English
Regarding the eight roots of Ga, there are the four noble paths and the four right abandonments. The four non-dual Madhyamaka practices that sever demons. When combined with correct samadhi, the four miraculous legs, etc., twenty-four qualities, such as abodes, are combined with the ten bhumis. The latter four noble paths and the four abandonments are drinking and near-drinking practices. When samadhi is combined with the thirteenth bhumi, it is compatible with tantric texts such as conduct and manifestation. Since the thirteenth bhumi here is the path of seeing, it also agrees with the general principle that all aspects of enlightenment are attained on the path of seeing. Since it is the aspect of enlightenment of the inner pure channels, there is no fault even if it does not conform to the general order. Fourteenth question: Khenchen Zhiwa Tso (Śāntarakṣita). It seems that he was a student of Yeshe Zhap (Jñānapāda), according to the Ba Zhé (rBa bzhed). If it is established by scripture that Yeshe Zhap was a student of Seng Zang (Siṃhabhadra), how can Seng Zang be a student of Zhiwa Tso? The answer is: Zhiwa Tso's student was Seng Zang, which is clearly stated in the commentary on the Eight Thousand Verse Prajñāpāramitā Sutra. Jampel Zhallung (ʼJam dpal źal luṅ) says that Yeshe Zhap was a student of Seng Zang. Khenpo Bodhisattva also seems to be definitely a student of Yeshe Zhap. Because he lived a long life, and Yeshe Zhap was a greater mantra master than Khenpo himself. It is not contradictory for him to appear as a student. However, it is necessary to examine whether the author of the Ornament of the Middle Way and the Khenchen are the same person. The fifteenth question is: How exactly is the view of the Hwa Shang (Chinese Chan master) mistaken? If it is mistaken because it is not upheld by conduct, then it should be refuted from the aspect of conduct. It seems unreasonable to say that the view is mistaken. The answer is: In general, the so-called path of sudden enlightenment was initiated in Tibet by the Hwa Shang Mahāyāna. In China, even before that, there were about twenty-five great masters of sudden enlightenment. It is said that the root of their source is also in India, according to the Samten Migdrön (bSam gtan mig sgron). The view of the resultant state of that school is the same as that of the old Prasangikas. The view of meditation only praises the cessation of mental activity. Not only is individually self-aware wisdom not needed during meditation, but it is also considered a fault in meditation. As for conduct, it is repeatedly emphasized that pure morality must be maintained. Misconduct
Chinese
对于戒律方面没有错谬。身语意三的善业不必刻意去作，后得位时，虽然不遮止慈悲和信仰等，但在入定的时候，说成仅仅不缘众生就是慈悲，仅仅不缘佛等就是信仰等等。总而言之，除了在无缘之中具备一切的方式之外，认为修习那些各自具有自相的法是错谬之处，似乎善法和积聚资粮都因此衰退了。果的方面，也似乎仅仅解释为一切所缘都已穷尽，而在其他显现中产生利益众生的事业。他所著的八十部经的依据，以及斯努（Snu）的《禅定明灯》中都清楚地记载着。对此，静命论师（Kamalaśīla）说：“舍弃了各别思择，就会舍弃证悟空性的智慧，舍弃了善业，也就舍弃了方便，舍弃了方便和智慧二者，更不用说成佛了，就连解脱也无法获得。如果没有各别思择的智慧，也无法进入无缘。”等等，因此，似乎是说因为没有各别思择的智慧，所以见解和修行都错了，因为没有努力行持善业，所以行为也错了。在新弘期出现的藏人中，有两种倾向，一种是只喜欢止观，另一种是只喜欢分析观。后者依赖静命论师的说法，认为初学者的所有不作意禅修都是错误的。前者有些人仅仅是遮止和尚的作意，因为没有认识光明空性的自性，所以说见解错了。还有一些大手印者说，和尚的作意和所有分别念都是遮止的，所以是错误的，而我们是将所有生起的分别念都不作取舍地带入道用，所以没有错。虽然不知道那些和尚的宗派到底是什么，但总觉得是一种恶劣的宗派，仅仅依靠所见所闻的一些片面之词就妄加揣测。认识觉性的自性，并且将所有生起的分别念都知晓为仅仅是觉性的自性，这在顿门宗派中也非常清楚地存在。以口头上说不作取舍的方式，想要不舍弃分别念而自然解脱的方法。
