Chinese
這些非實體的法也同樣會產生荒謬的結論。例如，雖然幼苗是從種子產生的，但也會得出幼苗並非由種子所生的荒謬結論，原因就在於此。此外，如果有人認為這些滅盡的事物雖然最初產生，但最終不會毀滅，那麼這將導致事物是恆常存在的結論。因為它們最初產生，所以是事物，又因為它們最終不會毀滅，所以是恆常的。因此，按照自宗的觀點，雖然是非實體，但新產生的事物是存在的，而且由於它是因所產生，所以必然是有因的。如果這樣，它就和實體沒有區別了。如果有人這樣認為，那麼凡是由近取因所產生、本質上存在、具有實體基礎的事物都是實體，而凡不是由近取因所產生、本質上不存在、沒有實體基礎的事物都是非實體。這種非實體在相對的層面上具有有為法的特徵，即使只是由心的分別念所安立，也是在遮遣的層面上產生。然而，它並沒有本質上的產生，因為它只是在假立的層面上存在。同樣，即使只是在世俗諦的層面上產生，它也不會在世俗諦的真實層面上產生。因此，本質上具有生滅的事物，僅僅存在於有為的實體之中。對於有為的非實體來說，雖然可以證明僅僅通過心的假立而存在生滅變化，但在通過理智進行詳細分析的層面上，更不用說在感官意識等顯現的層面上存在生滅變化了，又從何證明它不存在呢？由於這種假立是在錯誤的層面上進行的，所以必須認為非實體具有因。如果這樣，就能證明它具有生滅。如果即使具有生滅也不是有為法，那將會非常荒謬，即使具有有為法自身的特徵，又有誰會說它不是有為法呢？這樣說是非常錯誤的。對於有為法中本質上不存在的事物（如虛空），雖然沒有近取因和俱生因，但一定存在損壞因和作用因。例如，遮蔽（其他）具有阻礙的實體（如瓶子）之後，隨之而來的是該處虛空的產生。
English
These non-substantial dharmas would also lead to absurd conclusions. For example, although a sprout arises from a seed, it would also be absurd to conclude that the sprout is not born from the seed, and that is the reason. Furthermore, if one thinks that these cessations, although initially arising, might not ultimately perish, then this would lead to the conclusion that things are permanent. Because they arise initially, they are things, and because they do not ultimately perish, they are permanent. Therefore, according to our own system, although it is non-substantial, what newly arises is existent, and since it is produced by a cause, it necessarily becomes causal. If so, it would become no different from a substantial thing. If one thinks this, then whatever phenomena are produced by a proximate cause, exist substantially, and have a basis for a substantial thing are substantial things, while whatever phenomena are not produced by a proximate cause, do not exist substantially, and do not have a basis are non-substantial. That non-substantial thing has the characteristic of being conditioned in relation to something else. Even what is merely imputed by conceptual thought arises in the context of negation. However, there is no substantial arising in it, because it is merely in the context of imputation. Similarly, even if it arises merely in conventional truth, it does not arise in the ultimate truth. Therefore, what has substantial arising and ceasing exists only in conditioned substantial things. For conditioned non-substantial things, although it can be proven that there are arising and ceasing changes merely through mental imputation, let alone the existence of arising and ceasing changes in the context of sensory consciousness and other manifest appearances, how can it be proven that it does not exist? Since this imputation is done in the context of error, it is necessary to consider non-substantial things as having causes. If so, it is proven that there is arising and ceasing. If, even though there is arising and ceasing, it is not conditioned, then it would be extremely absurd. Even though it possesses the characteristics of a conditioned thing, who would say that it is not conditioned? To say so is extremely mistaken. For a conditioned dharma that does not exist substantially (like space), although there is no proximate cause or simultaneous cause for its arising, there must necessarily be a cause of decay and a causal agent. For example, after obscuring (other) obstructive substantial things (like a vase), what follows is the arising of space in that place.
