English
Gyi. Furthermore, those who consider whatever appears to be conventional truth and whatever is emptiness to be ultimate truth, and who consider appearance and emptiness to be inseparable in essence, thus considering the two truths to be one in essence but different in aspect, are different from us. Moreover, if one does not distinguish such realms separately but only takes control from the perspective of ultimate wisdom, then there is only the single ultimate truth, and nothing else. This is because there are no conventional phenomena at all in the ultimate truth. Fifth, examining one and different. Generally, there are two views: one that considers the two truths to be one in essence but different in aspect, and another that considers the two truths to be neither one in essence nor different in essence. Here, we follow the latter view. These two truths are different in that they negate being one in essence, because from the perspective of essence, they are neither one nor different. Moreover, according to our own system, although it is established as the essence of ultimate truth, it is not established as the essence of conventional truth. If one considers the essence to be one, then there are the four faults mentioned in the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*: if the two truths are one in essence, then when children and ordinary people see the conventional truth, they should also see the ultimate truth, and thus they should already be liberated. Just as attachment and other afflictions arise from focusing on the conventional truth, afflictions would also arise from focusing on the ultimate truth, and thus the ultimate truth would become an object of affliction. Just as there is no distinction in the ultimate truth, there should also be no distinction in the conventional truth. The conventional truth can only be understood through what is seen and heard by consciousness, and there would be no way to seek the ultimate truth beyond that, because the two truths are one in essence. If the two truths are other, that is, different, then there are also four faults: even if one sees the ultimate truth, one would not be able to reverse the clinging to truth in the conventional truth. The ultimate truth would not be the nature of the conventional truth. Merely by the absence of the conventional truth, the nature would not be the ultimate truth. In the continuum of one person, there would be both afflictions and pure aspects at the same time, because the two truths are different. This is what is said in the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*. Furthermore, one should know how to apply these eight faults to the ultimate truth, the perfectly established, and the other two characteristics, as appropriate. Second, explaining the distinct establishment of the nature of the two truths.
Chinese
是这样的，至尊弥勒怙主和我互相辩论的讲说方式，以及论师龙树和我互相辩论的讲说方式，还有从中边分别论中讲说的方式，共有三种。第一种分为总的指示和详细的解说两种。第一种是：法，具有世俗谛的真理，就像幻术一样，虽然其自性空无真实，但仅仅是显现而已。法性，胜义谛的真理，在其自性中没有变化，并且在远离能取所取的圣者等持智慧的境界中是真实的。第二种是详细的解说，分为：法，具有世俗谛的自性之解说，以及法性，胜义谛的自性之解说两种。第一种，法，具有世俗谛的自性之解说，分为：说明所取与幻术相似并带有必要性的解说，说明能取与幻术相似，以及说明与幻术的八种比喻相似的意义。第一种又分为：境的状况，以心识证悟的方式，以及说明境不是二元的。第一种是：就像幻术的材料，如石子和树枝等，是迷惑为马、牛等的基础一样，同样，迷惑为能取所取二者的基础，就是非真实的遍计所执，也就是他性起。那些石子树枝等材料，通过幻术咒语变幻成马牛等形象，同样，遍计所执也是在能取所取二者本无的情况下显现为二元，因此说是迷惑的境。就像幻术的材料，在其自身中没有马牛等实有自性一样，同样，他性起在遍计所执的自性中不存在，这就是胜义谛。就像幻术的材料，执着于马牛等形象一样，同样，显现为二元，这就是在世俗中显现。这里所说的胜义谛和世俗谛并非真实的胜义谛和世俗谛，而是安立在暂时状态下的胜义谛和世俗谛。因为，远离能取所取二元的遍计所执，仅仅是识的显现，这也是真实的世俗谛，以及暂时状态下的胜义谛。第二，以心识证悟的方式是：如果幻术咒语所变现的事物不存在，那么，其原因，石子树枝等就会清晰地显现出来
