English
It is said to be endowed with essence. Now, regarding the pervasiveness of the six sources (six entrances), it is like this: on the mind, the part that appears as the six sources (six entrances) is very similar to the uncontaminated six sources (six entrances) of the Tathāgata. For example, it is like pointing to an artificial golden mountain and saying, "The golden mountain is like this." So, when did it arise? There is no such thing as newly arising; rather, it has been transmitted from beginningless time. This is called the lineage that is not newly acquired through virtue, etc., but exists naturally. Moreover, it is not like some have it and some do not. As long as it is a sentient being, it is necessarily so; this is the nature of reality, and therefore it is obtained by the nature of reality. This lineage is the naturally abiding lineage. When faith, etc., are spoken of as lineage, it refers to the cause of this lineage that awakens and expands, that is, from the perspective of liberation, through newly acquired virtuous dharmas, the sentient being's continuum becomes more like the Buddha than before, which is called expansion, or the lineage of correct acquisition. Although it is said that faith, etc., increase the dhātu, it has not been seen that it is spoken of as the nature of the dhātu. From the perspective of the Buddha, neither the name nor the meaning of lineage applies, therefore it is merely the true essence and the designation of the Tathāgata. For these three, the first is of the fruit, the second is of the nature, and the third is the dhātu Tathāgatagarbha; this is the terminology approved by the earlier Tibetan translators, which is very good. However, merely negating self-nature deviates from the main point of the meaning, therefore it must be established like the completely purifying dharma mentioned above. Second, is the Pudgala who possesses the Tathāgatagarbha a sentient being? If one asks whether the Tathāgatagarbha with defilements is a sentient being, it is like the latter saying: Just as one relies on the mere collection of limbs and calls it a tree. Similarly, relying on the skandhas, etc., one calls it a conventional sentient being. Just as people in the world rely on the coarse skandhas and call this so-and-so, this statement called the coarse self is completely inverted. Although it is like the self posited by the Tirthikas, it accumulates karma, experiences the ripening result, does not abandon the five skandhas, and the one who takes rebirth is only the mind. The ālayavijñāna is constant, and other dharmas of body and mind are not constant.
Chinese
微细我的体性是这样的。《楞伽经》中说：主尊自在造作者等，仅是安立于唯识者。以及，莲花鬘女所请问的：世尊，这六种识聚是什么？这个识，这七法是不住的、不相关的、刹那性的，所以不是感受痛苦的。世尊，如来藏是相关的、无分别的、非刹那性的，所以是感受痛苦的。等等这样说了。如果无有阿赖耶或光明心恒常存在，那么第六意识等极不稳定，不能作为业果关系的所依，并且无有它，就不会对轮回的痛苦感到厌倦，也不会希求涅槃，因为这些产生并存在，所以它也必须存在，就像从烟推断有火一样。许多智者是这样认为的：善巧者在《正理之火》中说，我们也在名言中将我的声音完全施加于识上。月称也说：了知作者唯是心。这安立我与有情的基础，是确立中观自宗的，谢迥洛智在《入行论释》中这样解释。因此，说承认业果之所依的心唯是唯识，这是非常不确定的。月称在《入行论释》中说：圣《楞伽经》等中，所说的阿赖耶识是无边法的、是能力差别的基础、是所有种子的，就像大海之于波浪一样，是产生一切事物的因，那是什么？难道是完全不存在的吗？如果这样说，那不是的。这样说了，也破除了应成派认为阿赖耶根本不成立的观点。如果中观应成派和《宝性论》的观点相同，那么说有情所具有的无漏智慧如同蜂蜜的精华，这样将如来藏解释为无漏智慧，这是需要思考的。虽然以世间蕴聚为对境而安立为我，但《父子相会经》的意义是：士夫非地非水，非火非风非虚空，非识非一切。
English
