Chinese
呜呼！如果心和不相关的时侯，自性是一样的，所以没有过失，为了驳斥对方的需要，说了“如果我”等等。如果具有心的生和灭是不会改变的，没有生和没有灭的自性就是我。如果那样的话，心对它做什么呢？如果离开心，任何时候都不会改变而存在。这个我与具有心的智慧相遇，做了什么呢？又完成了什么特别的功德呢？一点也没有。即使和智慧相遇，也是以前的自性没有消失的状态，所以我就是具有心的。即使那样存在，你完成了什么呢？像那样说了“没有心”等等。不知道就是对利益和不利益一点也不知道。离开行为就是从行为之外转变，就是没有行为。那就是脱离一切外在的修改，对一切要做的事情没有差别。或者对一切身体没有能力，或者空于行走等等的行为。因为天空不是迫切需要的，所以和天空一样。如果这样，我就是我自己的自性，是分别安立的。这也是对自己意愿的总结。就像没有自性一样，仅仅通过考察空于一切行为，就像天空一样，我也是这样的意思吗？或者是别人的意愿，就像业和作者等等的本体是天空一样，因为没有心，而且没有行为。现在又想指出驳斥我的过失，所以引用别人的宗派，说了“如果我不是有”等等。如果其他世界都不存在，那么我到其他世界去是不存在的，如果没有，业果就不应该相关联。业就是善和不善，果就是想要和不想要。和它相关联，或者做了业就和果相关联。
English
Alas! If the nature is the same when the mind is related and unrelated, then there is no fault. To refute the other party's need, it is said "If I" and so on. If the birth and death of having a mind is unchanging, the nature of not being born and not dying is me. If that is the case, what does the mind do to it? If one is separated from the mind, one exists without changing at any time. What has this self done by encountering the wisdom of having a mind? What special merits have been accomplished? Nothing at all. Even if one encounters wisdom, it is still the state where the previous nature has not disappeared, so I am the one with the mind. Even if it exists like that, what have you accomplished? Like that, it is said "no mind" and so on. Not knowing is not knowing the slightest bit about benefit and non-benefit. Being separated from action is transforming from outside of action, which is no action. That is being free from all external modifications and making no distinction to everything that needs to be done. Or, there is no ability in all bodies, or it is empty of actions such as walking. Because the sky is not urgently needed, it is like the sky. If this is the case, I am my own nature, which is distinctively established. This is also a summary of one's own wishes. Just like having no nature, just by examining being empty of all actions, like the sky, am I also like that? Or is it the wish of others, just as the essence of karma and agent etc. is the sky, because there is no mind and no action. Now, wanting to point out the fault of refuting me, so quoting the tenets of others, it is said "If I am not existent" and so on. If other worlds do not exist, then it is not possible for me to go to other worlds, and if there is no, karma and result should not be related. Karma is good and bad, and the result is wanting and not wanting. Being related to it, or doing karma is related to the result.
Chinese
哦！您所做的业，就由您自己获得其果报，不是由他人获得。这怎么能成立呢？这是不合道理且不成立的。来世的业和果报之间的联系也是被认可的。在这方面，与如来们也没有争论。正如经中所说：“自己所造的业，怎么会由他人来承受呢？比丘们，已做和已积累的业，不会在地界成熟，不会在水界成熟，不会在火界成熟，不会在风界成熟，而是在已摄取的蕴、界、处本身成熟。”经中对此有详细的阐述。又说：“业纵经百千劫，亦不亡失，缘会时至，众生自受其报。”因此，业和果报之间的联系，您也没有否认。因此，必须承认有我，否则这一切都将变得不合理。如果没有我，业和果报之间的联系又怎么能成立呢？“做了业之后”等等就是这样说的。至于“呢”这个语气词，是因为做了善与非善性质的业，造了业之后就坏灭了，坏灭且业的作者已停止时，果报又怎么会产生呢？因为没有我，所以没有谁会去到来世。任何心识的刹那所造的业，由于是刹那性的，所以在造业的当下就已灭尽，那么造业的果报，善趣或恶趣中的安乐和痛苦，又将是谁的，又将由谁来承受和出生呢？任何人都不是。在来世，也会因为与所造的业相应的果报而出生另一个人。这样一来，所做的业就会白白浪费，而与未做的业相遇。这只是一个例子，对于记忆和认识的知识，怀疑和确定，拿回自己委托的东西，对于所见之事的毫不惊奇，原因和结果本身以及认识它们的量，束缚和解脱等等，也不会成立。如果这样认为，那是不合道理的。四果等等也是如此。
English
O! The karma you have done, you yourself will receive its fruit, not someone else. How can this be established? It is unreasonable and not established. The connection between karma and its fruit in the next life is also acknowledged. In this regard, there is no dispute with the Tathagatas either. As it is said in the sutra: "How can the karma done by oneself be experienced by another? Monks, the karma that has been done and accumulated will not ripen in the earth element, will not ripen in the water element, will not ripen in the fire element, will not ripen in the wind element, but will ripen in the aggregates, elements, and sources that have been taken up." The sutra elaborates on this in detail. It is also said: "Karmas, even after hundreds of thousands of kalpas, will not be lost. When the conditions and time come together, beings will certainly experience their results." Therefore, you have not denied the connection between karma and its fruit either. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge the self, otherwise all of this will become unreasonable. If there is no self, how can the connection between karma and its fruit be established? "After doing karma" and so on are said in this way. As for the word "ni," it is because one has done karma of the nature of good and non-good, and after creating karma, it ceases. When it ceases and the doer of the karma has stopped, how can the fruit arise? Because there is no self, there is no one who will go to the next life. Any karma done by a moment of consciousness, because it is momentary, ceases at the very moment of doing the karma. Then, whose will be the fruit of the karma, the happiness and suffering in the good or bad realms, and who will experience and be born from it? It will not be anyone's. In the next life, another person will also be born because of the fruit corresponding to the karma that has been done. In this way, the karma that has been done will be wasted, and one will encounter karma that has not been done. This is just an example; memory and the knowledge of recognition, doubt and certainty, taking back what one has entrusted, not being surprised by what is seen, the cause and result themselves and the valid cognition that recognizes them, bondage and liberation, and so on, will also not be established. If one thinks in this way, it is unreasonable. The four fruits and so on are also like this.
