Beezone


 


The Bardo Thodol was originally
written in the Tibetan language and is widely known by its
Western title as The Tibetan Book of the Dead, which was
coined by Dr. Walter Y. Evans-Wentz. Bardo Thodol means,
“liberation by hearing on the after death plane.” The
word bardo means “after death state” and thodol
means “liberation by hearing.”

 

The journey through the afterlife is
said to involve three stages:

The Chikhai Bardo or “the
experience of the primordial or primary clear
light
.”

The Chonyid Bardo or “the
experience of the peaceful and wrathful
deities.”

The Sidpa Bardo or “the bardo
of rebirth.”

 

Trungpa:

Y E S T E R D A Y W E DISCUSSED the world of the gods and
the particular point of eternity-involvement with eternity.
That whole idea comes from an approach to spiritual practice
which is based on the principles of ego. In such a spiritual
trip, you tend to reach a peak point in which you do not
know whether you are following a spiritual path or whether,
you are going completely mad, freaking out. That is the
point of the bardo of meditation, or samten bardo. You
worked so hard to get something-eternal promise, eternal
blessing-and you begin to feel that you are achieving
something; but at the same time you are not quite certain
whether that achievement is imaginary, based on
self-deception. That doubt brings madness. Conviction is
part of the pattern which leads ‘you to the madness,
conviction based purely on relating with ego. Whenever we
talk about bardo principles, we can apply ,the same analogy
that I used yesterday: experiencing both hot and cold water
being poured on you simultaneously. That pattern, which is
pleasurable and at the same time extremely painful,
continues with all six types of bardo.

The second bardo is connected with the realm of the
jealous gods, the asuras. According to the teaching, it is
described as the bardo of birth_: or, in Tibetan, kye-ne
bardo. Kye means “birth,” and nye means “dwelling.” So
kye-ne bardo is the birth and dwelling aspect of bardo. This
experience of birth and dwelling is based on speed and on
our trust in speed. It is based on living and dwelling on
that particular state of being, which is our own individual
experience of speed, aggression, and that which brings
speed, the ambition to achieve something. In this case, the
bardo experience is not necessarily a meditative state of
spiritual practice, but it is an ordinary everyday life
situation. You put out a certain amount of speed constantly,
yet you are not quite certain whether you are getting
anything out of it or whether you are losing something.
There is a certain peak point of confusion or hesitation,
uncertainty. It is as if you are going too far. If you spin
really fast, faster and faster-if you spin fast enough-you
are not quite certain whether you’re spinning or not. You
are uncertain whether it is stillness or whether it is
absolute speed that drives you. Absolute speed seems to be
stillness.

This, again, is exactly the same point as in the bardo of
meditation: that uncertainty as to sanity or madness. You
see, we come to this same problem all the time-whenever we
have some peak experience of aggression, hatred, passion,
joy, pleasure, or insight. In whatever we experience,
there’s always some kind of uncertainty when we are just
about to reach the peak of the experience. And when we reach
the peak point, it is as though we were experiencing both
hot and cold water at the same time. There is that kind of
uncertainty between the fear df,freaking out and the
possibility of learning something or getting somewhere. I’m
sure a lot of us have experienced that; it is a very simple
and experiential thing. I would like you to have a clear
perception of the bardo experience, both theoretically and
experientially. Particularly those who feel they have
experienced so-called satori have felt this experience. We
are always uncertain whether we have actually achieved
something or whether we are just about to freak out. And
this very faint line between sanity and insanity is a very
profound teaching in regard to the experience of bardo and
Buddhist teachings in general.

According to history, at the very moment of
enlightenment, Buddha experienced hosts of maras both
attacking him with aggression and trying to seduce him with
beautiful girls. That is a peak point, or moment of bardo
experience. The point is that once we have achieved some
higher state, a so-called higher state or more profound
state of something, the negative aspect, or the mara aspect,
is also going to be thereequally, exactly the same. And they
both become more subtle. The subtleties of awakeness are
exactly the same as the subtleties of sleepiness or
confusion. Such subtleties continue all the time, side by
side. Therefore, samsara and nirvana are like two sides of a
coin. They occur together in one situation,
simultaneously.

