Chinese
仅仅是遮止了遍计所执的清净识，也安立了很多圆成实性的名称，如果将它执为究竟的胜义谛，也没有超出唯识宗的宗义。其中，周遍的法性圆成实性真实地周遍于所周遍的依他起性，因为凭借它的力量，所有遍计所执都是依他起的显现。虽然也安立了周遍于遍计所执，但并非一定周遍于遍计所执，因为遍计所执在二谛的阶段中，任何时候都不存在，所以没有可周遍的。例如，当水中显现影像时，因为周遍于所有虚空的色法，并且开显了因，所以虚空周遍于水，而显现在水中的影像，因为是无有、仅仅是明相，所以如同虚空没有周遍一样。如果举例说明这三种自性如何融入所诠义中：例如，无论是显现于眼识还是显现于意识，在显现瓶子的时候，因为遣除了非瓶子的部分，所以是瓶子的部分就是遍计所执；能辨别它的仅仅是明觉的识就是依他起；遍计所执和依他起灭尽之后的空性智慧，就被认为是圆成实性。如果用烦恼中的贪嗔等来举例说明：心中生起强烈的贪欲或嗔恨时，贪嗔的显现模糊不清就是遍计所执；它的觉性明觉的部分就是依他起；平等周遍于一切的无戏论智慧就是圆成实性。这里之所以说平等，例如，嗔恨的明觉识和贪欲的明觉识，虽然相貌非常相似，但体性各不相同，所以彼此之间互不周遍，而它和它的<安住方式、法界和智慧明空双运大>的圆成实性，则没有体性的差别，因为已经成为了平等。道路上如何融入三种自性呢？例如，在修习空性的时候，修习的部分，也就是道路的智慧本身就是依他起，而认为这是空性之道等等，对道路本身进行分别的部分就是道路的遍计所执，道路所缘的境
English
Merely the pure consciousness that prevents the imputed is also given many names of the perfectly established, but if it is taken as the ultimate ultimate truth, it does not go beyond the tenets of the Mind Only. Moreover, the pervasive Dharma-nature, the perfectly established, actually pervades the dependent, and because of its power, all imputations are appearances of the dependent. Although it is also established that it pervades the imputed, it is not necessarily the case that it does not pervade the imputed, because the imputed never exists in the stage of the two truths, so there is nothing to pervade. For example, when an image appears in water, it pervades all the forms of space and opens up the cause, so space pervades the water, and the image that appears in it is non-existent, only a clear appearance, so it is like space does not pervade. An example of how the three characteristics enter into the base of the sign is: for example, whether it appears to the eye consciousness or to the mind consciousness, when a vase appears, the part that is not a vase is completely eliminated, so the part that is a vase is the imputed; the consciousness that distinguishes it is the dependent, and the emptiness wisdom after the imputed and the dependent are gone is considered to be the perfectly established. If we take the example of attachment and aversion in afflictions: when strong attachment or aversion arises in the mind, the appearance of attachment and aversion is vague and unclear, which is the imputed; the part of its awareness that is clear and aware is the dependent; and the non-conceptual wisdom that pervades everything equally is the perfectly established. Here, the reason for saying equality is that, for example, the clear and aware part of the consciousness of hatred and the clear and aware part of the consciousness of desire are very similar in appearance, but their nature is different, so they do not pervade each other, and it and its <abiding mode, the great union of the clear and empty wisdom of the Dharmadhatu> the perfectly established has no difference in nature, because it has become equal. How do the three characteristics enter into the path? For example, when practicing emptiness, the part of the practice, that is, the wisdom of the path itself, is the dependent, and the part that distinguishes the path itself, such as thinking that this is the path of emptiness, is the imputed of the path, and the object of the path
Chinese