The nature of the subtle self is like this. The *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* says: "The chief, the powerful, the maker, etc., are merely designated as Mind-Only." And, as asked by the maiden Śrīmālā: "Bhagavan, what are these six aggregates of consciousness? This consciousness, these seven dharmas are impermanent, unrelated, momentary, so they do not experience suffering. Bhagavan, the Tathāgatagarbha is related, undifferentiated, non-momentary, so it experiences suffering." And so on. If there is no Ālaya or clear light mind that constantly abides, then the sixth mind and so on are extremely unstable and cannot serve as the basis for the relationship of karma and result, and without it, there would be no weariness with the suffering of samsara, nor would there be aspiration for nirvana. Since these arise and exist, it must also exist, just as inferring fire from smoke. Many wise ones hold this view: Lekden says in *Togge 'Barwa* (Blazing Logic), "We also nominally apply the term 'self' to consciousness." Chandrakirti also said, "Understand that the agent is only mind." This establishes the basis for what is designated as 'self' and 'sentient being,' establishing the Svātantrika view of the Madhyamaka, as Sherjung Lodrö explained in the commentary on the *Bodhicaryāvatāra*. Therefore, saying that only Mind-Only accepts the mind as the basis of karma and result is very uncertain. Chandrakirti says in the commentary on the *Entering the Middle Way*: "In the *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* and others, what is said to be the Ālaya-vijñāna, the basis of the distinctions of the power of limitless dharmas, the basis of all seeds, like the ocean for the waves, the cause of the arising of all things, what is that? Is it something that does not exist at all?" If you say that, it is not so. Thus, the view of the Prāsaṅgikas who hold that the Ālaya is not established at all is also refuted. If the Madhyamaka Prāsaṅgikas and those who say that the *Uttaratantra* have the same view, then it is necessary to consider this explanation of the Tathāgatagarbha as uncontaminated wisdom, saying that the uncontaminated wisdom possessed by sentient beings is like the essence of honey. Although 'self' is designated by focusing on the aggregates of the world, the meaning of the *Sūtra of the Meeting of Father and Son* is: "A person is not earth, not water, not fire, not wind, not space, not consciousness, not all."
Chinese
正如《宝鬘论》中所说：“除此之外，还有哪个利他的人？”。入行论中也说：因为能仁说我就是地、水、火等，所以从那上面无法成就果的所依，因此就是这个微细的我。如果认为这和外道相同，那又怎么会相同呢？因为它本身也阐述空性。因此，六界意，十八界等，这些的自性之上的光明和空性是味等同的。等同的方面是细微的我。这远离了戏论的相，如果现量证悟这个，因为证悟了心，就成了对治我执的殊胜对治品。第三，一般来说，以理性的方式进入，也是诸佛所说，许多大车论师也曾阐述过。然而，在这个金刚乘中，大车论师和智者成就者们，似乎都不以分别观察的空性作为主要，而是以不分别的方式进入，如止观的次第中所说的那样。那个智慧的对境空性，也并非仅仅是否定存在的体性。如《意趣分别经》中说：“三时智者所未作，证悟虚空无别相，此即是为胜义谛，各别自证之体性。”等等，自性光明，那光明的意思并非仅仅是远离垢染，而是自证。那么，世尊曾以虚空为例来开示心，如“说见虚空，众生语中常宣说，虚空如何能见耶，当应观察此义理。如是见法，如来亦曾如是说。”难道不是以否定存在的例子来说的吗？虽然那样也可以，但以虚空为例，并非仅仅是否定存在的例子。所谓“孔隙虚空”，是眼识的对境，显现为中间空隙的清澈明亮。仅仅是色法的间隔，没有劫的成住坏空等的增减，是法处所摄的虚空。这两者是圆满清净的，是心光明和显现一切的例子。而如同瓶子中有水阻隔那样的否定存在的虚空，对于事物来说，周遍和不周遍的区别也是不合理的，如果存在的话。
English
