Chinese
亦然。为了显示那一点，那些没有成立，没有成立就应当观察，观察也不可能成立，因为没有例子。说了这样的话。因为应当观察和观察的那些没有成立，所以识等四者没有成立。如果识等四者没有成立，那么应当观察和观察也不可能成立，因为没有因就没有果，没有果因也不可能成立。这样显示说，你用识等果的理由来成立因，即应当观察和观察是存在的，所以我显示了因，即应当观察和观察是不存在的，所以果，即识等不成立，以及因为果，即识等不存在，所以因，即应当观察和观察也不成立。你的不同意的例子，比如盲人没有眼睛，所以没有识等果，如果反过来说，有眼睛就有识等果，这也是不行的，因为应当观察和观察被作为一方，所以除此之外，没有识等果，这是总结性的陈述。有些人这样说：在胜义谛中，识等是存在的，因为它们的果，如取等是存在的。对于那些人应当这样说：取等，怎么会存在呢？因为它们也和识等一样没有成立。这是这样理解的，即对于自己的宗派中那些说在胜义谛中，识等是存在的，因为它们的果，如取等是存在的那些人，也要这样说，如果识等不存在，那么它们的果，如取等怎么会存在呢？应当这样说，因为取等也和识等一样没有成立。这样解释就理解了。 这样显示说：因为渴爱的缘故而有取，这是因为因，即渴爱不存在，所以果，即取也不存在，其余的也同样，根据情况
English
Likewise. In order to show that, those are not established, if not established, then one should observe, and observation is also impossible to establish, because there is no example. Having said this. Because those to be observed and the observer are not established, the four, such as consciousness, are not established. If the four, such as consciousness, are not established, then the to be observed and the observer are also impossible to establish, because if there is no cause, there is no result, and if there is no result, the cause is also impossible to establish. Thus it is shown that you use the reason of the result, such as consciousness, to establish the cause, that is, the to be observed and the observer exist, so I have shown that the cause, that is, the to be observed and the observer do not exist, so the result, that is, consciousness, etc., is not established, and because the result, that is, consciousness, etc., does not exist, the cause, that is, the to be observed and the observer, is also not established. Your example of the opposite, such as a blind person has no eyes, so there is no result such as consciousness, etc., if you say the opposite, that if there are eyes, there is a result such as consciousness, etc., this is also not possible, because the to be observed and the observer are taken as one side, so apart from that, there is no result such as consciousness, etc., this is a summary statement. Some people say this: In the ultimate truth, consciousness, etc., exist, because their results, such as grasping, etc., exist. To those people, it should be said: How can grasping, etc., exist? Because they are also not established like consciousness, etc. This is understood in this way, that is, to those in one's own sect who say that in the ultimate truth, consciousness, etc., exist, because their results, such as grasping, etc., exist, it should also be said that if consciousness, etc., do not exist, then how can their results, such as grasping, etc., exist? It should be said that because grasping, etc., are also not established like consciousness, etc. This explanation is understood. Thus it is shown that: Because of the cause of craving, there is grasping, this is because the cause, that is, craving, does not exist, so the result, that is, grasping, also does not exist, and the rest are the same, according to the circumstances.
Chinese
应当广说支分。近取，是指应当近取的事物，即欲、戒律、禁行、胜解、我语和见解等。近取一词的含义是，贪爱等因缘以果的方式应当近取，因此称为近取，即欲近取、戒律和禁行胜解近取、我语近取、见解近取等。等等，是指首先展示的那些，即指首先展示了有等和近取等。那些也是有、生、老死等。那些是指什么呢？是指应当连接“是什么”一词。因此，你存在同样的过失，这是总结和所有结果。因此，如果先前认为此人缘于对色法的专注和观察而成为观察者，那么对色法的专注也只有在眼、色、光明、虚空和作意存在时才存在，因此，具有天授等集合才能被称作观察者，除此之外则没有。正如所说，你存在同样的过失，因此你的观察者、观察和被观察者都不能成立，这是总结性的陈述。现在，为了以先前所示的方式，相似地展示外道论者的辩论中，首先将危害等和声音等作为例子来接近，（经文说：）以见听和嗅，做体验和触及意，听者和听等，应知如是分别解说。意思是说，从现在开始，外道为了证明存在生和行，因此在这个关于处界考察的论辩中，首先在建立不相符的方面时，实际上内部的处界应当仅仅被认为是生，因为它们各自确定于各自的境。在此，对于没有生者来说，没有各自确定于各自的境，例如石女之子的处界。
English
The divisions should be explained extensively. "Clinging" refers to the things that should be clung to, namely desire, discipline, asceticism, supreme adherence, assertion of self, and views. The meaning of the term "clinging" is that craving and other causes should be clung to as a result, hence it is called clinging, i.e., clinging to desire, clinging to discipline and asceticism as supreme, clinging to assertion of self, and clinging to views. "Etc." refers to those that are shown first, i.e., it refers to those such as existence and clinging that are shown first. Those are also existence, birth, old age, and death. What are those? It refers to connecting with the word "what is it?" Therefore, you have the same fault, which is the conclusion and the result of everything. Therefore, if it is previously inferred that this person is an observer because of focusing on and observing form, then the focusing on form only exists when eye, form, light, space, and attention are present. Therefore, one is called an observer when possessing the collection of Deva-given and others, but there is no other than that. As it is said, you have the same fault, therefore your observer, observation, and object of observation are not established, which is a concluding statement. Now, in order to similarly show, in the debate of the non-Buddhists, how harm and sound are first approached as examples, (the text says:) "Through seeing, hearing, and smelling, doing experiencing and touching mind, the hearer and hearing, etc., should be known to be explained separately." It means that from now on, non-Buddhists, in order to prove that there is birth and going, therefore in this debate on the examination of the sense bases, first, when establishing the contradictory side, actually the internal sense bases should only be considered as birth, because they are each determined in their respective objects. Here, for those who are not born, there is no determination in their respective objects, for example, the sense bases of the son of a barren woman.