Tibetan
ས་པ་གསུངས་ཏེ། ཁྱོད་དང་ཁོ་བོ་ཅག་གཉིས་ལ་སྟེ། བདག་ཏུ་སྨྲ་བ་ཁྱེད་དང༌། བདག་མེད་པར་སྨྲ་བ་ངེད་ཅག་ལ་གྲུབ་ཅིང་ངེས་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། །ཅི་ཞིག་གྲུབ་ཅེ་ན། བྱ་བ་འབྲས་བུ་བཞི་ཐ་དད་པར་གསུངས་ཏེ། ལས་ནི་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་ཏེ། འཇིག་རྟེན་འདི་ལའོ། །འཇིག་རྟེན་ཕ་རོལ་དུ་དེའི་འབྲས་བུའོ། །གཞི་ཐ་དད་པ་དེ་དག་ལ་སྟེ། རྟེན་སྣ་ཚོགས་དེ་དག་ལ་གྲུབ་པོ། །འདི་ལྟར་ཡང་ལུས་ངག་གིས་སྐྱེ་བ་དེ་ཉིད་ལ་ལས་བྱེད་པ་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ། དེ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་འཇིག་རྟེན་ཕ་རོལ་དུ་འབྲས་བུ་ལ་ལོངས་སྤྱོད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། །དེའི་ཕྱིར་ལས་བྱེད་པ་གཞན་ཉིད་ཡིན་ལ། ལོངས་སྤྱོད་པ་པོ་ཡང་གཞན་ཡིན་ནོ། །དེ་ལྟ་བས་ན་གཞི་ཐ་དད་པ་ལ་བྱ་བ་དང་འབྲས་བུ་དག་ཏུ་འགྱུར་ལ་འདི་ལ་ཡང་འུ་བུ་ཅག་ལ་རྩོད་པ་ཡོད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །དེ་ལྟར་གྱུར་ན་ཡང་བདག་དེའི་བྱ་བ་མེད་པར་དེ་ཉིད་བྱེད་པ་པོ་ཉིད་དང༌། ལོངས་སྤྱོད་པ་པོ་ཉིད་དག་ཏུ་མི་འགྱུར་རོ་ཞེ་ན། འདི་ལ་བརྗོད་པ་དེར་བདག་བྱེད་པ་མེད་ཅེས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པ་གསུངས་ཏེ། བྱེད་པ་མེད་པ་ནི་བྱེད་པ་དང་བྲལ་བ་ཡིན་ལ། དེ་ལ་ཞེས་པ་ནི་ལས་བྱེད་པ་དང་འབྲས་བུ་ལ་ལོངས་སྤྱོད་པ་དག་ལའོ། །བདག་བྱེད་པ་མེད་པ་ཉིད་ནི་སེམས་པ་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་དང༌། རྟག་པའི་ཕྱིར་གང་ལ་ཡང་བྱེད་པ་ལ་ནུས་པ་ཡོད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །གང་ཡང་བརྗོད་པ། ཤེས་པ་ཙམ་སོགས་གང་འབྲེལ་པ། །དེ་ ལ་བྱེད་པ་པོ་ཉིད་བརྗོད། །བདེ་དང་སྡུག་བསྔལ་སོགས་རིགས་པ། །འདུ་བ་ལས་ནི་ཟ་བ་པོ། །ཞེས་སོ། །དེ་ཡང་བརྗོད་པའི་རིམ་པས་སྔ་མ་དང་ཕྱི་མའི་དུས་དག་ཏུ་མི་གཡོ་བའི་རང་བཞིན་དུ་རིགས་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །རྒྱུ་དེས་ན་འདིར་ནི་བདག་ལ་བྱེད་པ་མེད་པ་ཉིད་ཡིན་ལ། རྩོད་པ་ནི་རྣམ་པར་རྩོད་པ་ཡིན་ལ་གང་དོན་དེ་ཁས་བླངས་ལ་ནི་དོན་མེད་ཅིང་འབྲས་བུ་མེད་པ་ཡིན་ཏེ། དེ་ལ་དེ་ཉེ་བར་མཁོ་བ་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །མ་ཡིན་ནམ་ཞེས་པ་ནི་གཞན་ལ་བོད་པའི་ཚིག་གོ །གལ་ཏེ་བདག་མེད་ན་འོ་ན་ཇི་ལྟར་བྱས་པ་ཆུད་ཟོས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཉེས་པར་མི་འགྱུར། དེ་ལྟ་བས་ན་རྩོད་པ་དོན་མེད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེ་ན། འདི་ལ་རྒྱུ་ལྡན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་གསུངས་ཏེ། གང་རྒྱུ་དང་ལྡན་པ་ནི་ལས་དང་ལྡན་པ་ཡིན་ལ་དེ་ཉིད་འབྲས་བུ་དང་ལྡན་པ་ཡིན་ཏེ། འབྲས་བུ་དང་བཅས་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་འདི་ལྟར་མཐོང་བ་དེ་ནི་སྲིད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ལ་དམིགས་པ་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ། གང་གི་ཕྱིར། འཇིག་རྟེན་འཆི་བ་གཞན་ཉིད་ལ། །སྐྱེ་བ་ཡང་ནི་གཞན་ཉིད་དོ། །དེའི་ཕྱིར་རྒྱུ་དང་ལྡན་པ་འབྲས་བུ་
Chinese