Such bardo experiences happen all the time with us. We
don’t have to have a peak experience or a dramatic
experience-in ordinary everyday situations as well, we are
not quite certain whether we are learning something or
whether we are missing something. There is that particular
point of doubt. If you are more paranoid, you will think you
are missing something; if you are more confident, you will
think you are learning something. But there is also the
awareness of the learning and missing qualities occurring
simultaneously in experiences all the time. This experience
is very common and very obvious. In many cases, we don’t
have to ask any more questions: what is real, what is not
real; what is safe, what is not safe. But when we are just
about to approach safety, we are not quite certain whether
it is really true safety or not. There is some faint
suspicion of danger; at the same time we feel tremendous
safety. The more we feel tremendous safety, the more we feel
danger. That double take takes place all the time. It is a
kind of supposing, or looking back again. That is the basic
experiential factor connected with bardo.

 

Student: What’s a good attitude to take to that
ambiguity?

Trungpa Rinpoche: You see, at that point you can’t
control the situation-you are the situation. So it depends
on the technique or practice that you’ have already gained
experience in. It really depends on that. You can’t correct
or change course at all. In fact, the idea of a change of
course doesn t occur at that particular moment because you
are so much into it: you are the situation rather than the
situation being something external.

 

Student: Is there any difference between the feeling
of-confusion and the feeling of confidence?

Trungpa Rinpoche: It is the same thing. The same
experience happens at exactly the same level. Fundamentally,
at an experiential level, our perception is extremely
fantastic and possesses all sorts of attributes. It is
really fantastic to discover that perception has such a wide
range, as well as a narrow range and a penetrating range. It
has the capability of seeing a hundred things at the same
time. That is why things are referred to as wisdom and
things are referred to as confusion.

That’s a very important point. It is really the key point
when we talk about madness and about sanity. It is extremely
important. Everybody should know that that is one point,
rather than that you belong to either ‘Of those groups. You
don’t have to belong in order to become mad or in order to
become wise or liberated. You don’t have to associate
yourself with either the good or the bad, but you become the
one. And that one possesses both good and bad
simultaneously,, That’s a very important point in terms of
experience. It is extremely necessary to know that.

S: Whenever that happens, I feel there’s something wrong.
Doubt always occurs-always, always, always.

TR: Yes. It occurs always.

S: So there’s no point expecting it to diminish?

TR: No. You don’t have to make the distinction as to
whether you belong to that group or to this group, but you
see the situation as it is-that’s the important point. You
can’t change that particular situation at all. You can only
divert it through some kind of chain reaction process: you
can impose your experience prior to that by becoming
familiar,with sanity or, equally, by becoming familiar with
madness or insanity. Either way is safe and instructive, and
either of them could be said to be insight. And, then
one-pointedness switches you into the awake or,
enlightened

state automatically.

S: Is that awake state free of doubt or uncertainty?

TR: Yes, of course. The reason it is free of doubt is
that there’s so much reinforcement from what you have
already worked with before that experience. You are quite
familiar with what you’ve gone through. But I would like to
say something else on this particular point. That is, when
we talk about self-awareness, self-consciousness,
self-observingoften that self-observing awareness-Is
negative. When you try to work on self-observing or
self-awareness in a self-consciousness way, then the reason
you’re being self-aware is that you are purely trying to
ward off danger. It is sort of a conservative attitude.
_’

In the general philosophy of conservatism, you don’t
think about what could go right, or what is the best thing
for you to do; often the inspiration of conservatism starts
with what could go wrong with you, what’s a bad thing to do.
Because of that, you give guidance to other

people in a conservative way, saying “I am trying to talk
to you in terms of safe and sound, so that what you’re doing
is not a mistake.” The first statement comes from a negative
view: “. . . so that what you are doing is not a mistake.”
That approach to the fundamental basic Subtlety of
self-awareness is not looking at the positive and healthy
aspect of that state of mind, but constantly aggravating the
negative “What could go wrong?” state of mind. That could
pile up in the process of the path. order to become wise or
liberated. You don’t have to associate yourself with either
the good or the bad, but you become the one. And that one
possesses both good and bad simultaneously. That’s a very
important point in terms of experience. It is extremely
necessary to know that.

S: Whenever that happens, I feel there’s something wrong.
Doubt always occurs-always, always, always.

TR: Yes. It occurs always.

S: So there’s no point expecting it to diminish?