Chinese
是因。又，在那上面放置有碍之事物时，是使那上面的虚空受损之作用因。同样，有些非事物也有离因，即修习各自获得止观的道，成为止观的离因，也成为其他果法<道之功德>的生因。仅有放置之因和作用因，不能产生物质之事物，但在观察之境中，由其所生，故与兔角等虚构之事物以及这些非事物不相同。说这些是常法者之所欲中，是作为实体而观察，还是观察是常法？若如前者，则这两个灭<如外道>将成为常法之事物，因作为实体是常法之故，不能承认，因常法和事物二者，体性极为相违之故，不可能存在于一个基之上。若如后者，则与心识前生灭之现象直接可见相违。第五个要点是，事物和非事物二者皆显示为有为法，即任何成为诸根识之对境的法，都是世俗谛，以及成为分别念之是想之对境的一切世俗假立，都是有为法，而成为无二智慧唯一的自证之对境者，则为无为法，那也是胜义谛，并且是从心识前的一切法中完全解脱者，因此它完全超越了对境。名为此者，是剩余意义之偈颂。第二，论证行苦，即痛苦之痛苦，乃至畜生也能认知为痛苦，故无需以理证成立。变异之痛苦<具慧者>，因具有辨别能力之异生也能直接认知为痛苦之故，那也无需以理证成立。必须以理证成立为痛苦者，是孩童们因不了解是痛苦，而执着为安乐之行苦。那也是一切行皆为刹那
English
It is the cause. Also, when an obstructive object is placed on it, it is the acting cause that damages the space above it. Similarly, some non-things also have a separation cause, that is, the practice of the path of individually attaining calm and insight becomes the separation cause of calm and insight, and also becomes the cause of arising of other fruit dharmas <qualities of the path>. Only the cause of placement and the acting cause cannot produce material things, but in the realm of observation, it is produced by it, so it is not the same as fabricated things such as rabbit horns and these non-things. Among those who say that these are permanent dharmas, is it observed as a substance, or is observation a permanent dharma? If it is like the former, then these two cessations <like the outsiders> will become permanent things, because as a substance it is a permanent dharma, it cannot be admitted, because the two permanent dharmas and things are extremely contradictory in nature, it is impossible to exist on one basis. If it is like the latter, it contradicts the fact that the phenomena of arising and ceasing in the mind are directly visible. The fifth key point is that both things and non-things are shown as conditioned dharmas, that is, any dharma that becomes the object of the sense consciousnesses is the conventional truth, and all conventional fabrications that become the object of the thought of being are conditioned dharmas, and those that become the object of the self-awareness of the only non-dual wisdom are unconditioned dharmas, which is also the ultimate truth, and is completely liberated from all dharmas in the mind, so it completely transcends the object. What is called this is the verse of the remaining meaning. Second, arguing for the suffering of conditioning, that is, the suffering of suffering, even animals can recognize as suffering, so there is no need to establish it with reason. The suffering of change <those with intelligence>, because even ordinary beings with the ability to discern can directly recognize it as suffering, so there is no need to establish it with reason. What must be established as suffering by reason is the suffering of children because they do not understand it as suffering, but cling to the suffering of conditioning as happiness. That is also because all conditioning is momentary.
