English
It will become a fault. If you say that these are all mistaken, then it is also unreasonable for you Madhyamikas to meditate on illusory conventionalities, wanting to be liberated from the attachment to reality. It is also unreasonable for the Mahamudra practitioners to meditate on coemergent appearances, wanting to achieve self-liberation, because they are meditating on mistaken appearances, so they cannot reach the true nature. They say that there is no such fault, because even if it is a mistaken appearance, they do not cling to it, but recognize it as emptiness. Again, they say, then we also do not cling to the form of emptiness, but recognize it as emptiness, why can't it become the path? Therefore, even if it is mistaken in your eyes, the appearances that arise from the practice of the path will obscure the true nature, while the impure karmic appearances will not obscure it, this is not right. If good and bad actions are realized as emptiness, then realization and non-realization are the same, even if realization and non-realization are the same, they do not make distinctions between realization and non-realization, but instead become more attached to non-virtue, thinking that the practice of deity meditation, recitation, the conduct of precepts, and various meditative experiences are contrary to non-fabrication and non-action, therefore it is a wrong path. And they become more attached to sins, thinking that fighting, distraction, desire, love and hatred are the cause of liberation through non-fabrication. These statements are contrary to the Buddha's intention, entering from darkness into darkness, and are of the kind of Yakshas and Rakshasas. If you think that these doctrines do not exist in the schools of the great chariot masters, that is true, but from the past to the present, most of the people who hold this doctrine are hypocritical, and clearly lead people astray. If their own fundamental school does not have these doctrines, then the absence of these doctrines will destroy you, not only contradicting the Dharma, but also contradicting your own school. Again, they are asked, is there an un-mistaken appearance or not? If not, then there is no liberation, or liberation will become mistaken, becoming unreliable. If you think that all appearances are mistaken, and what does not appear is un-mistaken, then how can the complete absence of appearance be un-mistaken? Because it is like a rabbit's horn, there is nothing at all. Again, they say this
Chinese
是的，如果认为不错误就是指心念当下把握的显现，那么十相也不会错误，理由就在于此。因为（心）用于体验乐空和无分别。如果说心性当下无法把握，那么吃饭、喝水、穿衣和行走等行为也未曾停止。对您来说，这种情况也不可能不存在。如果认为那些是被禅定所把握，所以没有过失，那么我们也被禅定所把握，那又有什么过失呢？这样一来，空色是错觉的说法就被驳斥了，而证明其非错觉的理由如下：空色是无错觉的显现，因为它是圣者们所体验的对象，并且它能消除对此现象的执着，而且对于最胜瑜伽士们来说，这种显现会越来越广大。第二个辩论已经消除完毕。第三种观点是，大多数的旧派人士，以及法王索南坚赞等人认为，空色十相等既不是错觉，也不是胜义谛，因为它是见者的心识自现，所以是道谛的有为法。这种观点比之前的观点要好，但并不完全正确。根本续部中说：“各自摄集大手印，虚空空性之体性。”而且至尊观世音菩萨也说：“一切相皆从虚空生，普贤一切自在尊，安住一切有情自性中，俱生之喜。”等等，这些都是对空色体性的阐述。那若巴也说：“心之三时之种种色，亦非实有，彼等无有过去等实有之体性，且已超越微尘之法性。”由此否定了其为有为法。导师日玛巴益西（ཉི་མ་དཔལ་ཡེ་ཤེས་）说：“法界是虚空，与一切种种色皆具之空性。”《释续心要光明》中说：“如是唯是心之显现，法界即是大手印。”如是，彼等境空色。
English
Yes, if it is thought that not being mistaken refers to the appearance of grasping the moment of mind, then the ten signs will also not be mistaken, for that is the reason. Because (the mind) is used to experience bliss and emptiness and non-discrimination. If it is said that the nature of mind cannot be grasped in the present moment, then eating, drinking, wearing clothes, and walking, etc., have not ceased either. Such a situation cannot be non-existent for you either. If it is thought that those are grasped by meditation, so there is no fault, then if we are also grasped by meditation, what fault is there in that? In this way, the assertion that empty form is an illusion is refuted, and the reason for proving that it is not an illusion is as follows: empty form is a non-illusory appearance, because it is the object experienced by the noble ones, and it eliminates attachment to this phenomenon, and for the supreme yogis, this appearance becomes increasingly vast. The second debate has been resolved. The third view is that most of the old school people, as well as Dharma Lord Sonam Gyaltsen and others, believe that empty form, the ten signs, etc., are