TR: No. You don’t have to make the distinction as to
whether you belong to that group or to this group, but you
see the situation as it is-that’s the important point. You
can’t change that particular situation at all. You can only
divert it through some kind of chain reaction process: you
can impose your experience prior to that by becoming
familiar with sanity or, equally, by becoming familiar with
madness or insanity. Either way is safe and instructive, and
either of them could be said to be insight. And then
one-pointedness switches you into the awake or enlightened
state automatically.

S: Is that awake state free of doubt or uncertainty?

TR: Yes, of course. The reason it is free of doubt is
that there’s so much reinforcement from what you’have
already worked with before that experience. You.. are quite
familiar with what you’ve gone through. But I would like to
say something else on this particular point. That is, when
we talk about self-awareness, self-consciousness,
self-observingoften that self-observing awareness is
negative. When you try to work on self-observing or
self-awareness in a”-self-consciousness way, then the reason
you’re being self-aware is that you are purely trying to
ward off danger. It is sort of a conservative attitude.

In the general philosophy of conservatism, you don’t
think about what could go right, or what is the best thing
for you to do; often the inspiration of conservatism starts
with what could go wrong with you, what’s a bad thing to do.
Because of that, you give guidance to other people in a
conservative way, saying “I am trying to talk to you in
terms of safe and sound, so that what you’re doing is not a
mistake.” The first statement comes from a negative view:
“… so that what you are doing is not a mistake.” That
approach to the fundamental basic subtlety of

self-awareness is not looking at the positive and healthy
aspect of that state of mind, but constantly aggravating the
negative “What could go wrong?” state of mind. That could
pile up in the process of the path. And it’s quite likely
that when such a person is in the peak state of mind of both
sanity and insanity happening simultaneously, then the
immediate first flicker of mind will reflect back naturally
to what’s bad, that sense of paranoia. Then you could flip
back into madness. It sounds quite dangerous.

 

Student: Do you have to be a warrior?

Trungpa Rinpoche: Well, I think the point is that you are
willing to see the creative aspect rather than the negative
aspect. The whole process is one of going along rather than
looking back at each step.

 

Student: Is this doubt a result of an impending sense
that the peak

experience is going to deteriorate and return to a less
profound state of consciousness, or is it a result of a
sense that perhaps the peak experience won’t end, and you
won’t return?

Trungpa Rinpoche: I don’t think you will return. Once
you’ve had it, you’ve had it. That doesn’t mean to say there
will be only one peak experience. There will be a succession
of peak experiences-which happens with us anyway, all the
time. I’m not talking purely theoretically. In our own
experience of everyday life, flashes happen all the time,
peak

experiences. Doubt is not being able to match yourself
with a prescribed goal. Whenever there is doubt, you also
have an ideal concept of the absence of’doubt, which is the
goal.

 

Student: Is this particular experience-between sanity and
insanity ever ,resolved by what’s known as surrendering or
openness to the guru?

Trungpa Rinpoche: I would say both yes and no. You see,
at that very moment nobody can save you. At the same time,
at that very moment, things could be inspired-somebody could
push you overboard. Both situations are possible. But
fundamentally nobody can save you. You have to make your own
commitment to the situation, that’s for sure.

S: Then there’s no surrendering.

TR: Surrendering happens early on. If you surrender, that
means you are associating yourself with positive experiences
and you are not trying to hold back and be careful and
conservative, as I have been saying. Surrendering to the
guru ii a very positive thing; therefore, it proceeds with
inspiration rather than by holding back and checking the
danger. You see, the idea of the term surrender is that once
you surrender-that’s the whole thing! You don’t surrender
because of something. Surrendering to the guru is quite
different from an insurance policy. In the case of an
insurance policy, you write down a list of all sorts of
dangers, up to the point of the will of God or “acts of
God.”

 

Student: You talked about the nirvanic and the samsaric
worlds as being coexistent. Autobiographically speaking, I
am very much aware that in certain chemical states the
reality of the world of physics is revealed to me, the world
of wave patterns and whirling molecules and whatnot. It
seems to me this world, which modern physics has revealed to
us, very often is equated with the nirvanic state, where you
as an ego, as a separate item, cannot exist. Do you see the
nirvanic state as I described it? ‘

Trungpa Rinpoche: The state of nirvana or freedom cannot
be described in any way. If you are trying to describe it,
then you are involved witli wishful thinking of some kind
more than natural reality because immediately when you begin
to describe it, you are separating the experience from the
experiencer. Nirvana is something quite different from
that.