法的自性是<光明离戏>的圆成实性。果法身如何安立三种自性之理，譬如对于各自的凡夫之心而言，法身是远离戏论且是自性觉性的智慧，如此认为的分别执着的所缘分，作为分别对境显现的法身是遍计所执的法身；执持法身之相的心是他起依他起性的法身；真实的实相是圆成实性的法身。此类推及一切所知事物。然而，应当舍弃如口出狂言般无止境地宣说，譬如瓶子的遍计所执的遍计所执，以及他的依他起性，他的圆成实性等等，不应无止境地套用，而应将这三种自性普遍地安立于一切基法的法上。将这三种自性安立为三种空性，如至尊慈氏菩萨于《现观庄严论》中所说，遍计所执的法称为无性空性，即并非以其他的空性之基遍计所执的法为空或无，而是遍计所执<自身>在二谛中都不存在，并且因为不是以自性成立，所以是无性空性。他起依他起性虽然在胜义谛中不存在，但在世俗谛的体性中存在，所以是有性空性。圆成实性以自性而存在，并且因为远离了遍计所执和他起依他起性，所以是自性空性。此外，在宣说自性无性的中观宗中，认为如苗芽般的事物会执持实事和自性两种体性，即在任何事物上都会执持一个世俗谛的体性和一个胜义谛空性的体性。如果是这样，那么凡是法就一定是空性的这种周遍关系就不确定了，因为凡是法就一定是胜义谛，这样就必然会产生过失。因为在这个宗派中，凡是法就一定是空性的周遍关系是确定的，所以说一切法都是空性，对于这个宗派来说是非常合理的。三种空性的安立是，在《五百般若经》中说：善现，于色中空性的等持。
English
The nature of Dharma is the <luminous absence of elaboration> of perfect reality. How the three natures are applied to the resultant Dharmakāya is as follows: For example, for the minds of ordinary beings, the Dharmakāya is free from elaboration and is the self-aware wisdom, so the object of conceptual grasping that holds this view, the Dharmakāya that appears as the object of conceptual thought, is the imputed Dharmakāya; the mind that grasps the appearance of the Dharmakāya is the other-powered Dharmakāya; the actual reality is the perfectly established Dharmakāya. This kind of reasoning should be applied to all knowable things. However, one should abandon the extreme assertions that speak endlessly like those who babble incoherently. For example, one should not endlessly apply the imputed imputation of a pot, its other-powered nature, its perfect reality, and so on. Instead, these three natures should be universally applied to all phenomena that are the basis of designation. The way these three natures are established as the three emptinesses is as follows: As the venerable Maitreya said in the Ornament of the Sutras, the imputed Dharma is called the emptiness of non-existence, that is, it is not that the basis of emptiness, the imputed Dharma, is empty or non-existent by another emptiness, but the imputed <itself> does not exist in either of the two truths, and because it is not established by its own nature, it is the emptiness of non-existence. The other-powered nature, although it does not exist in the ultimate truth, exists in the nature of the conventional truth, so it is the emptiness of existence. The perfectly established nature exists by its own nature, and because it is empty of the imputed and the other-powered natures, it is the emptiness of self-nature. Furthermore, in the Madhyamaka school that asserts the absence of self-nature, it is held that things like sprouts grasp two natures: reality and self-nature, that is, in anything, one grasps a conventional truth nature and an ultimate truth emptiness nature. If this is the case, then the pervasion that if it is a Dharma, then it must be emptiness is not certain, because if it is a Dharma, then it must be the ultimate truth, which would necessarily lead to a fault. Because in this school, the pervasion that if it is a Dharma, then it must be emptiness is certain, it is very reasonable to say that all Dharmas are emptiness in this school. The establishment of the three emptinesses is as follows: In the Five Hundred Prajñāpāramitā Sutra, it is said: Subhuti, the samadhi of emptiness in form.