Chinese
因为刹那产生和坏灭，是无常的自性，所以没有丝毫存在的机会。因为没有存在的自主权，不情愿地坏灭，所以就是痛苦。而且，不情愿地坏灭是痛苦，更何况是想要坏灭的时候呢？想要和不想要两者都不是的中间状态坏灭也是痛苦，因为那个坏灭也是没有自主权，不由自主地坏灭的缘故。四圣谛中，痛苦和集谛从一个基础上观察，集谛是因，痛苦是果。例如，从烦恼嗔恨的驱使下，某个有情做了杀生的业，从那个因集谛产生了果痛苦谛，就像地狱的蕴形成一样。但是，一般来说，痛苦和集谛两者互相是因果，所以在任何情况下，集谛不一定是因，痛苦不一定是果。道谛如果用理智来分析，虽然是断除痛苦和集谛的无上对治，但也属于痛苦和集谛的范畴，因为士夫相续中的道也与士夫的近取蕴相关联，而且是刹那刹那无常，没有存在的自主权的自性。一切痛苦都是从因无常的力量中产生的，例如，财富和兴旺等圆满的事物，先前存在后来坏灭等，与所爱分离的痛苦也如上所述。时间刹那刹那地流逝，从无常中，那些最终坏灭的痛苦就会产生。还有，与不可爱的事物相遇的痛苦产生也是，先前没有痛苦，但那也是时间刹那刹那地流逝，与不可爱的事物越来越接近，从而产生与不想要的事物相遇的痛苦。另外，事物不住留在各自的状态，而是从那状态变成其他的状态，最终坏灭也是痛苦和令人厌恶之处，例如，从因种子中，通过水、肥料、温度、湿度等的完全催动，不住留在种子的状态，而是
English
Since it arises and disintegrates in an instant, it is of the nature of impermanence, so there is not the slightest chance of abiding. Since there is no autonomy of abiding, and it disintegrates unwillingly, it is suffering itself. Moreover, if it is suffering to disintegrate unwillingly, what need is there to say that it is suffering when one wants to disintegrate? Even if it is a middle state that is neither wanting nor not wanting to disintegrate, it is still suffering, because that disintegration is also without autonomy, disintegrating involuntarily. Among the Four Noble Truths, suffering and the origin are observed from the same basis, the origin is the cause and suffering is the result. For example, driven by the affliction of hatred, if a sentient being commits the act of killing, from that cause, the origin, arises the result, the truth of suffering, just like the formation of the aggregates of hell. However, in general, suffering and the origin are both cause and effect to each other, so in any case, the origin is not necessarily the cause, and suffering is not necessarily the result. The truth of the path, if analyzed with reason, although it is the unsurpassed antidote to abandoning suffering and the origin, it is also included in the category of suffering and the origin, because the path in the continuum of a person is also related to the aggregates of the person's appropriation, and it is impermanent from moment to moment, of the nature of having no autonomy of abiding. All suffering arises from the power of the cause of impermanence, for example, wealth and prosperity, etc., things that were once complete later disintegrate, and the suffering of separation from loved ones is also as stated above. Time passes moment by moment, and from impermanence, the suffering of those final disintegrations will arise. Also, the suffering of encountering unpleasant things arises because, previously there was no suffering, but that too is because time passes moment by moment, and one becomes closer and closer to unpleasant things, thus the suffering of encountering unwanted things arises. Furthermore, things do not remain in their respective states, but change from that state to other states, and ultimately disintegrate, which is also a place of suffering and aversion, for example, from the cause of the seed, through the complete stimulation of water, fertilizer, temperature, humidity, etc., it does not remain in the state of the seed, but
Chinese
完全坏灭而执持苗芽的阶段，并且不滞留于此，它完全坏灭，完全执持果实的阶段，并且不恒常滞留于此，最终会坏灭。此外，能够染污心续也是从无常的力量中产生的，从先前未被染污的状态，以刹那刹那的时间完全引导，使心续新近被染污所沾染，被烦恼所驱使，行对心识完全施加习气，而且习气也是，最初的刹那只是种下习气，尚未开始习气成熟，它也以刹那坏灭，然后刹那刹那地执持习气成熟的阶段，习气成熟的刹那完全坏灭，由此果实显现，并且不滞留于此，果实最终也会坏灭，因此感到恐惧和痛苦。因此，所有痛苦都是从无常的理由中产生的。第三，成立作者空性，通常，主张作者的那些人，是将不相符的因执持为因，这是一种颠倒执着的迷乱心识，是所有过患的门户。此外，例如执持从常法中产生苗芽，将非因执持为因是颠倒错乱的心识，然而，像承认作者那样，并非是产生所有过患的门户。而且，世间的所有苦乐，也是从善恶的力量中产生的，造作恶业，感受痛苦的果报，行持善业，由此感受安乐的果报，也是作者最初就为众生分别造作的，因此，虽然通常来说，从善恶业中必定产生苦乐果报，但在特殊情况下并非如此确定，如果作者的神高兴，即使造作恶业也会感受安乐的果报，如果作者的神不高兴，即使行持善业也会产生痛苦的果报等等，因为他们主张未造之业相遇，已造之业空耗，以及业果不确定等等，因果的