English
Therefore, even if there are differences, because the fruit with the same characteristics is close, the category follows by distinguishing. If this closeness itself is the cause of knowledge with following, then there is no contradiction. This also shows that the universal is not an entity. Because in any case, for consciousness, the entity does not appear. If it is thought that the essence or self-nature of the universal is appearance, then since the consciousness that holds itself is admitted to be clear, it will not not appear. If the universal is an entity and is an appearance, then in the absence of it, the consciousness that holds itself will manifest my own self-nature. For things that have the same object and are to be grasped by the same sense, they will also be recognized as their own self-nature, such as the tactile sensations of wind and sunlight. Therefore, if the universal changes, it will also be seen and appear. Even if it is grasped, if it is not certain, then the use of consciousness and speech is not done by it, in which case, conceptual thought becomes meaningless. Association is that for the consciousness that wants to hold its essence in some way, anything that does not appear is not an existence different from it, for example, for the consciousness that holds the universal, other universals do not appear. If it is thought that the essence of the universal is not manifested as different from the clear essence for the consciousness that holds the universal, then this is not observing the pervasion. If the form of the senses such as the eyes does not appear in consciousness, but they are not different existences from form etc., then this is an uncertain reason. This is not the case, because these senses themselves are not the nature of direct perception. Because of seeing the other shore, it is not recognizing one's own essence. So what is it? At the time of the fruit of some direct perception consciousness, for the existing objects, also seeing the use and non-use, this shows other causes. Therefore, anything that is said to be form is called a sense. If the senses become the viewer of the person who sees the meaning beyond the senses, then they will hold their own essence.
Chinese
对于知识而言，它的身体是显现，如若是感官的对境，那就毫无疑问。为什么呢？因为具有形体，因为具有感官的自性。因此，对于想要执持自身的现量识而言，凡是不显现的，就是作为理由的意义，因此是确定的。如果感官的本体是自己见自己，显现于自己的知识，那么对于现量识而言，就不是种类的本体，因为没有在其他地方见到过。因为清晰而明显，所以没有见到种类的本体的原因。在执持清晰的时候，也只有声音，没有显现出与本体不同的东西。在执持清晰的时候，清晰的名称是什么，它的颜色等等是什么，仅仅是这些显现，而不会显现出与此不同的其他一般。当想要执持自身的知识不显现一般的本体时，那它就不会变成它的识。凡是本体显现于某者，那就是它的知识，想要执持自身的知识不显现一般，因此就不是它的知识。论式是：凡是本体不显现于某个知识，那它就不是该知识的所取，例如，对于声音的知识而言，蓝色等等的本体不显现，就像不是声音的知识的所取一样。对于想要执持自身的知识而言，一般的本体也不显现，这被称为周遍不成立。凡是能生起对境的知识，这就是意义作用的终结。因此，因为想要执持自身的知识不显现，所以一般它，仅仅是对自己的对境的知识，也不可能产生意义作用，因为没有能力。不可能，因为没有本体。因为没有事物，所以也不能产生仅仅是识的果，这就是它的意义。为什么不可能就是没有事物呢？就像这样，这就是没有事物的特征。就像这样，所有没有意义的能力，以及分离，这就是没有的特征。那在一般中也是存在的，因此是没有事物的。那...
English
For knowledge, its body is manifestation, and if it is the object of the senses, then there is no doubt about it. Why? Because it has form, because it has the nature of the senses. Therefore, for the manifest consciousness that wants to hold itself, whatever does not appear is the meaning of the reason, therefore it is certain. If the essence of the senses is to see itself, appearing to its own knowledge, then for manifest consciousness, it is not the essence of the kind, because it has not been seen elsewhere. Because it is clear and obvious, there is no reason to see the essence of the kind. When holding clarity, there is only sound, and nothing different from the essence appears. When holding clarity, what is the name of the clarity, what is its color, etc., only these appear, and no other generality different from this appears. When the knowledge that wants to hold itself does not manifest the general essence, then it will not become its consciousness. Whatever essence appears to someone, that is their knowledge, the knowledge that wants to hold itself does not manifest the general, therefore it is not their knowledge. The argument is: whatever essence does not appear to a certain knowledge, then it is not the object to be taken by that knowledge, for example, for the knowledge of sound, the essence of blue, etc. does not appear, just like it is not the object of the knowledge of sound. For the knowledge that wants to hold itself, the general essence also does not appear, which is called pervasive non-establishment. Whatever generates knowledge of its object is the end of meaning function. Therefore, because the knowledge that wants to hold itself does not appear, so generally it, is only the knowledge of its own object, and it is also impossible to produce meaning function, because it has no ability. Impossible, because there is no entity. Because there is no thing, it cannot produce the result of mere consciousness, that is its meaning. Why is it impossible that there is no thing? Just like this, this is the characteristic of having no thing. Just like this, all meaningless abilities, and separation, this is the characteristic of non-existence. That also exists in general, therefore it is without things. That...