S: But people still say they have seen nirvana, so they
must have been aware of something.

TR: Yes, definitely.

S: Then the split remains. As you come out of nirvana,
there is a moment where your senses react to-Ae high state
you’ve been in and say, “I come from nirvana.”

TR: Once you’ve gotten into it, you are in it already you
can’t come out of it.

 

Student: Is there only one bardo experience associated
with each world, or is it possible to have any of the bardo
experiences in any of the worlds?

Trungpa Rinpoche: I think so, yes. Yesterday we discussed
the bardo experience associated with the world of the gods,
and today we have been discussing the bardo connected with
the world of the asuras, or jealous gods. Each bardo
experience is connected with a particular sphere, so to
speak, or world.

S: Then there’s a one-to-one correspondence between
bardos and worlds?

TR: Yes, but these corresponding experiences happen
irregularly within one’s own experience, all the time. You
may begin with hell and continue with the world of human
beings. From the world of human beings you could go back to
the world of the pretas, the hungry ghosts, and so on. This
could happen continuously. The whole point I’m trying to
make is that bardo experience is a peak experience where you
are not quite certain whether you have completely gone mad
or you are just about to receive something. That particular
peak point is the bardo experience. And the bardo experience
cannot be resolved unless there is training. Without
lifelong training in the practice of meditation and in
accordance with the practice of meditation, putting the
skillful actions of a bodhisattva into practice, you cannot
have a complete bardo experience.

 

Student: Rinpoche, what is madness?

Trungpa Rinpoche: That’s a good question. At the
experiential level, madness begins with some kind of
confusion between the experience of reality and the
experience of the perceiver of reality, a conflict between
the two. Then, further on, one tends to go on with that
confusion and try to discover some ultimate answer to
pinpoint what is reality and what is the perceiver of the
reality. You try and you struggle more and more :up to the
point where you cannot discover the answer unless you give
up the idea of the existence of both the experiencer and the
experience.

At that level, you are so overwhelmed j~,3r_such
experiences that you make up all sorts of ways of convincing
yourself. You either try to rationslize that there is such a
thing as a self, that things outside are dangerous or
seductive, and that “me” is the rightful person to
experience that. Or, on the other hand, you begin to feel
that you are out of control. Then you become ultimately
mad.

You are so confused as to what is the experiencer and
what is the experience. The whole thing is completely
amalgamated into the one or the many. It is confusion
between the one and the many. You don’t have the
earth-grounding process of seeing “that” as opposed to
“this” anymore at all, because the whole thing is so
overwhelming. You are completely sucked into it. You have
all sorts of experiences of being claustrophobic, becaise
the whole situation around you is so overwhelming. You
experience paranoia because such overwhelming experience
could try to suffocate you, destroy you, destroy the
experiencer. And at the same time you would like to act as
though nothing happened. You begin to play the game of deaf
and dumb, but you pretend you actually never heard of it.
Hundreds of million,, of tactics begin to develop because of
this overwhelming suddenness, this overwhelming
crowdedness.

S: Is it possible to achieve enlightenment without
becoming mad?

TR: We are mad anyway, in different degrees. We may not
become completely mad unless we are maniacs-religious
maniacs or political maniacs, whatever-unless we lose
control of the situation. We have a sort of medium madness
going on all the time, with the possibility of absolute
madness. You see, that is samsara-madness. And that which is
not madness is called enlightenment. Because such an idea as
madness exists, therefore automatically there is that which
is not madness, which, is enlightenment. So once you begin
to talk about enlightenment, or freedom, that means you are
speaking in terms of madness.

 

Student: Rinpoche, it seems that one thing you were
saying is that when you approach this peak experience of the
bardo, if you’re not prepared for it, it’s too sudden and
you go mad.

Trungpa Rinpoche: That seems to be the point, yes. That’s
the whole idea of why we mention bardo at all, because it is
connected with the teachings, with the path.

 

Student: Could you describe the-.5ardo in the asura world
again? I don’t have any feeling for that at all.

Trungpa Rinpoche: It is trying to give birth and at the
same time trying to dwell on it. Suddenly, at the peak
experience, you try to force thingsyou try to push your
situation because you are about to reach some experience.
That experience is pushed by a certain effort, extreme
effort, and you would like to retain that particular
effort.

