Chinese
鸟等是士夫果。略作分析，虽然不承认外境，但显现为处所的识和显现为对境的识等，安立为士夫果。异熟果是为有情相续所摄，属于身体之法，即是自己的近取五蕴，以及显现于此的识等。等流果是，从能作因的角度所生的一切。增上果是，从等起因所生的一切。这些也是就主要的方面而说的，并非绝对。总的来说，产生诸事物的因，必定归摄为二：即，遍染污因阿赖耶识，具有轮回的一切习气；以及，清净因无漏种子。遍染污因阿赖耶识，即轮回的一切种子习气，是三界轮回一切染污的因。第二，无漏种子，是安立在阿赖耶识之上的。对此，《摄大乘论》中说：“从听闻所生的种子。”其体性并非仅仅是布施、持戒等善业，或是一般的习气，而是听闻佛陀身语意的功德后，在阿赖耶上安立的习气。此处主要指，与佛陀意、法身之因相顺的，善说之语经典，听闻此，并依此了知佛陀身语意的甚深秘密，在阿赖耶上安立的种子，此后此人成为获得解脱之因，因此称为无漏种子。此无漏种子，并非必定存在于一切有情心中。或者，归摄为生得因和串习因两种。第一是，阿赖耶异熟分，第二是种子分。例如：
English
Birds and the like are the Adhipati-phala (dominant result). With some analysis, although external objects are not acknowledged, the consciousness that appears as a place and the consciousness that appears as an object, etc., are established as the Adhipati-phala. The Vipāka-phala (result of maturation) is that which is included in the continuum of sentient beings, belonging to the dharma of the body, namely, one's own five aggregates of appropriation, and the consciousness that appears therein, etc. The Kāraka-phala (agent result) is everything that arises from the perspective of the acting cause. The Nisṣyanda-phala (result concordant with the cause) is everything that arises from a cause of equal potential. These are also explained from the perspective of what is most important, but they are not absolutely definitive. In general, all the causes that produce things are necessarily included in two: namely, the all-afflicted cause, the Ālayavijñāna (store consciousness), which possesses all the habitual tendencies of Saṃsāra (cyclic existence); and the completely purified cause, the Anāsrava-bīja (seed of non-outflow). The all-afflicted cause, the Ālayavijñāna, which is the seed of Saṃsāra, all the habitual tendencies, is the cause of all the afflictions of the three realms of Saṃsāra. Secondly, the Anāsrava-bīja is placed upon the Ālayavijñāna. Regarding this, the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* states: "The seed that arises from hearing." Its nature is not merely the act of giving, moral discipline, etc., virtuous actions, or the establishment of ordinary habitual tendencies, but rather the habitual tendencies established on the Ālaya after hearing the qualities of the Buddha's body, speech, and mind. Here, the main point is that the speech of the well-spoken scriptures, which is in accordance with the cause of the Buddha's mind and Dharmakāya (body of dharma), is heard, and based on this, the seed established on the Ālaya, which understands and knows the aspects of the profound secrets of the Buddha's body, speech, and mind, later becomes the cause for that person to attain liberation, and is therefore called the Anāsrava-bīja. It is not certain that this Anāsrava-bīja exists in the minds of all sentient beings. Alternatively, it is included in two types of causes: the innate cause and the acquired cause. The first is the Ālaya-vipāka aspect, and the second is the seed aspect. For example:
Chinese
以前世听闻的种子成熟的力量，今生自然拥有的圆满智慧称为生得智慧。今生广闻博学，将种子完全播下并加以串习，由此产生的圆满智慧称为修生智慧。第二，观察观待而成立之理：如果所生之果从能生之因产生，那么果就依赖于因，因此果不是以自己的自性而存在的。这指的是能生所生之间的因果关系。任何以自性成立的法，都必须是不依赖于任何东西而能独立存在的。然而，这些内外之物都依赖于各自的因，因此不是独立存在的。所立与能立也都是互相观待，一切安立都将瓦解。仅仅如此并不能成立自性观待，例如，右边的山和左边的山，二者在自性上没有任何观待。当右边的山上生长花朵果实等时，左边的山也必须生长，否则就会出现荒谬。因此，这两座山在自性上不是观待，只是在名言上观待。右边的能立依赖于左边，左边的能立依赖于右边，因此依赖于右边的安立之名言。虽然事物本身不是观待，但因此必须说缘起的主要方面是能生所生。因此，说自空者依赖于真有真无，说真无者依赖于真有，这只是真无的安立理解依赖于真有的安立理解，二者在自性上不是观待，因为真无是无实之物。对于什么都没有的东西，彼此之间没有依赖的理由。因此：因此，此缘起之理，能断除一切恶见之网。说观待成立之理本身是前所未有的阻断实执之理也不合理，仅仅凭此就能将所立与能立的一切缘起都确定为无自性
English
