Chinese
非可爱亦非不可爱，非痛苦亦非快乐，因此颠倒想皆不存在。 其中，于无常执常是颠倒想。如果从无常之事物中，没有领会到颠倒的常，又怎么会从无常中产生颠倒的常呢？因为是颠倒想，所以是颠倒，即错误的理解。当无常不变成常，无常也不是颠倒。无常之事物并非从无常中获得颠倒的常性而变成颠倒，然而，当将无常之事物，如其所是地安立为无常，并执着为常性时，因为执着颠倒，所以称为颠倒。再次，什么颠倒想执着为颠倒？答：执着为常。再次，那时如何执着为常？因为生起彼之识。如果那样，那时，彼之识并非于无常之事物，因为彼未生起彼之相。因此，识亦非于无常，因为于有执着常之相，执着常如何是颠倒？答：于事物安住于无常而执着常之相，故称为颠倒。再次，事物安住于无常之相，如何如是了知？由何于何生起何之识，由此，从识上显现之相而安立事物，如蓝色和黄色等。常之识不是其他的相，那时，于无常之相，彼之识如何能执着事物？若于他者作彼之无常，则事物是无常，此非如是，彼即是彼时之彼之无常。于他者未生起彼之识，因为是不可见之自性，彼是彼之相是不合理的，应说是执着于颠倒。因此， 常之相非颠倒想，既已说常与无常，则颠倒想本身不存在。
English
Neither lovely nor unlovely, neither suffering nor happiness, therefore inverted perceptions do not exist. Among them, to perceive permanence in impermanence is an inverted perception. If from the object of impermanence, the inverted permanence is not comprehended, then how can the inverted permanence arise from impermanence? Because it is an inverted perception, it is an inversion, that is, a wrong understanding. When impermanence does not become permanence, impermanence is also not an inversion. The object of impermanence does not become an inversion by obtaining the inverted permanence from impermanence. However, when the object of impermanence is established as it is, as impermanence, and is clung to as permanence, then because of clinging to inversion, it is called inversion. Again, what inverted perception clings to as inverted? Answer: Clinging to permanence. Again, how does it cling to permanence at that time? Because that consciousness arises in that form. If that is so, then at that time, that consciousness is not in the object of impermanence, because that form has not arisen in it. Therefore, consciousness is also not in impermanence, because it clings to the form of permanence in what exists. How is clinging to permanence an inversion? Answer: Because clinging to the form of permanence in an object that abides in impermanence, it is called an inversion. Again, how is it understood that an object abides in the form of impermanence? From what, in what, does the consciousness of what arise? From that, the object is established from the form that appears in consciousness, such as blue and yellow. The consciousness of permanence is not the form of another. At that time, in the form of impermanence, how can that consciousness grasp an object? If the impermanence of that is made in another, then the object is impermanent. This is not so, that is the impermanence of that at that time. Because the consciousness of that has not arisen in another, because it is the nature of invisibility, it is not reasonable to say that that is the form of that, and it should be said that it is clinging to inversion. Therefore, the form of permanence is not an inverted perception, and since permanence and impermanence have been spoken of, inverted perception itself does not exist.
Chinese
诶！如是，任何时候都无我，且非我所；对于可爱与不可爱，也非是；对于快乐与痛苦，也非是，应广说之。因此，如是无颠倒，于何时无有颠倒之时，彼无颠倒四者中，由生起之无明不可能有，彼无则行亦不生，其余诸支亦如是。于此，若说所说之支分相续，以因相续而显示，故有缘起，此理不应理。若说由颠倒四者所生之无明本身，若无颠倒则无有，如是显示，彼即成立遮遣行等支分。于何处无有无明，则行等不生，如是无有识，则遮止名与色，乃至无有生，故无老死之间。如是若无缘起，则由彼等以因相续而显示，彼之支分相续又于何处？故成立缘起无生。此处说，若然，虽说由颠倒所生之无明，以无颠倒故而无有，如是说者，如是，然于此处暂时单独安立此等无有，则不能，以能生行故，以显示彼为因之事物之故，且行等亦显示为无明之果故。如是世尊亦曾说：随逐无明之补特伽罗此等，亦现行福德之行，亦现行非福德之行，亦现行不定之行。是故，无明与行等是有，彼有则其他缘起之支分等成立，故说成立缘起十二支。若然，无明与行等之自性若成立，则缘起十二支是有，然非有，为成立如何无有之故而说，无明行无
English