English
There are no errors in terms of discipline. There is no need to deliberately perform virtuous actions of body, speech, and mind. Although compassion and faith are not prohibited in the post-meditation period, during meditative equipoise, it is said that merely not focusing on sentient beings is compassion, and merely not focusing on Buddhas, etc., is faith. In short, apart from the way in which everything is complete in non-objectification, considering the meditation on those individual characteristics as a wrong path, it seems that virtue and the accumulation of merit are declining. In terms of the result, it seems to be explained only as the exhaustion of all objects of focus, and the arising of activities for the benefit of beings in other appearances. The basis for the eighty sutras composed by him, and the "Lamp of Meditation" by Snu, clearly state this. Regarding this, Kamalaśīla said, "By abandoning individual discrimination, the wisdom that realizes emptiness is abandoned, and by abandoning virtuous actions, skillful means are also abandoned. Since both skillful means and wisdom are abandoned, not to mention Buddhahood, even liberation cannot be attained. If there is no wisdom of individual discrimination, one cannot even enter into non-objectification." Therefore, it seems to be saying that because there is no wisdom of individual discrimination, view and meditation are mistaken, and because one has not strived to perform virtuous actions, conduct is also mistaken. Among the Tibetans who appeared during the later dissemination of the teachings, there are two tendencies: one is to only favor calm abiding, and the other is to only favor analytical meditation. The latter rely on the words of Kamalaśīla and consider all non-conceptual meditation by beginners to be wrong. Some of the former merely block the thoughts of the Heshang, and because they do not recognize the self-awareness of clarity and emptiness, they say that the view is wrong. Some Mahamudra practitioners say that the Heshang's thoughts and all conceptualizations are blocked, so it is wrong, while we bring all arising conceptualizations into the path without acceptance or rejection, so it is not wrong. Although it is not known in detail what the Heshang's sect is, it is generally felt to be a bad sect, and they are merely making conjectures based on some one-sided words they have seen and heard. Recognizing the self-nature of awareness, and knowing that all arising conceptualizations are merely the nature of that awareness, is very clearly present even in the Dunmen sect. The method of wanting to liberate conceptualizations naturally without abandoning them, by means of saying that one does not accept or reject.
Chinese
还有，这仅仅是舍弃作意的方法。因此，在等持中阻止慈悲等显现，以及偏离方便部分的过失是必然存在的。而且，对于见修行持的实际，这仅仅是显宗的修持次第。所以，不可能从灌顶的体验、上师的加持、本尊神的力量、明咒的效力、作缚的关键、以及脉气明点的缘起等产生智慧。如果不是在显宗本身中积累了多世的资粮，那么这种未以各自证悟的智慧为先导的见解修持方式，即使达到了见解的顶点，效果也很小，力量迟缓，而且有无法达到见解顶点的歧途的危险，因此必须对所有的人说，这种教导是错误的实践。我并没有看到在空性方面的见[解]修持的实际本身存在错误。然而，他认为如果这种方式盛行，将会损害教法的传统和教规，因此当时就加以禁止。莲花戒的驳斥，如果在见解的场合，主要以显宗的独立性为主，也不会有冲突，但如果按照字面意思，就没有普遍性了。སྣུབས་སངས་རྒྱས་ཡེ་ཤེས་（努·桑结益西，梵文，罗马拟音不详，努·桑结益西）说顿门的方式是纯正的中观宗风。而སྣུབས་（努，梵文，罗马拟音不详，努）是所有大圆满行者都视为标准的老师。因此，大手印、大圆满、息解、断行等等，以及顿门的宗义，在行持方式和禅修方面可能存在差异，但在空性的瑜伽方面没有差异，而且在某些情况下，对于核心意义的教法来说，顿门也会适用。而且，顿门盛行时所要驳斥的对象，在其他情况下也可能发生在其他人身上。当我看到八十部经的来源时，我害怕这种认为这种见解是魔业的说法会广为流传。 第十六个问题是：对欲望没有贪执而进入密咒道的人，以及临终和中阴身成佛的人，是否需要依赖行为和近取因？ 以及，由此延伸的第十七个问题是：如果需要，行为方式是怎样的？如果不需要，那么