S: You mean like a woman trying to give birth and keep
the baby at the same time?

TR: Exactly. Yes. It is so action-conscious.

S: Is it a sense of having too much energy?

TR: Too much energy, yes, because the ground for this
particular bardo of birth and dwelling is the realm of the
asuras. The whole environment of the jealous god realm is
very much action-conscious, all the time rushing. But you
get more than that action at the asura level, you get a peak
experience: you have to push yourself into some particular
peak experience, and you would like to hold on to that,
grasp it.

 

Student: If you see somebody going crazy, is there
anything you can do, or should you just leave them alone?
They might be destroying themselves or trying to destroy
others.

Trungpa Rinpoche: You can do a great deal. But to start
with, it is better not to do anything at all. It is better
not to try to use any system or psychological school or
concept-Freudian, Jungian, Buddhist, Christian, or whatever.
You see, one problem is that when we come across somebody
who is absolutely mad, our immediate response is to try to
do something with them, rather than trying to understand the
basic ground. So you have to allow yourself space and not
allow the situation to be completely controlled by them. You
should allow space and not associate with any category of
philosophical or psychological school.

You should not analyze at all-that’s the last thing you
would like to do. That’s the source of what’s been wrong in
the past. Without trying to fit things into pigeonholes of
that category or this category, but with an open mind, you
can relate with the situation of the moment-the person, the
background of the person, as well as your own state of mind,
whether that situation is your imagination or whether it
actually exists independent of your imagination.

From that level, once you get a clear perce tion of the
situation, then you can proceed to relate with the person.
You can do a great deal, because generally madness is the
ultimate concept of frustration, and frustration needs to
work, or communicate, with some kind of external situation.
Even though the person who is in a state of madness appears
to be completely, absolutely incommunicative, absolutely
going wildat the same time, the wildness depends on the
external situation, or the internal situation of mind being
sparked up by the external situation. So nothing could be
said to be completely impersonal. In other words, the point
is not to relate with that person as an impersonal thing,
but as something still living and continuing. In that way
you will be able to relate with the person and go along with
the situation.

Another important point is not to be either too
compassionate and gentle or too aggressive. You should be
aware of the “idiot compassion” aspect of being too kind,
and at the same time, you should be aware of laying your
trip on the other person. It is an individual matter and you
should work along with it. These little details can’t be
generalized; they depend on the individual situation. But
you can do great deal to help. There is a moment when you
should let the person be what they are, and there also will
be a moment when you shouldn’t let them be what they are.
That is individual inspiration, how you relate with that
person. It also depends on how much space you=allowed at the
beginning, that you didn’t rush in immediately.

S: I saw somebody who wanted to stick their hand in a
fire to prove that they could withstand pain, and it was a
thing for me to watch their hand swell up like a
marshmallow. Then I had to say, “No, you can’t do that.”

TR: Well, you use your basic common sense. Actually,
there is a particular mentality involved when you are
dealing with people like that: the whole thing is regarded
as a game. You analyze the person’s every activity and
appreciate its symbolic quality, and you let them do what
they like. But completely letting the person do what they
like is somehow too self-indulgent. One should use some
common sense, in the process, definitely. In other words,
one should not expect any miracles. If a person says he
can’t feel heat and his hand is invincible, that person is
trying to imagine himself as more than he is. Quite possibly
he would like to become what he imagines he should be rather
than what he is, and one should realize that situation. The
earth-grounding quality is very important.

Student: How can you respond when a maniac attacks
you?

Trungpa Rinpoche: You can stop it, generally speaking.
But you have to deal with it individually, whether the
person is attacking in order to get some reaction from you
or because he would like to release himself. It depends on
the situation.

S: Sometimes they attack without knowing why they attack,
because they are in a crisis. In this case, you can’t say
you respond according to what the person wants, because you
don’t know. Even the person doesn’t know what he wants.

TR: It seems that often you have some knowledge of the
person as the person is, in any case, unless it’s somebody
you just met that very moment on the street. If the person
is a friend, then there will be some idea of that person’s
state of mind-not necessarily just that person as insane,
but his aspects of sanity as well and his particular way of
handling himself in terms of sanity.

