people write books and teach others to learn driving techniques. In that case, what will driving techniques become later on? Will this technique still have practical operational value? Then will anyone still drive in the future? Will there still be people who can drive? After this, won't driving techniques be lost, becoming a mere armchair strategist's game?
The Dharma is the same. If everyone engages in intellectual understanding without actual realization, passing it on one by one, eventually even those who intellectually understand will cease to exist, even the intellectually understood Dharma will become distorted, and the true Dharma will be lost. This is a situation the Buddha cannot bear to see; as true disciples of the Buddha, we would also be deeply saddened by this.
Insightful understanding (领悟理解, lingwu lijie) and intellectual understanding (解悟, jiewu) are fundamentally different. Intellectual understanding is similar to guessing the general functioning of the Tathagatagarbha; it is not directly observed, not as clear as seeing something before one's eyes. What is guessed, the manas still does not comprehend; the mind is unsettled, insecure, easily swayed. Thus, one cannot observe the specific workings of the Tathagatagarbha and cannot give rise to true great wisdom. General understanding and insight involve relatively good learning and mastery of knowledge but have not yet entered the stage of actual contemplation and investigation; they have no experiential knowledge of the Tathagatagarbha's operation. They are still far from the degree of intellectual understanding, let alone the gap to actual realization.
7. What are Direct Perception (现量, xianliang), Inference (比量, biliang), and Non-Valid Cognition (非量, feiliang)?
Direct perception is the ability to presently observe and contemplate dharmas, seeing the true appearance of dharmas, confirming their current state without distorting the true reality. If one cannot see the present state of dharmas as they truly are, cannot observe the true appearance of dharmas accurately, one resorts to other methods, such as comparison with reference points – this is inference. It might yield a correct result, or it might not. For inference to be correct, there is a prerequisite: the dharmas used as references must be accurate and error-free. Then the inferred result can have higher accuracy. Because there are ready-made references, it doesn't require overly detailed thinking; not much wisdom is needed, nor deep meditative concentration. One can even infer a result without meditative concentration, but its accuracy is uncertain.
If the wisdom of direct perception is insufficient, one can adopt another method: imagination, fantasy, and conjecture. One can follow a certain line of thought or logic, or one can indulge in pure fancy without method or logic – this is non-valid cognition. Non-valid cognition is thinking without evidence, involving much baseless imagination, undertaken only when one lacks the ability to collect and grasp evidence. Thus, non-valid cognition requires even shallower wisdom and no need for meditative concentration. This shows that direct perception requires considerable meditative concentration and wisdom; its wisdom is very precious and trustworthy. The realization of the Dharma relies on the wisdom of direct perception.
In non-valid cognition, due to the lack of evidence, relying entirely on the imagination of consciousness, it's like a kite in the sky – perhaps with a string, perhaps without. In this process, the manas cannot exert force; the wisdom of the manas cannot fly wildly like consciousness, cannot imagine or conjecture. Whatever consciousness thinks is what it is; the manas cannot confirm it. Therefore, realization is impossible, though coincidence or luck are not ruled out. Thus, the wisdom of the manas does not increase; only the wisdom of consciousness increases. When encountering dissimilar problems, one cannot extrapolate; consciousness has to engage in non-valid cognition again, indicating its wisdom growth is very limited.
In inference, comparing two principles relies mainly on the deductive and analogical function of consciousness; the wisdom of the manas cannot exert much force. The manas can only watch from the sidelines; its result cannot be truly confirmed by the manas. Although correct inference is not ruled out, it cannot resolve the manas's doubts; the wisdom of the manas does not increase, only the wisdom of consciousness increases.
For example, consider a towering tree. To obtain its height, there are three approaches: direct perception, inference, and non-valid cognition. Using non-valid cognition means baseless thinking, imagination, and guessing. Having no experience with tree height, not knowing how to compare, let alone observe directly – the result is predictable; one probably cannot even confirm it oneself, let alone for others. Using inference means comparing it to a nearby utility pole, a tall building, or a mountain, then deriving an approximate value. The result is half-affirmed and half-denied in the mind; superficially one might appear confident, but if someone insists on verification or presents more precise evidence to refute it, one loses confidence. Of course, if others agree with the result, it might add some confidence.
Besides these, there is another approach and method: direct observation. But this is very difficult; it requires a lot of evidence and data, rich experience, sharp and accurate observation, meticulous thought, and precise data. Having rich experience and a large amount of accurate, error-free data requires hard work, a considerable period of exploration – its hardship is beyond ordinary people, its meditative concentration during observation is beyond ordinary people, thus the resulting wisdom is also beyond ordinary people. Such people are extremely rare in the Saha world, especially in the Dharma-Ending Age; not one in ten thousand, not one in ten million.