English
Furthermore, this is merely a method of abandoning mental activity. Therefore, in meditative equipoise, the obstruction of appearances such as compassion, and the fault of straying from the aspect of means, are certainly present. Moreover, regarding the actual basis of view and practice, this is merely the gradual path of the sutra system. Therefore, it is impossible for wisdom to arise from the experience of empowerment, the blessing of the guru, the power of the yidam deity, the effectiveness of vidya mantras, the key to binding actions, or the interdependence of channels, winds, and bindus. If one has not accumulated merit for many lifetimes within the sutra system itself, then this way of cultivating the view without the wisdom of individual realization preceding it, even if it reaches the peak of view, will have little effect and slow power. And because there is a great danger of straying into a path where one does not reach the peak of view, it must be said to all individuals that this teaching is a mistaken practice. I do not see that there is error in the actual basis of meditating on the view of emptiness itself. However, he saw that if that system became popular, it would harm the tradition and precepts of the teachings, so he prohibited it at that time. The refutation of Kamalashila, if in the context of view, it is mostly made in terms of the independence of the sutra system, there would be no conflict, but if it is according to the literal meaning, there is no universality. Snubs Sangye Yeshe said that the Tonmun system is a pure tradition of the Middle Way. And Snubs is a teacher who is regarded as authoritative by all Dzogchen practitioners. Therefore, there may be differences in the way of practice and meditation between Mahamudra, Dzogchen, Shije, Chod, and so on, and the tenets of Tonmun, but there is no difference in the yoga of emptiness, and in some cases, Tonmun also applies to the teachings of essential meaning. Moreover, the object of refutation when Tonmun is prevalent may also occur to others in other situations. When I saw the source of the eighty sutras, I feared that the statement that this view is only the work of demons would become widespread. The sixteenth question is: Do those who have gone beyond attachment to desire and entered the mantra path, and those who attain enlightenment at the time of death and in the bardo, need to rely on conduct and proximate causes? And, the seventeenth question arising from this is: If so, what kind of conduct is necessary? If not, then
Chinese
我的现证如何圆满，对此解说：对于欲望，先要离贪；声闻缘觉阿罗汉进入密咒；成佛必须行持（双运）行。行持的方式是，那些进入密咒之前，先以大乘道的一些特点来调伏自相续，获得与烦恼相应的自在，即使没有烦恼，也要依靠欲望的功德，生起安乐，特别是能够修持明妃合修的安乐。那时才能进入密咒道。如果小乘的离贪者没有调伏自相续，不要说行持（双运），就连灌顶和修持生起次第的资格都没有。对于欲望离贪的异生凡夫，如果离贪没有退失，生起对密咒的信心也很难。如果生起了信心，那么以世间道舍弃的显现的欲望贪执，再次生起也没有困难。这些总的来说是密咒的歧途，然而如果进入密咒道，就要那样做。所谓临终中阴成佛，是指那时获得圣道的名称。临终时获得见道，中阴时获得双运，就叫做临终成佛。临终时获得大暖相等，在中阴时成就只有风心的身，以那个所依修持道，如果根器敏锐，就不需要受生，在中阴本身就能获得圣道。还有临终时获得那个身的人，以临终心稍微经历安忍，在中阴必定获得双运，那些就叫做中阴成佛。对于这些人，在那个时候不需要行持和近取，从那以后次第经历地道而成佛的人，就必定需要行持和近取，因为那些是不可思议的行持者，与今生获得双运的人没有差别。因此，对于出现五种现证，没有值得高兴的地方。总的来说，即使是烦恼极其微薄的大圣者，由于没有灭尽前面所说的四种情况的习气，也需要行持和近取，既需要也有能力。 第十八个问题是：