Chinese
因为通过近取差别的因和果的部分的差别，为了显示暂时的差别，所以应当安立为其他的。在名言上，事物不是成立的，因为那在其他方面也是合理的。例如：从自己的因的事物中，这个意义以前也是存在的。如此这般，对于这个事物，就生起了它的显现。通过现量、比量等，这个意义并不是被证悟的。因此，这个世间的名言，仅仅是盲人相传而已。另外，如果仅仅是执取意义的某些差别，那么，那也成了知识非知识。如果知识是相，在没有完全断定所知的情况下，那个知识，所知从何而来？如果完全断定为将知，那就是它的自性。其他的无意义的差别，就是那样如实地说。即使没有断定为将知，那又是如何成为能知的呢？在称为知义时，知识是被理解为知识。在仅仅知义时，知识是被理解为它的意义本身。通过认识它的自性，诸义就存在于它的自性中。在认识白色的意义时，除了那个，还有其他的白色吗？如此这般，这已经说完了。然而，如果是其他的显现，那么，就不能完全断定为已显现。对此的解说如下：未见者，非由他者而成为将见，任何将见者皆不见。如果显现是从将显现者之外的未见者而来，那么如何完全断定将显现的自性？如果不是那样，那么对于由他者所显现者，也会变成“这是由他者所显现的”，而成为显现的名言。正如仅仅是看见，就说“我看见了”，同样，因为通过他的看见而看见了意义的差别，所以那个差别对于其他的看见也是无疑地想要，因此会变成“这是由他者所显现的”。然而，那个差别不是唯一的，因此因为没有看见由他者所显现的，以及没有看见自己所显现的，如果说自己所看见的那个本身不是证悟，那么，那也是不合理的。
English
Because, through the difference of the cause and effect parts of the difference of approximation, in order to show the temporary difference, it should be established as other. In terms of language, things are not established, because that is also reasonable in other aspects. For example: From the thing of its own cause, this meaning was also present before. Thus, for this thing, this appearance of it arises. Through direct perception, inference, etc., this meaning is not realized. Therefore, this worldly term is merely a transmission of blind people. Furthermore, if only some differences of meaning are grasped, then that also becomes knowledge or non-knowledge. If knowledge is a sign, without completely determining the knowable, from where does that knowledge, the knowable, come from? If it is completely determined as what will be known, that is its own nature. Other meaningless differences are just spoken of in that way as they are. Even if it is not determined as what will be known, how can it be a means of understanding? When it is called 'knowing the meaning', knowledge is understood as knowledge. When it is merely 'knowing the meaning', knowledge is understood as its meaning itself. By knowing its essence, all meanings exist in its essence. When knowing the meaning of white, is there anything other than that white? Thus, this has been explained. However, if it is another appearance, then it will not be possible to completely determine it as having appeared. The explanation of this is as follows: The unseen does not become what will be seen by another, and no one who will be seen is seen. If the appearance comes from the unseen other than the one who will appear, then how can the nature of what will appear be completely determined? If it is not so, then for what has been appeared by another, it will also become 'this has been appeared by another', and it will become the term of appearance. Just as merely seeing, one says 'I saw', similarly, because the difference of meaning is seen through his seeing, that difference is undoubtedly desired for the seeing of others as well, therefore it will become 'this will be appeared by another'. However, that difference is not unique, therefore, because what has been appeared by another is not seen, and what has been appeared by oneself is not seen, if it is said that what one has seen is not realization itself, then that is also unreasonable.
Chinese
诶！就像这样，因为差别存在于他人所见之外，所以能领悟自心。如果差别很多，即使是那样，那些并非是自己所要认识的，但那些也同样会被见到。因此，就能领悟自己和他人的心。因此，被见到的就必须成为自己所要认识的。然而，如果那也被其他的认识所见到呢？如果是那样，那上面也同样存在着会被领悟的，就会变得没有尽头。然而，如果被见到的仅仅只有一个，那样的话，他人所见到的也同样是那个差别，因此就会变成领悟自心。当他人所见到的被他人领悟的时候，即使我所见到的并不存在，但通过见到他人所见到的，就能领悟自心。那个被见到的依赖于自己和他人，并非存在差别。然而，即使自己所见到的也存在，从那里面就能领悟自心吗？不是的，因为自己所见到的和他人所见到的之间没有差别。只有当自己所见到的与自己所见到的关联被领悟时，才是知识。如果不领悟那个，那么这个所谓的“自己所见到的”又从何而来呢？因此，即使不是自己所见到的，但通过领悟他人所见到的，就能领悟自心。然而，如果被见到的就是领悟自心，也没有过失，因为这上面没有任何缺失吗？没有缺失。虽然是那样，但因为它不会变成事物的实相，所以仅仅是缺失。就像这样，从领悟被见到的之后，我或者这个又从何而来呢？对于那个，无论用什么来依赖他人，都不可能存在反驳。如果成为自证的体性，那么通过反驳那个也不会改变。所谓自证被他人体验，实在是太随便了。自证就是这个，凡是成为不是他人所能体验的显明，就是自证。因此，自性是无待的，从意义法独立自主中
English