During the process of exploring and collecting data, the manas is always watching, slowly being influenced. When consciousness finally draws a conclusion, it is very convincing. The manas, after its own consideration, will confirm it because it is reasoned and evidenced. Since the manas has shallow wisdom and lacks analytical ability, it trusts what has ample evidence, trusts the state of direct perception. Actually, this result is also drawn by the manas itself; all the data are laid out, very real; the manas itself will engage in consideration and produce a conclusion. Only a conclusion drawn by oneself can be believed without doubt; of course, one trusts one's own conclusion the most. No matter what others say, one can resolutely accept it without room for negotiation, and it's not easy to discard one's own conclusion.
Because direct observation is so arduous and difficult, those pursuing short-term effects and afraid of hardship are unwilling to engage in long-term, laborious exploration. Those with short practice time lack sufficient meditative concentration and wisdom and cannot accumulate enough experience to correspond to direct observation. Therefore, many people prefer inference and non-valid cognition, liking conjecture and comparison, because these methods are less laborious, don't take much time, and don't require much meditative concentration or wisdom to produce a final result. This is so easy; these people only want the result, not the process in between.
Yet precisely the process in between is crucial. This is the process of refining evidence, influencing the manas, subduing various afflictions of the mind, and the process of quantitative change leading to qualitative change. Without this process, there is no qualitative change; the afflictions of one's own mind can never be subdued or changed. Therefore, some people everywhere seek results, attempting to gain the fruit without going through the arduous process of investigation. This fruit is not their own; they cannot enjoy it; they remain poor. If they falsely claim to be Dharma Kings, they will only incur retribution; the consequences are dreadful.
At this point, some may ask: You've talked for so long without clearly explaining what direct observation is. But I tell you, what others call direct observation, once you know it, becomes inference; it is no longer direct perception. True direct perception requires personal observation and verification. Therefore, results obtained by inquiry or guessing are very unreliable. Even results inquired from direct observers do not belong to oneself. If results are inquired from inferential thinkers, they belong even less to oneself and are even more unreliable. Further spreading and inquiring about results makes them even more illusory, and the outcome is dreadful. Here, I solemnly warn those unwilling to exert hard effort: Only through personal investigation can one personally attain the fruit and freely use it. Otherwise, it is bitter fruit, and this bitter fruit must be personally endured alone – the karmic retribution is real.
8. Inference, No Matter How Correct, Is Not the Realization of Direct Perception
Those with insufficient meditative concentration and wisdom resort to inference and research methods in practice. Those with strong meditative concentration prefer investigation, persisting until they reach the Yellow River (never giving up). Greatly wise ones fully realize through direct perception. Especially the Buddha, the World-Honored One, with All-Knowing Wisdom (一切种智, yiqie zhongzhi), knows all dharmas through direct perception, without comparison, imagination, or conjecture; His speech is affirmative, without hesitation. Only those with insufficient meditative concentration, insufficient wisdom for contemplation, unable to investigate truly, use inferential reasoning, thinking this method can realize the Dharma. In reality, it is not realization; it resembles guessing. Of course, guessing is a function of consciousness, close to intellectual understanding. The understanding of consciousness is also important, but one must also cultivate meditative concentration well, engage in deep and subtle contemplation within concentration, after which direct realization may be possible.
If one remains only at the intellectual understanding of inference, there is no merit or benefit. When encountering all people, events, and principles, one needs consciousness to help again with inferential analysis and thinking; this is often hindsight. If the manas suddenly reacts incorrectly, it must be corrected again. Even if the inference is correct, the reasoning is correct, it is not direct perception, not actual realization. Actual realization is seen immediately; although not seen with the eyes, the "seeing" of consciousness is immediate, without reasoning or comparison. This is the meaning of direct perception.
Consciousness-wise people can all engage in logical thinking and reasoning, but this cannot replace actual realization. The suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and selflessness of the five aggregates and eighteen elements must be perceived immediately, cannot be compared or reasoned; comparison and reasoning are a step slower, relying on the forced infusion and restraint of consciousness to make it so. Once the function of consciousness weakens or consciousness disappears, the restraining effect is gone, and one cannot know the suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and selflessness of the five aggregates and eighteen elements. Thus, there is no merit and benefit of liberation; the intermediate state (中阴身, zhongyinshen) cannot draw strength, and future lives will have no merit and benefit.
Similarly, in the Mahayana Dharma, the operation of the Tathagatagarbha must be observable immediately, cannot be compared, cannot be logically reasoned; one knows when one knows, cannot presently use consciousness to consider and analyze – this is not direct perception. Only dharmas known immediately are actual realization; only then can there be effect, resonance, benefit, and the merit and benefit of liberation. For dharmas known immediately, the manas necessarily knows them; no prompting by consciousness is needed. What the manas does not know requires consciousness to logically reason, analyze, compare, and guess.