neither illusory appearances nor ultimate truth, because they are the self-appearance of the mind of the seer, so they are the compounded truth of the path. This view is better than the previous one, but it is not entirely correct. The root tantra says, "Gathering separately is the Great Seal, the nature of empty space." And the venerable Avalokiteshvara also said, "All forms arise from space, Samantabhadra, the lord of all, abides in the nature of all sentient beings, the joy of co-emergence." etc., these are all explanations of the nature of empty form. Naropa also said, "The various forms of the mind's three times are also not real, for they do not have the nature of real things such as the past, and they have transcended the nature of particles." Thus, it is denied that it is a compounded phenomenon. The teacher Nyima Pal Yeshe said, "The Dharmadhatu is space, emptiness endowed with all kinds of forms." The Commentary on the Essence of Light says, "Thus, it is only the appearance of the mind, the Dharmadhatu is called the Great Seal." Thus, those objects are empty forms.
Chinese
由于宣说了法性，因此完全成立了那些不是道谛。又有些人这样认为：仅仅是自己心的显现，并且说成与幻术、梦等相同，因此会变成识和无实有。要知道，这些比喻只是从一个方面来理解，而不是全部。因此，这里用幻术、梦等比喻所要说明的是：虽然显现清晰，却没有极微尘的法，以及空无造作和实有之义。并不是作为错觉，或者不是以自性真实存在的比喻来理解。从因陀罗菩提的《智慧成就》中也说：幻术等这些比喻，是诸佛与其子共同的教诲，仅仅是假立而没有实体，并不是全部遮止。如果以比喻本身相同，以各种方式宣说诸法，那么所有要证成的，都不会变成比喻本身。例如，人狮的比喻，世间人也有，因为具有勇敢等功德，但没有尾巴等。因此，一切事物，并非都是自性的全部。追随经文和理智，由最殊胜的人来证悟。因此，您所说的一切，只是中小根器之人的方法，不是以利益众生的想法而真实宣说的。如同兔角一样，也像石女之子一样，诸佛在任何地方都没有说过事物是不存在的。这样说道。说用幻术等的比喻来表示仅仅是无实有，这是欺骗孩子的方法，不是以利益他人的想法而真实宣说的。就是这个意思。又有些人说，这个显现是烟还是不是烟？如果是，那么会变成外境和造作，哪里会有真实？如果不是，因为不是烟却显现为烟，这还有什么迷惑呢？对此回答说：烟的空相，不是世俗显现和声称的烟，虽然在那里显现，但不显现，因此不是烟却显现为不是烟，这有什么迷惑呢？虽然在胜义智慧中显现为烟，但因为是就是，所以见到是就是，又怎么会是错觉的见法呢？因为不是世俗显现和声称的法，所以不是造作的
English
Since the nature of reality is explained, it is completely established that those are not the path truth. Furthermore, some think like this: it is merely the appearance of one's own mind, and it is said to be similar to illusion, dream, etc., therefore it will become consciousness and non-reality. Know that these metaphors are taken from one aspect, not all. Therefore, here too, the metaphor of illusion, dream, etc., is meant to show that although it appears clearly, there is no dharma of subtle particles, and it is the meaning of emptiness of compounded things and entities. It is not taken as a metaphor for being a delusion, or not being truly existent by its own nature. From Indra Bhuti's 'Wisdom Accomplishment' it is also said: These metaphors such as illusion, are the teachings of the Buddhas and their sons, merely imputed and without substance, not completely negated. If the Dharma is taught in every way, like the metaphor itself, then all that is to be proven will not become the metaphor itself. For example, the metaphor of a man-lion, worldly people also have it, because they have qualities such as bravery, but they do not have tails, etc. Therefore, all things are not all of their own nature. Following scripture and reason, it should be realized by the most excellent person. Therefore, whatever you say is only a method for people of small and medium capacity, not truthfully spoken with the intention of benefiting others. Just like a rabbit's horn, and like the child of a barren woman, the Buddhas have never said that things are non-existent anywhere. Thus it is said. Saying that the metaphor of illusion etc. indicates only non-reality is a method of deceiving children, not truthfully spoken with the intention of benefiting others. That is the meaning. Furthermore, some say, is this appearance smoke or not smoke? If it is, then it will become external objects and compounded things, where will there be truth? If it is not, because it is not smoke but appears as smoke, what delusion is there from that? To that I say: This empty form of smoke is not the smoke of conventional appearance and assertion, although it appears there, it does not appear, therefore it is not smoke but appears as not smoke, what delusion is there? Although it appears as smoke in ultimate wisdom, but because it is what it is, seeing what is as what it is, how could it be a deluded way of seeing? Because it is not a dharma of conventional appearance and assertion, therefore it is not a compounded thing.