As it is said in the Ratnavali, "Besides that, who is the altruistic person?" Also in the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra: Because the Thubpa (Buddha) said that I am earth, water, fire, etc., therefore, from that, the basis of the result cannot be accomplished, therefore, this is the subtle self. If you think it is the same as the heretics, how can it be the same? Because it itself also explains emptiness. Therefore, the six elements, mind, eighteen realms, etc., the clarity and emptiness on the nature of these are of equal taste. The aspect of equality is the subtle self of the causal continuum. This is devoid of the characteristics of elaboration. If one directly realizes this, because one realizes the mind, it becomes the supreme antidote to the view of self. Third, in general, entering through the use of reasoning, is also spoken by the Victorious Ones, and many great charioteers have also explained it. However, in this Vajrayana, it seems that the great charioteers, the wise and accomplished ones, do not primarily make that emptiness of analytical examination as the main thing, but enter through the way of non-conceptualization, as has already been explained in the context of shamatha and vipassana. That object of wisdom, emptiness, is also not merely a characteristic of negating existence. As it says in the Gongpa Lungten (Revelation of Intent): "Not made by the Knower of the Three Times, Realization, the sign of indivisibility from space, This alone is the ultimate meaning, The characteristic of individual self-awareness." And so on, naturally luminous, that is, the meaning of luminosity is not merely empty of defilements, but self-awareness. Now, the Bhagavan has shown the mind as an example of space, saying: "Saying 'seeing space' is often proclaimed in the words of beings, How can space be seen? One should examine this meaning. Thus seeing the Dharma, the Tathagata has also taught." Is it not said as an example of negation of existence? Although that may be so, the extent to which space is used as an example is not merely an example of negation of existence. The so-called "hole space" is the object of eye consciousness, appearing as a clear and bright space in between. Merely the interval of form, without the increase or decrease of the formation and destruction of kalpas, etc., is the space included in the dharma realm. These two are accomplished as completely purified, and are examples of the mind's clarity and the arising of all appearances. And the space of negation of existence, like the obstruction of water in a vase, is not reasonable for the distinction of pervasiveness and non-pervasiveness in relation to things. If it exists, how could it be?
Chinese
因为必须要有兔角，所以没有兔角才能遍及一切所知。因此，仅仅是众生自性不存在就是如来藏，并且认为它没有遍及外境。例如，如果瓶子不是众生自性不存在，难道它不会变成众生自性存在吗？这里说到：虽然极力宣说无遮遣词，但心中要记住非遮遣词。仅仅认为是对众生，这是污垢和无等遮遣的奇妙之处。认为法身也遍及一切法，这是持无遮遣的智者们所说。那些自以为是，说矛盾聚合、时过境迁的论师们真是愚蠢。说遮止了非复合之物，这是说一切有部的错误。说这是无错的中观之道，这种说法也是无稽之谈。自己犯错却扰乱传承，还嘲笑没有犯错的其他人。对于这些人，有智慧的人们会再次发出更大的嘲笑。这被称为中间的偈颂。另外，在修习无分别智时，听到修习平凡的意识，就将平凡的意识视为非常糟糕，从而感到不满。平凡是自性和变化的区别。例如，在《金刚空行》中说：“具有平凡咒语之身的母。”这里所说的平凡空行母，大阿阇黎婆瓦跋陀罗也解释为俱生空行母。因此，它的意思是俱生。大成就者拉瓦巴也说：“平凡的意识在心中苏醒。”等等，这些也请查看。第二，关于作为因和传承（《ཛཾ》（藏文种子字）+放置方式）的解释，包括驳斥错误和确立自宗。首先，有些人认为将如来藏安立为无遮遣，这本身就是因和传承。阿跋耶和寂天菩萨也这样认为。从胜义谛的角度来说是这样，但从世俗谛的角度来说，拉瓦巴说：“对极难获得的修行者宣说。”那若巴说：“对如珍宝般的人宣说。”因此，仅仅是对具有资格的人宣说。阿跋耶在《口诀穗》中说：因和传承是佛陀近取的因。寂天菩萨在《掌中花》中说：什么是因的传承，那就是佛的种姓。因此，无遮遣的