The realization of the manas is similar to intuitive experience. Without meditative concentration, there is no intuitive experience, even though there may be brief concentration during fright. The Seven Factors of Enlightenment (七觉分, qijuefen) are the necessary path to realizing the Dharma. Among them, the enlightenment factor of joy (喜觉分, xijuefen), the enlightenment factor of tranquility (猗觉分, yijuefen), and the enlightenment factor of concentration (定觉分, dingjuefen) gradually arise during actual practice; all are related to meditative concentration and are sequential stages of concentration. Without this process, do not speak of realization. Trust the Buddha's words; trust the Buddha's speech is not wrong. The discriminating thinking of consciousness can lead to the intuitive experience of the manas; its merit is also great. In the process of practice, both cognitive faculties (觉知性, juezhi xing) are indispensable and very important.
However, if without meditative concentration the function of consciousness is overly strong, it will overshadow and block the considering nature of the manas. Thus, intellectual understanding becomes easy, but actual realization becomes extremely difficult. Therefore, past Chan Patriarchs opposed excessive activity of consciousness and also opposed sitting rigidly in concentration without engaging in contemplative thinking. The function of consciousness being just right is difficult. For example, fixed work done by two people: if A does more, B does less – the principle is the same. If consciousness is strong, one can rely on it while alive. But once the activity of consciousness weakens or consciousness ceases, the manas has nothing to rely on; then it relies entirely on the manas. Everyone, think: At the time of death and in future lives, if the manas has not become strong, what would that be like? The purpose and result of consciousness being strong should be to make the manas strong. If the manas is not strong, what about the future? If the manas is weak, we are weak. Once the manas becomes very strong, it can function even without consciousness, for example, the mutual functioning and interpenetration of the six sense faculties (六根互用, liugen huyong; 六根互通, liugen hutong).
9. Realization of the Dharma Must Rely on Direct Observation
The realization of the Dharma does not rely on inference but on direct observation. It does not rely on reasoning, speculation, deduction, or research but on contemplation and investigation within meditative concentration. Only then is the conclusion direct perception, reliable, enabling the discovery of truth, realization of truth, thereby gaining true benefit, eliminating doubt, and generating faith.
So-called inference is similar to guessing. Guessing correctly doesn't happen often; the accuracy rate is not high. Even if guessed correctly, it is not equivalent to direct observation. For example, seeing smoke rising behind a mountain, one infers, speculates, deduces that there must be a fire on the other side. Actually, it might not be a fire; it might be damp grass being smoked, etc., not necessarily flames. Another example: seeing a woman pregnant, one infers she must have engaged in sexual desire. Actually, people with high meditative concentration can enter the womb without sexual desire; the Fifth Patriarch's (五祖, Wuzu) birth was like this, and some highly concentrated Chan masters in the Tang and Song dynasties were also born this way.
There are many more examples showing that inference is not equal to direct perception. Inference relies entirely on the understanding, analogy, reasoning, and speculation of consciousness. As long as consciousness is a bit clever, it can be done; it's not difficult. There are many clever people in the world; the difficulty lies in direct observation. This is why countless people practice seeking liberation, yet those truly liberated are as rare as phoenix feathers and unicorn horns. True sages are always, forever, an extreme minority; sages and ordinary beings are not proportional.
Conclusions reached by speculation and reasoning are not equivalent to actual realization. Even if the deduction is correct and happens to match the facts, it cannot eliminate doubt; there is no merit and benefit of liberation. For example, ordinary sentient beings all consider their own five aggregates and eighteen elements to be the real self. Superficially, every ordinary being seems to have no doubt, firmly believing it. But if sentient beings truly, genuinely, firmly believed this, then why, when the Buddha expounded the selflessness of the five aggregates, did some sentient beings become doubtful and go on to cultivate concentration, contemplate, and investigate the truths of the Four Noble Truths, finally eliminating doubt and proving their previous understanding was wrong? Evidently, the so-called firm belief of sentient beings is also unreliable; otherwise, how would the Buddha liberate sentient beings? Similarly, many people's conscious reasoning, deduction, and research do not eliminate doubt in their minds; sooner or later they will overturn their deduced conclusions for true, actual realization.
Another example: Scientists, through various scientific methods, reach a conclusion. Even if everyone agrees with this conclusion, it is not necessarily factual, not necessarily true. Otherwise, later scientists wouldn't use more modern technological means to overturn the conclusions of previous scientists. If scientists' deductions and research were all correct and accurate, conforming to facts, then scientists should be like the Buddha, possessing great wisdom, able to fully explore the truth of the universe, knowing the essence of worldly dharmas, their conclusions not contradicting the Buddha's holy teachings; they would all become sages within the Buddha Dharma, teachers of sentient beings. The fact is not so; they all have deep ignorance, are still complete ordinary beings, and do not know the reality of the Dharma Realm.
This shows that methods like reasoning, deduction, research, etc. – inference – cannot be used in Buddhist practice; they cannot be regarded as means to realize the Dharma. Results deduced, even if one strongly believes in them, are not true belief; the manas has unresolved doubts, unknown even to oneself. At life's end, it will become clear. Then, is it still possible to turn back?
