Chinese
对涅槃的认识，以及对不如理说法之破斥，以及对如是破斥与教证相违之遮遣。第一：若此一切皆非空，则无生亦无灭，由舍弃以及止息，欲成涅槃。如是说。若此等事物皆由自性成立故非空，则不应理，若由自性成立，则无有新产生和新坏灭，故从舍弃和止息哪个烦恼和蕴而欲得解脱是不合理的，因为蕴和烦恼若由自性而住，则不能够退转。第二：无舍亦无得，无断亦无常，无灭亦无生，是说为涅槃。如是说。那么你的涅槃是怎样的呢？有，如贪等一样无舍弃，如沙门果一样无获得，如取蕴等一样无断灭，如非空一样非常，如是自性而无，自性而无灭和无生等戏论寂灭之体性，是说为涅槃之故。其他宗派的两种涅槃是以有余和无余取蕴的角度安立的，但此宗派是以入定中无二取之戏论和出定中有此戏论的角度安立两种涅槃，然二者皆是从断除烦恼的角度而说的，是相同的。第三有三：破斥涅槃成立于四边，显示通达彼者不成立四边，彼者成立之义。第一有三：破斥涅槃于实有和实无各自之边际的观点，破斥于二者之边际的观点，破斥于非二者之边际的观点。第一有四：于实有之边际，于实无之边际破斥其观点，舍弃二边之涅槃安立于何处，以显示执二边之见而作呵责。第一：略言之，涅槃非实有，当成衰老死亡之体性，无有衰老和死亡之，实有是不存在的。若涅槃是实有，则涅槃当成有为法，无为之实有，任何处皆无有。
English
Identifying Nirvana and refuting improper statements about it, as well as refuting contradictions to the scriptures in such refutations. First: If all this is not empty, then there is no arising and no ceasing. From abandonment and cessation, one wishes to attain Nirvana. Thus it is said. If all these things are not empty because they are established by their own nature, then it is unreasonable. If they are established by their own nature, then there is no new arising and no new destruction. Therefore, it is unreasonable to desire liberation from abandoning and ceasing which afflictions and aggregates, because if the aggregates and afflictions abide by their own nature, they cannot be reversed. Second: There is no abandonment and no attainment, no cessation and no permanence, no extinction and no birth, that is called Nirvana. Thus it is said. So what is your Nirvana like? It exists. Like attachment, there is no abandonment, like the fruit of a renunciate, there is no attainment, like the aggregates of grasping, there is no cessation, like non-emptiness, there is no permanence. Likewise, the nature of the pacification of elaborations such as non-existence by nature, non-cessation by nature, and non-birth, is said to be Nirvana. Although the two Nirvanas of other schools are established from the perspective of the aggregates of grasping with remainder and without remainder, in this school, two Nirvanas are established from the perspective of no duality in meditative equipoise and the presence of duality in post-meditation. However, both are similar in that they are spoken of from the perspective of abandoning afflictions. The third has three parts: refuting the establishment of Nirvana in the four extremes, showing that understanding it does not establish the four extremes, and the meaning of its establishment. The first has three parts: refuting the view that Nirvana exists at the extremes of existence and non-existence respectively, refuting the view that it exists at both extremes, and refuting the view that it exists at neither extreme. The first has four parts: at the extreme of existence, at the extreme of non-existence, refuting their views, where to place Nirvana that has abandoned the two extremes, and criticizing by showing the view of holding to the two extremes. First: Briefly, Nirvana is not real, it would become the nature of old age and death, without old age and death, there is no real existence. If Nirvana is real, then Nirvana would become conditioned, there is no unconditioned reality anywhere.
Chinese
。如果涅槃是实有，如何涅槃是依赖的？没有依赖的事物，任何地方都不存在。如此说。分别说者说：涅槃是遮止自身所应断的事物。暂时涅槃，是法，不应是遮止自身所应断的事物。如果是，则应成为衰老，即变异和死亡，即毁灭的自性。因为事物不会与那样的衰老和死亡相混淆。理由成立，因为没有那样的衰老和死亡的事物是不存在的。另外，如果涅槃是事物，则不合理，因为涅槃会变成有为法。无为法是内外的事物，自性上依赖的任何事物，在任何时空终点都不存在，因为是相违的。另外，如果涅槃是事物，那么如何涅槃不是依赖于自己的因产生的呢？必须是，因为没有不依赖于因集合而产生的事物，任何地方都不存在，如是说。第二是：如果涅槃不是实有，如何能成为非实有？对于涅槃不是实有的，那里没有非实有。对于涅槃不是实有的，如何涅槃不是依赖的？对于不依赖的，如何不是非实有？如此说。经部师说：如果不是事物，也是非事物，那也只是安立为远离烦恼和生，那么，这也是非事物，不是仅仅以名言安立，而是以自性安立，如果那样，道理也不合理。如果涅槃不是事物，那么如何能以自性存在于非事物中呢？不合理。在任何方面，已经指出的过失是，已经逝去不是事物的方面，即因此涅槃在非事物中也承认事物存在是不合理的。因为将事物转变为其他事物称为非事物，并且自性存在转变为其他事物是不合理的。另外，如果对于任何涅槃不是事物，自己的体性
English