Due to the power of the seeds of hearing done in previous lives ripening, the perfect wisdom that is naturally possessed in this life is called innate wisdom. In this life, having heard and learned extensively, completely planting the seeds and cultivating them, the perfect wisdom that arises from this is called acquired wisdom. Second, examining dependent establishment: If the produced effect arises from the producing cause, then the effect becomes dependent on the cause. Therefore, the effect does not exist by its own nature. This refers to the relationship between the producing cause and the produced effect. Any dharma that is established by its own nature must be established independently, without relying on anything. However, these internal and external phenomena all rely on their respective causes, and therefore are not established independently. The established and the establisher are also mutually dependent, and all establishments will collapse. However, this alone does not establish inherent dependence. For example, the mountain on the right and the mountain on the left have no inherent mutual dependence whatsoever. When flowers and fruits grow on the mountain on the right, the mountain on the left must also grow them, otherwise it would be absurd. Therefore, these two mountains are not inherently dependent, but only nominally dependent. The establisher on the right depends on the left, and the establisher on the left depends on the right. Therefore, it depends on the nominal designation of the right. Although the objects themselves are not dependent, it must be said that the main aspect of dependent origination is the producer and the produced. Therefore, saying that self-emptiness depends on true existence and true non-existence, and saying that true non-existence depends on true existence, is only that the understanding of the establishment of true non-existence depends on the understanding of the establishment of true existence. The two are not inherently dependent, because true non-existence is an unreal thing. There is no reason for mutual dependence for something that does not exist. Therefore: Therefore, this reasoning of dependent origination cuts through all nets of wrong views. It is also unreasonable to say that the reasoning of dependent establishment itself is an unprecedented reasoning that prevents the clinging to reality, because by this alone, all dependent originations of the established and the establisher can be determined as without inherent existence.
Chinese
能夠成立。因為那個能力，可以成立遍計所執的法都是無自性的，但是，生起和能生起的緣起他緣起性的事物，不能成立為無自性。這樣一來，世尊以有也包含於無，無也包含於有，因此說：不應說是有，也不應說是無。這樣一切法不是說成一體，而是互相觀待嗎？這是就所安立和能安立的緣起而說的。這是關於五法、三自性、緣起成立的第五品解說。第六品，成立二無我。分為：人無我的解說、法無我的解說、以及與二者相關的意義的種種名稱的解說三部分。第一部分又分為：以進入的方式作簡要的說明、廣泛地解說成立人無我的理智、以及總結意義三部分。第一部分是：將不淨執為淨、將痛苦執為快樂、將無常執為常、將無我執為我，說了四顛倒。其中，將無我的執為我的顛倒，因為前三者是俱生我執的助手，所以，成為顛倒執著的一切分別的基礎和根本的，就是我。一般來說，我的梵語是阿特曼（藏文：ཨདྨ་ཀ་，梵文天城體：आत्म，梵文羅馬擬音：ātman，漢語字面意思：我），這是就語氣輕微而說的。因此，不依賴任何事物而能獨立存在的，就稱為我，這樣是就法我的角度來說的。如果就語氣嚴謹來說，就是指以蘊為對象，執著我為我的情況，這樣是就人我的角度來說的。所謂的我見，就是指壞聚見，這是以壞滅和無常的自性之蘊的集合為對象，執著我為我，這也是與無明相隨順的，只要有對四諦愚昧的無明存在，這個我見也就存在，斷除無明，這個我見也就斷除了。這樣一來，因為無明
English
