Chinese
是也。如是者，乃与遍计所执之体性相合。意义之精髓虽不存在于遍计所执之法物中，然仅有假立之存在于心识中显现。故，仅为错乱显现之法，与该法于任何时候皆未曾存在之空性，实为一体。于真实世俗中，显现为色等之识仅存在，此乃轮回流转之因，经由修道，舍弃此识亦可得解脱。故，取舍之境乃唯识，即显现为色蕴之识，空性于自显之所取与能取之种种相状。如是之所取能取空性于异体，此即显现为色蕴之识。所取自性空之二空性，体性无有差别。故，空性非异于显现为色之识。显现为色之识亦非异于空性。如是者，乃与有之空性，他起之体性相合而说。因此，若欲观视此当下种种显现，不加造作，本初即显现为空性之自性，若能真正掌握其要点，则仅是修习遍计所执与依他起之空性。此二者之空性，其“性”字乃唯一之义。意为空性唯一，因于胜义中从未存在，故为空性唯一之义。又，法性之色蕴乃圆成实之空性。彼亦为法性之色。二者之空性与法性之色，彼此非各自独立存在，而是安住于一体之中，此乃就圆成实自性空性而言。今欲安立彼等精髓汇集之主要意趣，体性包含于二谛之中。若将二谛共同结合，则法性之色蕴乃由遍计所执与依他起二者所摄之所有世俗法之空性。然，世俗之空性亦非仅为空性，而是在无有世俗之境，法性之色蕴恒常存在。于法性之色蕴
English
It is so. This is related to the characteristic of the completely imputed. Although the essence of meaning does not exist in the dharma substance of the completely imputed, only a fabricated existence appears in the mind. Therefore, that dharma which is merely a mistaken appearance, and that emptiness in which that dharma has never existed, are shown to be of one essence. In mere relative truth, there is only the consciousness that appears as form and so on. This is the cause of entering into samsara, and by practicing the path, it can be abandoned and liberation can be attained. Therefore, the object of acceptance and rejection is only consciousness, that is, the consciousness that appears as the skandha of form is empty of the various aspects of the apprehended and the apprehender that appear to it. Such an emptiness of apprehended and apprehender by other entities is the consciousness that appears as the skandha of form. Since the two emptinesses of the apprehended being without inherent nature are not different in essence, emptiness is not other than the consciousness that appears as form. The consciousness that appears as form is not other than emptiness. This is explained in relation to the characteristic of the emptiness of existence, dependent on others. Therefore, if one wishes to see the self-face of this present variety of appearances, without fabrication, as the original arising as emptiness, if one is sure to hit the point, then it is only meditating on the emptiness of the completely imputed and the dependent. The word 'nyid' in emptiness for these two is the word for 'only'. It means only emptiness, because it has never existed in ultimate truth, so it means only emptiness. Furthermore, the form skandha of suchness is the emptiness of the perfectly established. That is also the form of suchness. The emptiness of the two and the form of suchness are not established as separate from each other. It is explained that they abide as one essence, which is made by the power of the perfectly established selflessness. Now, to establish the main point of the meaning that gathers the essence of these, the characteristics are included in the two truths. If the two truths are combined in common, then the form skandha of suchness is the emptiness of all relative dharmas included by the two, the completely imputed and the dependent. That emptiness, which is empty of the relative, is not merely emptiness, but in the state where there is no relative, the form skandha of suchness always exists. On the form skandha of suchness
Chinese