Chinese
也没有垢染。又这样说，至尊金刚手面前说，这叫做加持，就是个别个别收集的世俗的空性。因为这样说的缘故，如果认为是无实和世俗成立的，那么这里所说的世俗空性就是有相空性的名称。如上面所说，这里的有相也不是指错乱的显现，也不是指能取所取的显现，也不是指分别念和戏论，所谓有相，是指现量见到，或者以量见到，或者有能见、能懂、能体验、能知晓的名称。之所以称之为世俗，是因为在二谛无别或者二谛双运的时候，在心的面前作为二谛之一而存在的世俗的缘故。也就是说，证悟胜义的法性智慧和世俗的法性智慧是二谛双运，其他不可能是二谛双运。因为胜义本来和世俗的暂时的遮蔽的显现二者没有成为一体的机会，而且按照你们的观点，二者无自性而平等，这也不会成为双运，因为仅仅从无自性的角度就必须安立为双运的缘故。瓶子和瓶子的总义双运，人和水的总义双运，天授和祭祀双运，最终兔子角和石女的儿子也成了双运了。如果也这样认为的话，那么你的双运的建立就太稀奇了，很多体性不相同，而且一切也不是以何者为所缘而清净的基位，不修也不行。果也不决定，只是自认为高深的法相，对于追求解脱和一切智智的人来说，任何时候也没有需要的缘故。因此，法性是具有一切相的，所以是世俗的法性。具有一切相的空色就叫做世俗谛，胜义自
English
There is also no stain. Furthermore, it is said that in the presence of the venerable Vajrapani, what is called blessing is seeing the emptiness of the conventional that is collected separately. Because it is said so, if it is thought to be established as unreal and conventional, then here, conventional emptiness is the name of emptiness with an object. As mentioned above, the object here does not refer to the appearance of delusion, nor does it refer to the appearance of grasping and clinging, nor does it refer to conceptualization and elaboration. The so-called object refers to what is seen directly, or seen by valid cognition, or has the name of being seen, understood, experienced, and known. The reason for calling it conventional is because it is the conventional that exists as one of the two truths in the mind when the two truths are inseparable or the two truths are in union. That is, the wisdom of the Dharma-nature of ultimate truth and the wisdom of the Dharma-nature of conventional truth are the union of the two truths, but others cannot be the union of the two truths. Because there is no chance for the original ultimate truth and the appearance of temporary obscuration of the conventional to become one, and according to your view, the two are equal without self-nature, this will not become a union, because it is necessary to establish it as a union only from the perspective of no self-nature. The union of a pot and the general meaning of a pot, the union of the general meaning of a person and the general meaning of water, the union of Devadatta and sacrifice, and ultimately the horns of a rabbit and the son of a barren woman also become unions. If you also think so, then your establishment of union is too amazing. Many entities are different, and everything is not the basis of purification by focusing on what, and it cannot be changed without cultivation. The result is not determined, it is just considered a profound Dharma term, because it is not needed at any time for those who seek liberation and omniscience. Therefore, Dharma-nature is the Dharma-nature of the conventional because it has all aspects. The empty form with all aspects is called conventional truth, and ultimate self-