It is possible to establish. Because of that ability, it is possible to establish that all phenomena of complete imputation are without self-nature, but it is not possible to establish that the other-powered entity of dependent origination of arising and causing is without self-nature. Thus, the Blessed One said that existence is also included in non-existence, and non-existence is also included in existence. Therefore, it is said: One should not say that it exists, nor should one say that it does not exist. Is it not said that all phenomena are interdependent on one entity? This is said with reference to the dependent origination of what is to be established and what establishes. This is the explanation of the fifth chapter on the establishment of the five dharmas, the three natures, and dependent origination. The sixth chapter establishes the two selflessnesses. It is divided into three parts: the explanation of the selflessness of persons, the explanation of the selflessness of phenomena, and the explanation of the various names of the meanings related to both. The first part is further divided into three parts: a brief explanation of the way of entering, an extensive explanation of the reasoning for establishing the selflessness of persons, and a summary of the meaning. The first part is: taking the impure as pure, taking suffering as happiness, taking impermanence as permanence, and taking selflessness as self. Among the four perversions, the perversion of taking selflessness as self, because the first three are helpers of the innate self-grasping, therefore, the basis and root of all conceptualizations that are perverted grasping is the self. Generally speaking, the Sanskrit word for self is Atman (Tibetan: ཨདྨ་ཀ་, Sanskrit Devanagari: आत्म, Sanskrit Roman transliteration: ātman, Chinese literal meaning: self), which is said in a light tone. Therefore, what can exist independently without relying on anything is called self, which is from the perspective of the self of phenomena. If it is said in a strict tone, it refers to the situation of grasping the aggregates as objects and grasping me as self, which is from the perspective of the self of persons. The so-called view of self is the view of the perishable collection, which is to grasp me as self by focusing on the collection of aggregates that are perishable and impermanent in nature. This is also in accordance with ignorance, and as long as there is ignorance that is ignorant of the four truths, this view of self also exists, and when ignorance is eliminated, this view of self is also eliminated. Thus, because of ignorance
Chinese
是故，以（五）蕴为因，便会产生坏聚见。由于对蕴的集合体没有完全了解我、无我，依靠愚昧的心，便会错误地认为其中有我、有自性，从而产生坏聚见。这是因为坏聚见的行相非常明显。而无明是没有任何分别、行相不明显的，因此二者在行相和执持上是相违的。虽然无明不会直接由此产生，但由于坏聚见颠倒错乱的习气种子之力，无明才会产生。因此，坏聚见有欲界、色界、无色界这三种分类。由欲界所摄的坏聚见，仅仅是不善的；而由上二界所摄的坏聚见，则是有覆无记的。如此，在五蕴之上，本来就没有所谓的“人我”。因此，虽然执持的对境自性不存在，但由于错乱的心而执持为我，在执持方式的所执分上，便说有人我，以及执持它的分别念，称为人我执。如此，人我是不可能在任何时候都坏灭的，因此执持为恒常存在，是常见。不仅如此，我不是从无始以来就恒常存在的，而是认为突然从这个中间产生，然后到未来的尽头都恒常存在。同样，执持为两个生世，三个生世，一年、一月、一日，总之，执持为一段时间，从第二个刹那开始都不会坏灭而存在，这是与人我执相关的常见。如果心里认为以前存在一个真实成立的我，然后认为它在未来的某个时候会毁灭、断灭，这是与人我执相关的断见。这两种执持，被称为边执见，堕入常断二边，如同左右的悬崖一般。执持这两种边见的颠倒错乱之心，就叫做边执见。因此，如经中所说：“凡是自性存在的，那是不可能没有的，是常。以前有而现在没有的，那是断见。”就是这样说的。如此说来，人我的
English
Therefore, by taking the (five) aggregates as a cause, the view of the perishable aggregate arises. Because of not fully understanding the selflessness of the aggregates, relying on the deluded mind, one mistakenly believes that there is a self, a nature, and thus the view of the perishable arises. This is because the appearance of the view of the perishable is very clear. Ignorance, however, is without any distinction and its appearance is not clear, therefore the two are contradictory in appearance and grasping. Although ignorance does not directly arise from this, ignorance arises from the power of the seed of the reversed habit of the view of the perishable. Therefore, the view of the perishable has three