English
It is like this, the way of teaching through mutual debate between the venerable Maitreya Bodhisattva and myself, and the way of teaching through mutual debate between the master Nagarjuna and myself, as well as the way of teaching from the Madhyāntavibhāga-kārikā, there are three kinds. The first kind is divided into a general indication and a detailed explanation. The first is: Dharmas, the truths of conventional reality, are said to be like illusions, because their own nature is empty of truth, yet they exist merely as appearances. Dharmatā, the truth of ultimate reality, is unchanging in its own nature, and is true in the realm of the noble ones' meditative wisdom that is empty of both grasper and grasped. The second is the detailed explanation, which is divided into: the explanation of the nature of dharmas, which have conventional truth, and the explanation of the nature of dharmatā, which has ultimate truth. The first, the explanation of the nature of dharmas, which have conventional truth, is divided into: the explanation of the grasped as being similar to illusion, along with the necessity of explaining it; the explanation of the grasper as being similar to illusion; and the explanation of the meaning of being similar to the eight similes of illusion. The first is further divided into: the situation of the object, the way of realization by the mind, and the explanation that the object is non-dual. The first is: Just as the materials of illusion, such as pebbles and twigs, are the basis for being mistaken for horses, cattle, etc., so too, the basis for being mistaken for the two, grasper and grasped, is the unreal parikalpita, which is the other-dependent. Just as those materials, pebbles and twigs, are transformed into the forms of horses, cattle, etc., by the mantra of illusion, so too, the parikalpita appears as dual when there is no duality of grasper and grasped, therefore it is said to be the object of delusion. Just as the materials of illusion do not have the true nature of horses, cattle, etc., in themselves, so too, the other-dependent does not exist in the nature of the parikalpita, which is considered to be the ultimate truth. Just as the materials of illusion are fixated upon as horses, cattle, etc., so too, the appearance as dual is considered to appear in the conventional truth. The ultimate truth and conventional truth spoken of here are not the actual ultimate truth and conventional truth, but are the ultimate truth and conventional truth that are established in a temporary state. Because the parikalpita, which is devoid of the two, grasper and grasped, is merely the appearance of consciousness, this is also the actual conventional truth, and the ultimate truth in a temporary state. Second, the way of realization by the mind is: If the things transformed by the mantra of illusion do not exist, then their causes, pebbles, twigs, etc., will clearly appear.
Chinese
如果像那样，当那些错觉的处所转变成其他，获得圣者的智慧时，以平等性的智慧现量证悟法性后，从平等性中生起的后得的非真实的遍计所执，是依他起。如同世间没有错觉的人们，对于幻术的石子和木头等不迷惑，随心所欲地享用，同样，精进修持戒律没有错觉的人们，圣者们也是错觉的处所转变成其他，对于意义无误的法性，如是性，随心所欲地享受。第三，开示境不存在二元，有二：正文和它的必要。第一部分有比喻和意义两种。第一，比喻是，马和象等显现，存在于幻术的材料石子木头等中，但马象等的实物真实存在是不存在的。因此，幻术等显现为马象等是存在的，并且在那里真实不存在，这样说。幻术等显现为马象等存在，这不是不存在，因为在马象等中真实不存在，所以也不是存在。对于幻术等，仅仅显现存在和真实不存在，也说没有差别，因为真实不存在本身就是仅仅显现存在，仅仅显现存在本身就是真实不存在的缘故。第二，意义是，同样，显现为能取所取的二元，存在于显现之基的依他起中，但能取所取的二元的真实本体是不存在的。因此，对于色等，仅仅显现存在，并且在那里真实不存在，这样说。在那里，显现为色等存在，这不是不存在，因为在那里真实不存在，所以也不是存在。对于色等，仅仅显现存在和真实不存在，也说没有差别，因为仅仅显现存在本身就是真实不存在的缘故。例如，水中显现的月亮，和从未存在过月亮，二者本体没有差别一样。第二，必要是，那么，说存在不存在等，有什么必要呢？因为通过推理色等真实不存在，从而遮止执着为真实的边，并且仅仅显现存在