在其他地方没有空性，空性之外也没有它。例如，在夏季，有热的时候，没有冷的时候，这两者并非意义不同，而是汇聚为一个意义。此外，如果从究竟的决定性意义上来说，大乐一切相之色，以及彼本身离能取所取戏论之空性二者必须结合而显现，但暂时此处不述说。同样，对于其他蕴也应如此结合。第二，无相的意义是，如《赞叹超世间》中所说：若自性与所诠异，所诠则成无自性。虽非异体然无彼，汝已昭然示此理。自性所诠皆远离，一切言说皆舍弃，汝乃具慧之智者，寂静调伏见有情。如是说，能成为色法的是色的自性。虽然承认等等只是假立的体性，但如果能成为色法的和色蕴的自性是异体，那么自性就不能诠释自性所依，反之，如果自性是同一体性，那么自性和所诠就没有差别了。此外，在色的自性之前，色是存在还是不存在？如果不存在，那么自性依附于何处的自性所依就不存在了，因为没有自性所依的缘故，就成了没有自性。如果存在，那么没有自性的自性所依是不合理的，并且自性没有遍及于它，因此那个自性也不是自性（《ཛཾ》，zaṃ，种子字；+རོ，ro，种子字）。因此，无论自性所依或差别所依是什么，自性或差别法都会依附于它。或者说只是分别假立而已，实际上并非真实存在，因此一切法都是无自性的。关于“无生”是这样说的：实有之事物不生，非无亦非有非无生，非从自生亦非从他生，亦非从二生，云何而有生？如是说，世间若有少许作用，则必有作者，如饮食行走等。因此，若有生，则必有生者，即能生者。生者本身不生，因其已成立故。虽已成立，若仍生，则将无有止境地生
English
Emptiness is not in another place, and there is no other thing besides emptiness. For example, in the summer season, the presence of heat and the absence of cold are not different in meaning, but converge into one meaning. Furthermore, if considered from the ultimate definitive meaning, the form of great bliss in all its aspects and the emptiness of it, free from the elaboration of grasping and being grasped, must be combined to appear. However, for the moment, this is not discussed here. Similarly, this should be applied to the other aggregates as well. The second meaning, the absence of characteristics, is as stated in the "Praise of the Transcendent World": If the characteristic and the characterized are different, the characterized becomes without characteristics. Although not different entities, without that, you have clearly shown this truth. Characteristic and characterized are completely separate, all verbal expressions are abandoned. You, being the wise one with wisdom, see beings pacified and subdued. As it is said, that which can become form is the characteristic of form. Although it is admitted that these are merely imputed entities, if the nature of that which can become form and the aggregate of form are different entities, then the characteristic will not be able to characterize the characterized. Conversely, if the nature is the same entity, then there will be no distinction between the characteristic and the characterized. Furthermore, before the characteristic of form, does form exist or not? If it does not exist, then the characterized, to which the characteristic applies, will not exist. Because there is no characterized, it will necessarily be without characteristics. If it exists, then a characterized without characteristics is unreasonable, and since the characteristic does not pervade it, that characteristic is also not a characteristic (《ཛཾ》，zaṃ，seed syllable; +རོ，ro，seed syllable). Therefore, whatever is the characterized or the basis of distinction, the characteristic or the distinguishing feature applies to it. Or it is just conceptually imputed, but in reality, it is not truly existent. Therefore, all phenomena are without characteristics. Regarding "unborn," it is said: An existent thing does not arise, nor does a non-existent thing, nor does something that is both existent and non-existent. It does not arise from itself, nor from another, nor from both. How can there be arising? As it is said, if there is even a slight action in the world, there must necessarily be an agent, such as eating and walking. Therefore, if there is arising, there must be a producer, that is, one who causes arising. The producer itself does not arise, because it is already established. Even if it is established, if it still arises, it will arise without ceasing.