Chinese
我说，如果善男子观色，知色无实性，是为空性；如是知有实性，是为空性；缘自性空性，一心安住，是为空性之等持。菩萨如是于色，于空性之色，应善了知等持。如是说。经部中所说“有”与“无”之意如何？圣者无著与世亲论师说：谓于凡夫异生如何显现，如是于义理上无有，故说为“无”。何以故？谓于凡夫异生之迷乱显现中，如是显现，故说为“有”。又，了知无事物易于了知无自性，然于事物上，如何是无自性之理耶？设若如是思，未来之事物，以现在未生之故，事物无自主；过去之事物，就世俗谛而言，虽有往昔之时节存在之时，然现在已灭，故事物无自性；现在之事物，刹那刹那不住，少许安住之机会亦无，故于自事物上何时亦不安住；事物如心所执取般，然于义理上无有，故诸事物是无自性。如是安立。从三自性引申说缘起，分二：一、以连结方式略说；二、广说缘起之差别。初者：如是，从三相中，何者是缘起？何者非缘起耶？遍计所执与依他起二者，以说彼等是缘起之势，显示圆成实非缘起。若尔，如是所说圆成实是缘起，彼等之义如何连结耶？谓圆成实虽非世俗谛之缘起，然是胜义谛之缘起，如是作意，又或另一种方式，即是。
English
I say, if a virtuous man observes form, knowing that form has no true nature, it is emptiness; likewise, knowing that there is true nature, it is emptiness; focusing on the emptiness of self-nature, abiding single-mindedly, this is the samadhi of emptiness. A Bodhisattva should thus fully understand samadhi in relation to form, in relation to the form of emptiness. Thus it is said. What is the meaning of "exists" and "does not exist" as stated in the Sutras? The noble Asanga and the master Vasubandhu said: That is, as it appears to ordinary beings, it does not exist in reality, therefore it is said to be "non-existent." Why? Because it appears in the confused appearances of ordinary beings, therefore it is said to be "existent." Furthermore, it is easy to understand that non-things are without self-nature, but how is it that things are without self-nature? If one thinks like this, future things, because they are not yet born now, things have no autonomy; past things, in terms of conventional truth, although there was a time when they existed in the past, they have now ceased to exist, so things have no self-nature; present things are impermanent from moment to moment, and there is no opportunity to stay even a little, so they never abide in their own things; things are as the mind grasps them, but they do not exist in reality, so all things are without self-nature. Thus it is established. Explaining dependent origination based on the three natures, divided into two: 1. Briefly explaining by way of connection; 2. Explaining the distinctions of dependent origination in detail. The first is: Thus, among the three characteristics, which is dependent origination? Which is not dependent origination? The two, the completely imputed and the other-powered, by the force of saying that they are dependent origination, show that the thoroughly established is not dependent origination. If so, how are the meanings of those statements that the thoroughly established is dependent origination connected? That is, although the thoroughly established is not the dependent origination of conventional truth, it is the dependent origination of ultimate truth, thus intending, or in another way, it is.
Chinese
就瑜伽行者的心而言，瑜伽行者的最初，在尚未证悟圆成实性时，通过修道而证悟彼性之时，圆成实性看似前所未有地新产生一般，因此，应考虑到，在那样的显现中，如同因和缘的显现聚合一般。缘起有两种，即以所生能生的角度而言，以及以所立能立的角度而言，因此有两种缘起。第一种是他起，第二种是遍计所执。那也是主要安立，并非他起一定是所生能生的缘起，遍计所执一定是所立能立的周遍。所生能生的缘起也有暂时性的和真实性的缘起两种。第一种，就外器世界而言，例如种子、田地、水肥、温度湿度以及时节相同等，从这些能生之因中，产生所生之苗芽、茎秆和果实等。以内情众生为例，积累任何业，业以习气的形式留在心中，习气被外缘唤醒，从而显现自身的身语意三的景象。以内识为例，例如从能生四缘中产生所生眼识等识。就所立能立而言，也有从所生能生而观待的所立能立的缘起，以及不观待于它的所立能立的缘起两种。第一种，例如从显现为种子的识中，产生显现为苗芽的识，这是所生能生的因果真实存在。依靠它，认为显现为种子的这个是苗芽之因的分别念的执著方式的所执分，从中产生认为显现为苗芽的那个是果的执著方式的所执分。总的来说，仅仅显现为种子，是识的实物，也是显现，而且那