Chinese
如是，总法安住于“无事物”之中。如何是与所说相违背的？那也是自相的意欲。如所说，与所说相违背的，也是不可说为彼与此的意义，显现无有差别的，不是了知的对境，不是相似的，也不是不共的，不依赖于词语忆念的觉悟者，对于自执的知识，显现远离他性的，以及能够成办义利者，那是自相的执持。凡是显示以断除无事物的体性的相状为特征的总法，也有三种，是三种差别。量理宝论释，第二十四品。如何是呢？以事物与非事物二者为所依故。事物的近取者，非事物的近取者，以及二者的近取者。其中，事物的近取者，是指依于色等而施设名称的语词之义，例如生等。非事物的近取者，是指显现之义，不可得以及不具有生等。二者的近取者，是指仅仅不可得以及所知等。如果存在之识是事物的所依。如果认为事物的近取者是执持总法的识，那么，那个识对于事物将获得事物的对境，是这个意思。为什么呢？因为与有相关联。说了“因为与有相关联”，事物存在则存在，事物不存在则不存在。推理是，凡是事物存在则转变，事物不存在则不转变的识，那是事物的对境，例如眼识。执持一切法的总法的识，也是事物存在则转变，事物不存在则不转变，这是脓血般的理由。那个过失是不存在的。为什么呢？因为已经回答完毕。因为以“是所说”等理由，已经显示了执持总法的识是无事物的对境的缘
English
Thus, the general dharma abides in the state of being "without things." What is contrary to what has been said? That is also the desire for its own characteristic. As it is said, what is contrary to what has been said is also the meaning that cannot be expressed as "that" or "this," appearing without difference, not being an object of knowledge, not being similar, nor being uncommon, having an understanding that does not depend on the recollection of words. For the self-grasping consciousness, whatever appears as devoid of the nature of others, and whatever is capable of accomplishing benefit, that is considered to be the grasping of its own characteristic. Furthermore, that general dharma, which is shown to have the characteristic of distinguishing the nature of non-things, also has three aspects, which are three distinctions. Commentary on the Compendium on Valid Cognition, Volume Twenty-Four. How is it? Because both things and non-things are the basis. The one that closely takes things, the one that closely takes non-things, and the one that closely takes both. Among them, the one that closely takes things is the meaning of words that are named based on forms and so on, such as birth and so on. The one that closely takes non-things is the meaning of appearance, such as non-apprehension and the absence of having birth and so on. The one that closely takes both is merely non-apprehension and knowable things and so on. If the knowledge of existence is based on things. If it is thought that the one that closely takes things is the consciousness that grasps the general, then that consciousness will obtain the object of things in relation to things, that is the meaning. Why? Because it is related to existence. It is said, "Because it is related to existence," if things exist, it exists, and if things do not exist, it does not exist. The reasoning is, whatever consciousness changes when things exist and does not change when things do not exist, that is the object of things, like eye consciousness. The consciousness that grasps the general of all dharmas also changes when things exist and does not change when things do not exist, which is a pus-like reason. That fault does not exist. Why? Because the answer has already been given. Because with reasons such as "it is what is said," it has been shown that the consciousness that grasps the general is indeed the object of non-things.
Chinese
也是这样！但那并没有指出不违背的特性。那么是什么呢？因为以比量损害了所立的宗。因为见到已逝等其他事物。对于没有“变成瓶子”和“将要变成”的说法，从声音产生的知识见到事物不存在，那样的话，因不成。虽然如此转变，如果事物自性衰损转变。如果知道没有事物而执持总相的时候，如果事物自性存在，那么所立的宗就会衰损。如果这样说，那么就没有如前所说的过失。为什么呢？因为执持事物是先决条件。因为总相的知识或者总体的知识就是那个。总相如同色等一样，因为是自性事物的体性所知的对境。不是承许为事物的法性。那么是什么呢？当由于见到色等所熏染的习气而生起分别时，由于执着于自己所取的相为色等的相，所以进入，那样的话，由于由见到色等的力量而生起，并且执着于此，所以说是事物的法性，这是所说的意义。因此，除了自己的一个自相之外，其他的可量差别丝毫也不能成办作用。因此，自己的自相是唯一的所量。因为适合成为所量，所以是所量。只有自己的一个自相，有情具有分别，成办作用，因为追求意义，所以应当考察存在和不存在。为什么呢？因为没有其他的所依来考察自己的自相，所以说，从自己的自相成就作用，因为是原因，所以有情成办作用，因为追求意义，所以能成办作用的事物通过考察的途径成为对境，而不是其他的。能成办作用的也只是自己的自相，如果是那样，那么就考察它存在和不存在，因此，对于它本身，因为考察存在和不存在，因为是原因，所以自己的一个自相是唯一的所量。
English
That's right! But that did not point out the characteristic of not being contradictory. What is it then? Because inference harms the established proposition. Because one sees things like the past as other. For the absence of the statement "becoming a pot" and "will become," the knowledge arising from sound sees that things do not exist, in that case, the reason is unestablished. Although it transforms in this way, if the nature of things deteriorates and transforms. If one knows that one is grasping the general characteristic without things, then. If the nature of things exists, then the established proposition will deteriorate. If you say so, then there is no fault as mentioned before. Why? Because grasping things is a prerequisite. Because the knowledge of the general characteristic or the overall knowledge is that. The general characteristic, like form, etc., is the object of knowledge by the nature of the self-nature of things. It is not accepted as the Dharma nature of things. What is it then? When discrimination arises due to the habits of seeing form, etc., because one clings to the appearance taken by oneself as the appearance of form, etc., so one enters, in that case, because it arises from the power of seeing form, etc., and clings to it, it is said to be the Dharma nature of things, this is the meaning of what is said. Therefore, apart from one's own self-characteristic, other measurable differences cannot accomplish any function at all. Therefore, one's own self-characteristic is the only measurable. Because it is suitable to be measurable, it is measurable. Only one's own self-characteristic, sentient beings have discrimination, accomplish function, because of pursuing meaning, so one should examine existence and non-existence. Why? Because there is no other basis to examine one's own self-characteristic, so it is said that function is accomplished from one's own self-characteristic, because it is the cause, so sentient beings accomplish function, because of pursuing meaning, so things that can accomplish function become objects through the path of examination, not others. The one that can accomplish function is only one's own self-characteristic, if that is the case, then one examines its existence and non-existence, therefore, for itself, because one examines existence and non-existence, because it is the cause, so one's own self-characteristic is the only measurable.