English
If, in that way, when those places of illusion transform into something else, and one attains the wisdom of the noble ones, having directly realized the nature of reality with the wisdom of equanimity, the non-veridical conceptual proliferation of other-dependence that arises from equanimity is the object. Just as worldly people without illusion are not deluded by the pebbles and wood, etc., of that illusion and enjoy them as they wish, so too, those diligent in upholding vows, without illusion, the noble ones also, the place of illusion having transformed into something else, enjoy the suchness, the nature of reality without error in meaning, as they please. Third, there are two aspects to showing that the object is non-dual: the actual topic and its purpose. The first has two parts: example and meaning. First, the example is that appearances such as horses and elephants exist in the materials of illusion, such as pebbles and wood, but the true entity of horses and elephants, etc., does not truly exist. Therefore, it is said that appearances as horses and elephants, etc., exist in illusion, etc., but there is no truth there. The appearance of horses, elephants, etc., in illusion, etc., is not non-existent, but because there is no truth in horses, elephants, etc., it is also not existent. It is also said that there is no difference between merely appearing to exist and not truly existing in those illusions, etc., because not truly existing is itself merely appearing to exist, and merely appearing to exist is itself not truly existing. Second, the meaning is that, similarly, the appearance as duality of grasper and grasped exists in the other-dependence that is the basis of appearance, but the true entity of the duality of grasper and grasped does not exist. Therefore, it is said that there is only appearance of forms, etc., and that there is no truth there. The appearance of forms, etc., is not non-existent, but because there is no truth there, it is also not existent. It is also said that there is no difference between merely appearing to exist and not truly existing in forms, etc., because merely appearing to exist is itself not truly existing. For example, just as there is no difference in essence between the moon appearing in water and the moon never having existed. Second, the purpose is: well then, what is the purpose of speaking of existence and non-existence, etc.? Because by reasoning that forms, etc., do not truly exist, one refutes the extreme of imputing truth, and merely appearing to exist
Chinese
为了遮破那些从一开始就否定一切显现，认为一切皆不存在的断见边，以及为了遮破那些认识到有和无没有差别，因为轮回仅仅是显现而感到厌倦，最终以小乘涅槃为归宿的那些人，因此依次安立了存在、不存在以及有和无没有差别。第二，关于将所执著的事物视为如幻，有三点：揭示执著产生的错觉之因和自性；所断之敌与如幻相似；断除之方式与如幻相似。第一点是：将显现为色法的错觉之因和错觉，即眼识等二者，依次认为是显现为蓝色等色法实物的识，以及非色法的识。如果认为，虽然错觉之因不真实，但错觉，即眼识等的本体是真实成立的吗？并非如此，因为作为因的色法之识是不真实的，所以作为果的非色法之识，即眼识等，在那里也是不真实的。第二，所断之敌与如幻相似，分为两点：譬喻和意义。首先是譬喻，分为两点，第一是杂染的譬喻：执著于幻化大象形象的意识，因为是错觉，所以说能取的大象和所取的意识是二取，也就是说过患是二取。其含义是，虽然显现并非如其所是，能取和所取二者并不真实，但却执着于能取和所取二者。第二是清净的譬喻：修习不净观的瑜伽士将所有地方都执著为骷髅的形象，这也是因为是错觉，所以说境和识是二取。其含义是，虽然显现并非如其所是，能取和所取二者并不真实，但却执着于能取和所取二者。第二是意义，分为两点，第一是不共品：同样，作为错觉之自性的法，贪欲等不共品，无论是什么，就像幻化的大象仅仅是显现一样，也仅仅是不真实的分别念，就像幻化的大象不真实一样，能取和所取也是不真实的，有和无二者没有差别。