说有我，对于你和我来说，就是说，你主张有我，我们主张无我，这是成立而且确定的。成立什么呢？就是说，行为和果报四者是各不相同的。业是行为，就在这个世间。来世是它的果报。对于那些不同的基础，对于那些各种各样的所依来说，这是成立的。就像这样，身体和语言所产生的行为，并不是在这个身体上造作，而是由它在来世享受果报。因此，造业者是另一个人，享受果报者也是另一个人。因此，在不同的基础上，行为和果报会发生变化，而对于这一点，我们之间并没有争论。如果那样的话，即使没有我的行为，它也不会变成造作者和享受者本身，是吗？对于这一点，有这样的说法，说在那里没有我的造作等等。没有造作就是与造作分离。在那里，指的是造业和享受果报。没有我的造作，是因为没有心识，而且是常恒的，所以对于任何造作都没有能力。还有这样的说法：只要是与知识相关的，就称之为造作者。快乐和痛苦等类别，从聚集之中就是享用者。这也是按照说法的顺序，在先前和后来的时间里，不动的自性是不合理的。因此，在这里，我没有造作，争论是一种虚假的争论，对于已经承认的意义来说，是没有意义和没有结果的，因为对于它来说，那是不需要的。不是吗？这是对他人呼唤的词语。如果无我，那么怎么不会导致所作无意义等等的过失呢？因此，争论不是没有意义的，是吗？对于这一点，有具有因的说法，凡是具有因的就是具有业，而它本身就是具有果报的，因为是具有果报的缘故。就像这样所见到的，那不是存在，也不是目标，因为什么？世间死亡是另一个，出生也是另一个。因此，具有因就是果报。
English
It is said that there is a self, for you and me, that is to say, you assert that there is a self, and we assert that there is no self, this is established and certain. What is established? That is, the four of action and result are different. Karma is action, in this world. The next life is its result. For those different bases, for those various supports, this is established. Just like this, the actions produced by body and speech are not done on this body, but it enjoys the result in the next life. Therefore, the actor of karma is another, and the enjoyer of the result is also another. Therefore, on different bases, actions and results will change, and for this, there is no dispute between us. If that is the case, even without the action of the self, it will not become the actor and the enjoyer itself, will it? For this, there is such a saying, saying that there is no action of the self there, and so on. No action is separation from action. There, it refers to the creation of karma and the enjoyment of results. There is no action of the self, because there is no consciousness, and it is constant, so there is no ability for any action. There is also such a saying: as long as it is related to knowledge, it is called the actor. Categories such as happiness and suffering, from the gathering, are the enjoyers. This is also according to the order of saying, in the previous and later times, the immovable nature is unreasonable. Therefore, here, I have no action, the dispute is a false dispute, and for the meaning that has been admitted, it is meaningless and fruitless, because for it, that is not needed. Isn't it? This is a word to call to others. If there is no self, then how will it not lead to the fault of what has been done being meaningless, etc.? Therefore, the dispute is not meaningless, is it? For this, there is the saying of having a cause, whoever has a cause has karma, and it itself has a result, because it has a result. Just like what is seen, that is not existence, nor is it a goal, because of what? The death of the world is another, and birth is also another. Therefore, having a cause is a result.