English
Each place is covered by a grain of sand, but it is impossible for one covering grain of sand to cover many covered places. Therefore, the ultimate sphere, which is separate from the parts of place and time, is established as all-pervasive because it has no closeness or distance to anything. The reason for the validity of self-awareness is that the ultimate sphere is established as self-<awareness>, because knowledge has no distinction between the knower and the object of knowledge. That also, once the distinction between the realm of objects <of knowledge> arises, it is no longer established as self-<awareness>. Just as, relying on eye consciousness, the <grasped aspect> of the consciousness that appears as having the form of an object is established as other, and relying on that, the <grasping aspect> of eye consciousness is established as other, and so on. Because there is no time when it can be established as self-<awareness>. The ultimate sphere, in the realm of <wisdom>, is established as self-<awareness> because it is free from the dependence and establishment of the knower and the known. The ultimate sphere is also established as wisdom because it is known by the wisdom of the Victorious Ones. If it is knowledge, then a knower and an object of knowledge are necessary, because there is no term for knowledge for oneself alone. As it is said: "The edge of a sword cannot cut itself, so is the mind. A lamp does not need to illuminate itself, because it is not obscured by darkness." And so on, this is to refute the conventional self-awareness, and it is possible that a knower and an object of knowledge are necessary, but this is the ultimate self-awareness, so a knower and an object of knowledge are not necessary. Just the fact that it is established as one's own nature is the reason for knowledge, and it is established as self-awareness. That is, for example, the nature of water is just that it is moist and wet, and it does not need a moist place and a moistener. Just being moist and wet is the nature of water, so all water is moist, and it needs to rely on another moistener, and when it meets that, it becomes moist, and when it does not meet it, the water must not be moist and wet. It is not necessary to be like that, but just establishing the nature of moistness is like that, here also, a knower and an object of knowledge are not necessary, but it is enough to be oneself and established as wisdom. Therefore, "So Samveda" is the Sanskrit word for self-awareness. Therefore, believing that a knower and an object of knowledge are necessary, and believing that darkness must precede clarity, and so on, these are just appearances of knowledge, oneself.
Chinese
仅仅是这种理智是无法驳倒的。一切种类的理由是，普遍说空性和觉性无二无别，仅仅是这种说法就广为人知，因此也能成立。因为胜义空性与佛陀的智慧没有差别，所以成立它是佛陀的智慧。因为这个理由，为什么胜义空性没有无边的功德呢？必定是有的。因为胜义空性成立为佛陀的智慧，所以它了知一切所知，因此执持一切所知的胜义之相，而且因为这个理由，法界中显现轮回和涅槃的一切相，因此成立它是具有一切相的。而且，从《涅槃经》等经典中说，十度等无边的善法是法性，因此胜义空性是以与善法相顺的方式安住于法性之中，正因为如此，修习善法就能证得这个胜义空性。对于烦恼等不善法，空性是以不相顺的方式安住于法性之中，因此修习不善法不会证得它，而是要净化并完全断除它们才能证得它。离戏的理由是：胜义空性是远离戏论的，并且也远离了由心的言说、分别念和一切时处所引发的语言表达，因为它超越了分别念及其一切对境。无染的理由是：胜义空性永远不可能被非真实的遍计所执的集合所染污，因为能染污它的非真实遍计从一开始就不存在。而且，由于空性遍布于有情众生，如果认为它会被有情众生的各种过患所染污或与之混杂，那是不对的。因为胜义空性虽然存在于原始的本性之中，但污垢的集合仅仅是暂时的错觉，实际上从未存在过，因此胜义空性不可能被染污。由此引申出的问题是：如果胜义空性是离戏的，那么确立离戏的理路是什么呢？
English
This mere intellect cannot be refuted. The reason for being all-encompassing is that, in general, the mere saying that emptiness and awareness are inseparable is well-known to all, and thus it is established. Because ultimate emptiness is no different from the wisdom of the Buddhas, it is established that it is the wisdom of the Buddhas. For that reason, why would ultimate emptiness not have limitless qualities? It definitely does. Because ultimate emptiness is established as the wisdom of the Buddhas, it knows all knowable things, and therefore it holds the ultimate aspect of all knowable things. And for that reason, all aspects of samsara and nirvana appear in the dharmadhatu, thus it is established that it is all-encompassing. Moreover, since the sutras such as the Nirvana Sutra state that the ten perfections and other limitless virtuous dharmas are the nature of reality, ultimate emptiness abides in the nature of reality in a way that is in harmony with virtuous dharmas, and because of this, practicing virtuous dharmas will manifest this ultimate emptiness. For afflictions and other non-virtuous dharmas, emptiness abides in the nature of reality in a way that is not in harmony with them, so practicing non-virtuous dharmas will not manifest it; rather, it is manifested by purifying and completely abandoning them. The reason for being free from elaboration is that ultimate emptiness is free from elaboration and also free from the expressions of mind, conceptual thoughts, and speech arising from all times and places, because it transcends conceptual thought and all its objects. The reason for being unpolluted is that ultimate emptiness can never be polluted by the collections of untrue pervasive thoughts, because the untrue pervasive thoughts that could pollute it have never existed from the beginning. Furthermore, since emptiness pervades sentient beings, if one thinks that it will be polluted or mixed with the various faults of sentient beings, that is not the case. Because ultimate emptiness exists in its original state, but the collections of defilements are merely temporary illusions and have never truly existed, ultimate emptiness cannot be polluted. An issue arising from this is: If ultimate emptiness is free from elaboration, then what is the reasoning that establishes freedom from elaboration?