Hey! Thus, at any time, there is no self and it is not mine; it is also not for the lovely and unlovely; it is also not for happiness and suffering, it should be explained in detail. Therefore, thus there is no perversion, and when there is no perversion, among those four without perversion, the ignorance that arises is impossible, and without that, actions do not arise, and the other branches are also the same. Here, if it is said that the continuous sequence of branches is shown as a continuous sequence of causes, therefore there is dependent origination, this is not reasonable. If it is said that the ignorance itself, which arises from the four perversions, is non-existent if there is no perversion, thus showing that, it is established that it refutes the branches such as actions. Where there is no ignorance, actions do not arise, and likewise, without consciousness, name and form are prevented, and as long as there is no birth, there is no old age and death. Thus, if there is no dependent origination, then from those showing a continuous sequence of causes, where are its continuous sequence of branches? Therefore, it is established that dependent origination is unborn. Here it is said, if so, although it is said that the ignorance arising from perversion is non-existent because there is no perversion, thus saying, thus, but here it is not possible to temporarily and separately establish that these are non-existent, because it can produce actions, because it shows it as the thing of the cause, and also because actions etc. are shown as the result of ignorance. Thus, the Blessed One also said: These individuals who follow ignorance also manifest virtuous actions, also manifest non-virtuous actions, and also manifest unwavering actions. Therefore, ignorance and actions etc. exist, and if they exist, then the other branches of dependent origination etc. are established, therefore it is said that the twelve branches of dependent origination are established. If so, if the nature of ignorance and actions etc. is established, then the twelve branches of dependent origination exist, but they are not existent, and it is said to establish how they are non-existent, ignorance action no
Tibetan
མི་འབྱུང༌། །དེ་མེད་འདུ་བྱེད་མི་འབྱུང་ཞིང༌། །དེ་དག་ཕན་ཚུན་རྒྱུ་ཅན་ཏེ། །རང་བཞིན་གྱིས་ཀྱང་མ་གྲུབ་བོ། །གལ་ཏེ་མ་རིག་པ་འདུ་བྱེད་རྣམས་ཀྱི་རྒྱུར་རྣམ་པར་གཞག་པ་ནི་འདི་ལྟར་འདུ་བྱེད་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་དེ་མེད་ལ་རྒྱུ་གང་ཞིག་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་དུ་འབྲས་བུ་དང་འབྲེལ་པ་བྱས་པ་ལས་ཡིན་གྱི་འབྲེལ་པ་མེད་ན་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་ནམ་ཡང་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །ཡང་ན་འབྲས་བུ་ཉེ་བར་མ་བཟུང་བར་འགའ་ཞིག་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་དུ་འགྱུར་ན། དེ་ལྟ་ན་འགའ་ཞིག་འགའ་ཞིག་གི་རྒྱུར་མི་འགྱུར་ལ། དེའི་ཕྱིར་རྒྱུའི་རྣམ་པར་གཞག་པ་འབྲས་བུ་མེད་ན་མ་ཡིན་ལ་རྒྱུ་ཡང་མ་རིག་པ་ནི་འདུ་བྱེད་རྣམས་ཀྱིའོ་ཞེས་བྱ་སྟེ། མ་རིག་པ་ནི་འདུ་བྱེད་མེད་ན་རྒྱུར་མི་འགྱུར་ལ། རྒྱུ་འབྲས་ཀྱི་དངོས་པོའི་སྐབས་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར། རྒྱུའི་སྒྲ་མེད་ཀྱང་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་དུ་རྟོགས་པ་ཉིད་ཀྱི་འབྲས་བུ་རྒྱུའི་སྒྲས་མ་གསུངས་སོ། །ཇི་ལྟར་འབྲས་བུ་ལ་མ་ལྟོས་པར་འགའ་ཞིག་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་མ་རིག་པ་འདུ་བྱེད་མེད་ན་མི་འབྱུང་བ་བཞིན་འབྲས་བུ་ཡང་རྒྱུ་ལ་མ་ལྟོས་ན། རྒྱུ་མེད་པ་ལས་མི་སྲིད་དོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི། དེ་མེད་འདུ་བྱེད་མི་འབྱུང་ཞིང༌། མ་རིག་པ་མེད་ན་འདུ་བྱེད་མི་འཐད་དེ་རྒྱུ་མེད་པར་ཐལ་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གང་ཡང་འདི་ལྟར་རྒྱུ་དང་འབྲས་བུ་དག་ཕན་ཚུན་མ་ལྟོས་པར་གྲུབ་པ་མེད་ལ། དེའི་ཕྱིར་དེ་དག་ཕན་ཚུན་རྒྱུ་ཅན་དང༌། ངོ་བོ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་ཀྱང་མ་གྲུབ་སྟེ། ཕ་རོལ་དང་ཚུ་རོལ་བཞིན་ནམ་རིང་པོ་དང་ཐུང་དུ་བཞིན་རྒྱུ་དང་འབྲས་བུ་དག་ཕན་ཚུན་ལྟོས་པ་དང་བཅས་པའི་ཕྱིར་ངོ་བོ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་གྲུབ་པ་མེད་དོ། །གལ་ཏེ་རྒྱུ་དང་འབྲས་བུ་དག་ངོ་བོ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་གྲུབ་པར་གྱུར་ན། དེ་ནི་འབྲས་བུ་ལ་མི་ལྟོས་པར་རྒྱུར་འགྱུར་ན། དེ་ལས་ཀྱང་རྒྱུ་མེད་པ་ཉིད་དུ་འགྱུར་ཏེ། རྒྱུ་ནི་གང་ལས་ འབྲས་བུའི་འཇུག་པའི་རྒྱུ་ཉིད་པས་རྒྱུའོ། །དེ་མེད་ན་རྒྱུ་མེད་པ་ཉིད་རྒྱུར་འགྱུར་ཏེ། རྒྱུ་མེད་པ་ཉིད་རྒྱུར་འཐད་པ་ཡང་མ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བས། དེས་ན་ངེས་པར་འབྲས་བུ་ལ་ལྟོས་ལ། འབྲས་བུ་ལ་ལྟོས་པའི་ཕྱིར་རང་ཉིད་མ་གྲུབ་བོ། །དེ་བཞིན་དུ་གལ་ཏེ་འབྲས་བུ་ངོ་བོས་གྲུབ་པར་གྱུར་ན། དེ་ནི་རྒྱུ་ལ་མི་ལྟོས་པར་འགྱུར་ལ། དེ་ཡང་རྒྱུ་ལ་མི་ལྟོས་ན། དེ་ནི་ནམ་མཁའི་མེ་ཏོག་བཞིན་དུ་འགྱུར་བས་དེའི་ཕྱིར་རྒྱུ་ལ་ལྟོས། རྒྱུ་ལ་ལྟོས་པའི་ཕྱིར་ངོ་བོ་ཉིད་མ་གྲུབ་བོ་ཞེས་གནས་སོ། །དེ་ནི་འདི་ལྟར་ཇི་སྐད་དུ་གསུངས་པའི་རིག
Chinese
不生。彼无则行不生。彼等互相为因，自性亦不成立。若谓无明为行之因，如是，以无行故，彼无，何因与果相联而为因？若无关联，则因性永非有。又若不执果，某物可变为因，如是，某物不为某物之因。是故，若无果，则因之安立不成立，且因亦谓无明乃诸行之因。无明无行则不成因，以是因果之事物故。虽无因之语，然以了知为因之果，未以因之语宣说。如不观待果，某物则非因，如无明无行则不生，如是，果亦不观待因，则无因不应有，是故云：彼无则行不生。若无无明，则行不应理，以成无因之过故。又，如是因与果，不互相观待则不成立。是故，彼等互相为因，亦非自性成立。如彼岸与此岸，或如长与短，因与果以互相观待故，无自性成立。若因与果自性成立，则彼不观待果而为因，彼亦成无因，因乃由彼 有果之生起，故为因。若无彼，则无因成因，然无因亦不应理成因。故必观待果，以观待果故，自性不成立。如是，若果自性成立，则彼不观待因，彼亦不观待因，则彼如虚空之花，是故观待因。以观待因故，自性不成立。如是安住。此乃如是所说之理。
English
Does not arise. If that is absent, actions do not arise. Those are mutually causal, and also not established by nature. If ignorance is established as the cause of actions, like this, because actions are absent, that is absent. What cause, having connected with the result, becomes a cause? If there is no connection, then the nature of a cause is never present. Or, if something becomes a cause without apprehending the result, then something would not be the cause of something. Therefore, the establishment of a cause is not possible without a result, and the cause is also said to be that ignorance is the cause of actions. Ignorance does not become a cause without actions, because it is a matter of cause and effect. Even if there is no word for cause, the result of understanding it as a cause is not expressed by the word for cause. Just as something is not a cause without depending on the result, just as ignorance does not arise without actions, so also, if the result does not depend on the cause, it is not possible without a cause. Therefore, it is said: If that is absent, actions do not arise. If ignorance is absent, actions are not reasonable, because it would lead to the fault of being without a cause. Furthermore, like this, cause and result are not established without depending on each other. Therefore, those are mutually causal, and also not established by nature. Like the far shore and the near shore, or like long and short, cause and result are mutually dependent, therefore they are not established by nature. If cause and result were established by nature, then that would become a cause without depending on the result, and that would also become without a cause, because the cause is that from which the result arises, therefore it is a cause. If that is absent, then the absence of a cause becomes a cause, but the absence of a cause is not reasonable as a cause. Therefore, it is necessary to depend on the result, and because it depends on the result, its own nature is not established. Similarly, if the result were established by nature, then that would not depend on the cause, and that would also not depend on the cause, then that would be like a flower in the sky, therefore it depends on the cause. Because it depends on the cause, its own nature is not established. Thus it remains. This is the reasoning as it has been said.