Chinese
因此会太过分，并且会推论出已经成立之后就不需要产生。没有产生者而产生也是不合理的，因为会推论出没有作者的行为存在。有产生者和无产生者两者都不合理，因为如果两者是不同的，就会各自产生过失，并且在一个事物上，有产生者和无产生者两者是相违背的。这是有无生灭的论证。事物不是从自身产生的，因为已经在自身中成立了。不是从他者产生的，因为依赖于产生者本身。例如，苗芽不是从他者产生的，因为苗芽本身依赖于同一血统的种子。如果不依赖于它而产生，那么也会从所有无关的其他事物中产生。不是从两者产生的，因为说的是在两者中没有变化。也不是没有原因而产生的，因为没有原因就不依赖于他者。会陷入“要么永远存在，要么永远不存在”的过失。因此，只是显现出一种产生现象的错觉，实际上并没有成立产生。这样一来，真实的产生永远不存在，如果仅仅就产生的角度而言，正如所说：“最初和那个自身，以及他者自身，自己的特征会变成自己和他者。从完全的烦恼的特殊性中，宣说了对无生之法的忍耐。”因此，也说了许多特殊产生的完全不存在的名称。再者，对时间的分析是：暂时性的原因，也不可能产生结果。不是从不坏灭中产生，你承认梦和网的产生。坏灭和不坏灭的，原因和结果的产生，就像幻术的产生一样产生。你说了所有都是这样的。这样说是因为，原因和结果本身不是自性存在的，因为自性上也不能是不同的时间。同一时间也是不行的。如果说是不同时间的先后产生，那么暂时从坏灭的原因产生是不合理的，如果合理，就会推论出家禽死后也能发出声音。幻术坏灭后产生结果也是不合理的，如果合理，那么应该承认在原因的时间里，正在燃烧的燃烧物已经被烧完了。
English
Therefore, it would be too extreme, and it would be inferred that there is no need for production after it has been established. It is also unreasonable to arise without a producer, because it would be inferred that there is an action without an agent. It is also unreasonable for both a producer and a non-producer to arise, because if the two are different, they will each have their own faults, and on one thing, the producer and the non-producer are contradictory. This is the proof of the cessation of existence and non-existence. Things do not arise from themselves, because they have already been established in themselves. They do not arise from others, because they depend on the producer himself. For example, a sprout does not arise from others, because the sprout itself depends on the seed of the same lineage. If it arises without depending on it, then it will also arise from all unrelated other things. It is not from both, because it is said that there is no change in both. Nor does it arise without a cause, because without a cause it does not depend on others. It will fall into the fault of "either always existing or never existing." Therefore, only an illusion of the phenomenon of arising appears, but in reality, arising is not established. In this way, true arising never exists, and if only from the perspective of arising, as it is said: "The beginning and that self, and the other self, one's own characteristics will become oneself and others. From the particularity of complete afflictions, patience with the unarisen Dharma is proclaimed." Therefore, many names of the complete non-existence of special arising are also spoken. Furthermore, the analysis of time is: From a temporary cause, it is also impossible for a result to arise. It does not arise from the non-perishing, you acknowledge the arising of dreams and nets. The arising of causes and results of the perishing and non-perishing arises like the arising of illusion. You said that all are like that. This is said because the cause and the result themselves are not self-existent, because in nature they cannot be different times. The same time is also not possible. If it is said that they arise sequentially at different times, then it is unreasonable to arise temporarily from a perished cause, and if it is reasonable, it would be inferred that a domestic bird can make a sound even after it dies. It is also unreasonable for a result to arise after an illusion has perished, and if it is reasonable, then it should be admitted that at the time of the cause, the burning object being burned has already been burned.
Chinese
也会变成灰烬。因此，所有具有先后因果关系和同时性的事物，都应被理解为如梦如幻。以此为例，所有由因缘和合而成的法，虽然在世俗层面存在，但在胜义层面是不存在的。所谓“不灭”，是指有是存在的，是保持的种类，但不是会毁灭的。如是说：没有不住留的觉知，不是会毁灭的。因为色等自性不是毁灭，如果自性存在也不会毁灭，如果不存在也不会毁灭。如果存在就不会毁灭，因为存在是住留，住留和毁灭在同一时间是相违的。如果不存在也不会毁灭，因为对于已经不存在的事物来说，没有可以毁灭的东西。这样，灭和毁灭是一个意思，是名称的不同说法，没有毁灭就是不灭。对于“不生不灭”，有些虚伪的人解释为：觉知的自性什么也没有产生，力量在任何地方也不会停止，这种解释与西藏被称为大修行者们的术语相符，一般人看来似乎说法很好听也很容易理解，但大车论师们并没有这样说，而且把不生的意思理解为已经停止，把不灭的意思理解为产生，这样就与这部经的词义完全不符，所以应该远远抛弃这种自作主张的说法。又说：因此你所见的这些行，都是从完全的分别中产生的，即使普遍了知，也说没有生和灭。这是说，蕴等本来是空性的，因此，器情世间这些行都是从分别念中产生的，应知只是分别念所安立的。虽然在世俗的错觉中这些只是显现，但它们没有自性，因此也没有生和灭。另外，《六十正理论》中说：因为圆满正等觉说，世界以无明为缘，所以说这些行是分别念是不合理的。这是说，世界、蕴、界、处等一切都是由于无明的力量而产生的，所以一定是分别念，因为是虚妄之因的缘故，为什么不