How does the analogy of the broken pot explain the nature of existence after the body passes away?

Chapter 37 uses the analogy of a pot to explain that death is not an end to existence. It posits that if a pot is broken with a stone, only its form is destroyed, not its essence. The text argues that the "pot-existence" continues to remain in the broken pieces, meaning not even a tiny bit of its existence is lost. This illustrates the principle that the dissolution of an effect, such as the body, is eternally established in its underlying existence. Therefore, the passing of someone's body does not end in nothingness because the effect is never truly separate from its cause.