Chinese
要能证实诸法的胜义界是无有自性的，例如，如果认为：法性，就其自性而言是无生的，因为你既非从自生，也非从他生，亦非从二者生，更非从无因生。如果是这样认为，那是可以接受的，因为法性就其自性而言是无生的，这在实相上无论如何都是合理的。又如果认为：胜义界，就其自性而言是不成立的，因为你既非成立为一，也非成立为多。如果是这样认为，那这就是相违遍了。如果成立为一或多，那自性成立的说法就会消失。此外，胜义界，就其自性而言是不成立的，也就是说，如果成立，就必须成立为不依赖、能自主成立的，但因为并非如此成立，所以如果运用缘起的理路来推论，那也是对后一个宗义的回答。因此，如果任何法是具有生灭和戏论的，那么通过遮止生灭和戏论，那个法本身也会被破除。然而，对于无生且无戏论的法性，遮止生灭和戏论并不能破除法性，因为遮止了相状，也会破除那个相状所依的基础。例如，如果遮止说完全没有身体，那具有身体的人也会被破除，并且在破除和遮止了身体之后，人和动物等等也会被破除，但虚空不会被破除。因为虚空不具有身体，并且遮止了生，也会破除具有生的事物，如苗芽等，但永远无法破除无生的实相胜义界。这一类的推理可以应用于离一异等一切方面。此外，如果认为常法是存在的，而戏论是不存在的，并且周遍是会变成能遍和所遍等等，因此与离戏论相违，那并非如此。正如上面所说，对于离戏论而言，常法和周遍是非常合理的，但对于非离戏论而言，常和周遍这两者是非常不合理的。双运的道理是，世俗的空性和胜义的不空性二者结合，这就是此时双运的含义，而那也是在意识上安立为双运，而不是在实相上要证入的双运。
English
It is possible to prove that the ultimate realm of all phenomena is without inherent existence. For example, if one argues: the realm of phenomena, by its very nature, is unborn, because you are neither born from yourself, nor from others, nor from both, nor from no cause. If one thinks this way, it is acceptable, because the realm of phenomena, by its very nature, is unborn, which is reasonable in reality. Also, if one argues: the ultimate realm is not established by its very nature, because you are neither established as one nor as many. If one thinks this way, then this is contradictory pervasion. If it is established as one or many, then the claim of inherent establishment will disappear. Furthermore, the ultimate realm is not established by its very nature, that is, if it were established, it would have to be established as independent and self-sufficient, but since it is not established in this way, if one uses the reasoning of dependent origination, it is also a response to the latter tenet. Therefore, if any phenomenon is with birth and elaboration, then by negating birth and elaboration, that phenomenon itself will also be refuted. However, for the nature of phenomena that is unborn and without elaboration, negating birth and elaboration does not refute the nature of phenomena, because negating the characteristic also refutes the basis on which that characteristic exists. For example, if one negates and says there is absolutely no body, then a person with a body will also be refuted, and after refuting and negating the body, humans and animals, etc., will also be refuted, but space will not be refuted. Because space does not have a body, and negating birth also refutes things with birth, such as sprouts, etc., but the ultimate realm of reality, which is always unborn, can never be refuted. This kind of reasoning can be applied to all aspects such as one and many, different and same, etc. Furthermore, if one thinks that permanence is something that exists, and elaboration is something that does not exist, and pervasiveness becomes pervader and pervaded, etc., therefore it contradicts being free from elaboration, that is not so. As stated above, for that which is free from elaboration, permanence and pervasiveness are very reasonable, but for that which is not free from elaboration, these two, permanence and pervasiveness, are very unreasonable. The reason for union is that the union of emptiness in conventional truth and non-emptiness in ultimate truth is the meaning of union in this context, and that is also established as union in the mind, not the union to be realized in reality.
Chinese
如果不是这样，那怎么能把两种法安立在一种法之上呢？因此，就将胜义界，空与不空二者的体性，这二者以超离法的方式无别作为基础，在意识中安立为双运，就像在同一个基础上聚集了两种不同的法一样。那么，胜义界以世俗谛为空，以胜义智慧为不空，因此也是不空的。或者说，因为以世俗谛为空，所以不是不空；因为以胜义谛不空，所以也不是空。关于在种姓和界中开示的方式：是随顺瑜伽者的心识显现而安立的。也将界安立为佛的种姓和因的界。也就是，从无始以来相续流传下来的法性自然成就，如六处差别的具有三种差别的种姓，在《瑜伽师地论》中有所阐述。以及在《宝性论》中，以九喻开示心要时，所说的如苗芽等从果中取出的比喻，以及恶妇腹中有人主转轮王的譬喻等，也都是与修行者以心识证悟的方式相符而宣说的。具有三种差别的种姓，法性自然成就，似乎是每一个众生都被一个心要所遍布一样，也就是说，只要是众生，<ཆོས་ཉིད་བདེ་གཤེགས་སྙིང་པོ་གསལ་རིག་རྒྱུན་ཆད་མེད་པ་ཉིད་རང་བྱུང་གི་ཡེ་ཤེས་སུ་ངོ་འཕྲོད་ན་>（藏文）如果能够认识到法性如来藏光明觉性无有间断，即是自生智慧，那么就会看到，众生自性光明并非是新创造的佛性，而是自性本具的。而且，就像河流不断流淌一样，似乎从无始以来就不断具有。并且在六处之上，光明觉性的智慧与佛的身语意非常相似，似乎存在着极其微小的部分。而且，通过修道的威力逐渐增长，最终变成圆满正等觉等等，这些都只是瑜伽者的心识显现而已，并非是就这些安立为真实存在的方式。瑜伽者的心识显现中，又有凡夫和圣者两种不同的见解，也就是说，凡夫是具有一切束缚者，认为心要的意义就像是背后的事物一样存在。