. If nirvana is real, how is nirvana dependent? There is nothing that is not dependent, nowhere. So it is said. The Vaibhashikas say: Nirvana is the object that prevents its own objects to be abandoned. For a while, nirvana is a phenomenon. It is not reasonable to be an object that prevents its own objects to be abandoned. If it is, it should become old, that is, change, and death, that is, the nature of destruction. Because things are not confused with such old age and death. The reason is established, because there is no object without such old age and death. Furthermore, if nirvana is an object, it is unreasonable, because nirvana will become a conditioned phenomenon. The unconditioned is an internal and external object, and there is nothing that depends on its own nature at any time or place, because it is contradictory. Furthermore, if nirvana is an object, then how can nirvana not be born dependent on its own cause? It must be, because there is no object that is not born dependent on the collection of causes, and it does not exist anywhere, as it is said. The second is: If nirvana is not real, how can it become unreal? For that which nirvana is not real, there is no unreal. For that which nirvana is not real, how is nirvana not dependent? For that which is not dependent, how is it not unreal? So it is said. The Sutra school says: If it is not an object, it is also a non-object, and it is only established as being separate from afflictions and birth, then this is also a non-object, not just established by name, but established by nature, and if so, the reason is also unreasonable. If nirvana is not an object, then how can it exist in non-objects by its own nature? It is unreasonable. In any aspect, the fault that has been pointed out is that the aspect that has passed away is not an object, that is, it is unreasonable to admit that nirvana also exists in non-objects. Because transforming things into other things is called non-things, and it is unreasonable for self-existence to transform into other things. Furthermore, if for any nirvana is not an object, its own nature
Chinese
如果存在，就像坏掉的瓶子依赖于瓶子一样，涅槃怎么不依赖于自己所否定的事物呢？确实是这样的。因此，凡是不依赖于事物而存在的非事物，其自性是不存在的，因为这是可以用道理来证明的。第三是：到来和离去的物，所依赖或作为因，那不是依赖也不是因，涅槃即是如此宣说。如果涅槃在自性上不是事物和非事物二者，那么涅槃是什么呢？是存在的。从前世到来此处，以及从此处去往后世的生死，从一个到另一个传递的事物自身和自身因缘的集合所依赖的，或者像灯产生光一样，集合作为因所依赖的，那就是依赖于自己的因缘集合，像这样不是依赖，也不是作为因来进入，而是如前所说，烦恼和蕴的戏论寂灭的心的法性，那就是涅槃，这是世尊所开示的。仅仅如此虽然是非事物，但因为在那里自性上没有成立。第四是：生起和坏灭等，空性宣说要舍弃。因此涅槃，可以理解为不是事物和非事物。又是：对于生起的贪执和坏灭的贪执等，空性宣说要舍弃，因此涅槃不是事物，也不是以自性存在的非事物，可以这样理解。如果那二者在自性上存在，那么涅槃也会变成所欲求的。第二是：如果涅槃是，事物和非事物二者，事物和非事物等，如果变成解脱那是不合理的。如果涅槃是，事物和非事物本身，涅槃不是不依赖的，因为那二者是依赖而存在的。涅槃怎么会是，事物和非事物二者呢？涅槃是无为法，事物和非事物是有为法。涅槃怎么会有，事物和非事物二者呢？那二者不会存在于一个事物上，就像光明和黑暗一样。如是说。如果有人说涅槃是事物。
English
If it exists, just as a broken vase depends on the vase, how can Nirvana not depend on the very thing it negates? Indeed, it does. Therefore, whatever non-thing that does not depend on things and exists by its own nature does not exist, because this can be proven by reason. The third is: The things that come and go, whatever is relied upon or taken as a cause, that is neither reliance nor cause, Nirvana is thus declared. If Nirvana is not both thing and non-thing in its essence, then what is Nirvana? It exists. The birth and death that come here from the previous life and go to the next life from here, the things that pass from one to another, the collection of one's own causes and conditions that are relied upon, or like light arising from a lamp, the collection that is relied upon as a cause, that is reliance on one's own collection of causes and conditions, like this it is not reliance, nor does it enter as a cause, but as previously said, the Dharma nature of the mind that pacifies the afflictions and the proliferation of the aggregates, that is Nirvana, this is what the Bhagavan taught. Although it is only a non-thing, it is not established there in its own nature. The fourth is: Arising and destruction, etc., emptiness declares to abandon. Therefore, Nirvana can be understood as neither thing nor non-thing. Again: For the craving for arising and the craving for destruction, etc., emptiness declares to abandon, therefore Nirvana is not a thing, nor is it a non-thing that exists by its own nature, it can be understood in this way. If those two exist in their own nature, then Nirvana will also become something to be desired. The second is: If Nirvana is, both thing and non-thing, things and non-things, etc., if they become liberation, that is unreasonable. If Nirvana is, thing and non-thing itself, Nirvana is not non-dependent, because those two exist dependently. How can Nirvana be, both thing and non-thing? Nirvana is unconditioned, things and non-things are conditioned. How can Nirvana have, both thing and non-thing? Those two will not exist on one thing, like light and darkness. Thus it is said. If someone says Nirvana is a thing.