S: No, but this is a case where my friend has to go to
the hospital. She’s completely out of herself: she can awake
in the middle of the

‘night and do anything, and if she doesn’t go to the
hospital she might kill herself.

TR: Quite unlikely.

S: How can you deal with that?

TR: You can deal with the given situation. If you are her
friend, then you must have some understanding of her-not
necessarily from the technical point of view of a
psychiatrist, but in terms of being able to deal with her
particular aspects and go along with them. You can deal with
it, of course. It is exactly an aspect of the normality of
the person-so you go along with that.

S: But then sometimes you have to use violence.

TR: Sure, you can. That also depends on the situation. I
don’t mean to say that you have to be completely gentle all
the time-that’s another weak point, trying to be too kind.
In fact, a person needs reminders, shaking back-violence, in
this case. So violence can be a reminder of sanity
presuming, of course, that you who are going to work with
her are yourself sane. One has to use a sane kind of
violence, not insane

violence.

 

Student: What happens if you’re the one who’s really
feeling crazy, if you’re the person who feels out of
control? ;

Trungpa Rinpoche: You don’t purely°have to live in
your dream world, dealing with your imagination and your
neurosis by yourself. You have something else to relate
with-the actual physical world outside. And if you are going
too far, your physical world will act as a reminder to you.
That’s a very important point: the only way to deal with
yourself is through your` relationship with the actual
physical world outside. Therefore, the body is very
important in this case, in human life.

S: Sometimes you begin seeing things in the physical
world that aren’t there, hallucinations.

TR: That means that you are not seeing the physical world
as it is, completely. One should take a second look.

 

Student: What is enness?

Trungpa Rinpoche: Openness is without paranoia, I
suppose, to begin with. You don’t have to put up barriers or
a boundary to your territory: in your territory, others are
welcome as well. That doesn’t mean that a person has to be
absolutely polite, diplomatic, just acting. It is a genuine
welcoming. Your territory is not defended territory but it’s
open territory-anyone can walk into it. By doing that,
automatically the other person will be able to walk into it
without putting out any territory of his own.

 

Student: Is bardo experience possible in the awakened
state?

Trungpa Rinpoche: In the awakened state there will be the
experience of the essence of the bardo, which is the
constant act of compassion. A continual loosening process,
either in terms of the other person or yourself, is taking
place all the time.

 

Student: Could you speak further on the difference
between surrender to the guru and a life insurance
policy?

Trungpa Rinpoche: An insurance policy automatically talks
of what could go wrong and how you can guard against it. An
insurance policy often talks about being a guardian, in
other words, sort of exorcising the danger. In the case of
surrendering to the guru, the emphasis is'”not so much on
the danger aspect, but that the danger could be transmuted
into creative relationships. Everything that comes up in the
pattern is a continual creative process. Both negative and
positive could be used as stepping-stones on the path, which
the guru could point out to you as long as you don’t try to
hide from the guru. That’s the ultimate meaning of
surrendering, surrendering all, aspects of yourself to the
guru. And then you learn from that.

 

Student: It seems to me that there is a boundary between
the generosity of openness and self-defense. Sometimes you
can’t be generous without harming either yourself or both
yourself and the other person.

Trungpa Rinpoche: You see, the general idea is that if
you open yourself to what the given situation is, then you
see its completely naked quality. You don’t have to put up a
defensive mechanism anymore, because you see through it and
you know exactly what to do. You just deal with things,
rather than defending yourself.

S But then the feeling might be that you have to refuse
somebody. TR: Sure, yes. Openness doesn’t necessarily mean
that you have to make yourself available to the other person
all the time. Openness is knowing the situation-if it’s
healthy and helpful to the other person to involve yourself
with them, or if it is more healthy not to involve yourself,
if showing this kind of commitment is not healthy for the
other person. It works both ways. Openness doesn’t mean you
have to take everything in at all; you have a right to
reject or accept-but when you reject you don’t dose
yourself, you reject the situation.

S: But maybe the other person doesn’t want to reject the
situation.

IM Whether you accept or reject it depends on whether
it’s a healthy situation for the other person or not; it’s
not purely what they want. Openness doesn’t mean that you
are doing purely what the other person wants. Their
wantingness may not be particularly accurate. They may have
all sorts of ulterior motives and neurotic aspects to their
desire, and often it’s not recommended to encourage that. So
you just work along with what’s valuable there.