Eh! Just like this, because the difference exists outside of what others see, one can realize one's own mind. If there are many differences, even so, those are not what one needs to recognize oneself, but those will also be seen. Therefore, one can realize one's own mind and the minds of others. Therefore, what is seen must become what one needs to recognize oneself. However, if that is also seen by other cognitions? If that is the case, then there is also something to be realized on that, and it will become endless. However, if what is seen is only one, then what others see is also that same difference, so it will become the realization of one's own mind. When what others see is realized by others, even if what I see does not exist, but by seeing what others see, one can realize one's own mind. That which is seen depends on oneself and others, and there is no difference. However, even if what one sees oneself exists, can one realize one's own mind from that? No, because there is no difference between what one sees oneself and what others see. Only when the connection between what one sees oneself and what one sees oneself is realized, is it knowledge. If one does not realize that, then where does this so-called "what one sees oneself" come from? Therefore, even if it is not what one sees oneself, but by realizing what others see, one can realize one's own mind. However, if what is seen is the realization of one's own mind, there is no fault, because there is no deficiency in this? There is no deficiency. Although that is the case, it is only a deficiency because it will not become the reality of things. Just like this, after realizing what is seen, where does "I" or "this" come from? For that, no matter what one uses to rely on others, it is impossible to have a refutation. If it becomes the nature of self-awareness, then by refuting that, it will not change. The so-called self-awareness being experienced by others is really too casual. Self-awareness is just this, whatever becomes clear that is not something that others can experience is self-awareness. Therefore, self-nature is independent, from the independent meaning-dharma
Chinese
། 智慧不能被推断。 智慧的证悟现量是什么？ 除了自法和自智之外还有什么？ 有些依赖智慧的人会推断智慧。 境等共同的法，仅仅是证悟共同的所推断之法。 因此，推断我的智慧，必须成为我的法。 自己的法也无异于智慧。 自己的法性完全是智慧，如果它变得隐蔽，如何进行推断？ 或者，快乐等从与智慧相同的集合中产生， 那些是我的法，因此可以从中推断，如果这样说。 对此进行解释： 从相同的原因产生的， 从智慧之外的什么产生？ 从他者产生的也是虚假的。 如果快乐是由境和根等产生的。 已经阐述了一切都是觉性的自性。 或者，从所见的境中产生的快乐，从中可以推断自己的智慧，如果这样说。 快乐也不是由他者产生的，这是从何而来？ 他者的快乐，他者如何能够证悟？ 如果不是自证，这种区分如何产生？ 从恐惧等也会产生毛发竖立。 如果快乐等以自证的方式存在，那么那时就无法证悟与他者的关联，这是合理的。 如果不是那样，那么与他者的关联又如何阻止？ 如果我确定毛发竖立，就能推断是我的，如果这样说。 这又是从何而来？ 他人的妻子不会产生快乐，这不是不可能的。 快乐等所体验的自性，会产生毛发竖立等，因此需要自己和关联，或者不是那样吗？ 如果自己的快乐能证明产生毛发竖立等， 就能证悟自己和关联。 如果证悟了自己和关联，也能证悟是由它产生的，因此存在互相依赖的过失。 此外，随智慧而行和随智慧而逆行，或者随其而行，随智慧而行，如果是这样认为。 那么， 色等五境， 根和所缘， 除了这些之外
English
Wisdom cannot be inferred. What is the direct perception of wisdom's realization? What else is there besides one's own dharma and one's own wisdom? Some who rely on wisdom will infer wisdom. Common dharmas such as objects are only the realization of the common object to be inferred. Therefore, inferring my wisdom must become my dharma. One's own dharma is no different from wisdom. One's own dharma-nature is entirely wisdom, so if it becomes hidden, how can inference occur? Or, happiness and so on arise from the same collection as wisdom, Those are my dharmas, so they can be inferred from them, if you say so. This is explained: That which arises from the same cause, From what other than wisdom does it arise? That which arises from another is also false. If happiness is produced by objects and senses and so on. It has already been shown that everything is the nature of awareness. Or, from the happiness that arises in the seen object, from that one can infer one's own wisdom, if you say so. That happiness is not produced by another, from where does this come? How can another realize the happiness of another? If it is not self-awareness, how can this distinction arise? From fear and so on, the erection of hairs also arises. If happiness and so on exist as self-awareness, then at that time it is reasonable that one does not realize the connection with others. If it is not so, then what prevents the connection with others? If I am certain of the erection of hairs, I can infer that it is mine, if you say so. From where does this also come? It is not impossible that another's wife does not produce happiness. The self-nature experienced by happiness and so on produces the erection of hairs and so on, so is self and connection needed, or is it not so? If one's own happiness proves that the erection of hairs and so on are produced, One realizes self and connection. Even if one realizes self and connection, one also realizes that it is produced by it, so there is the fault of mutual dependence. Furthermore, following and reversing wisdom, or following it, following wisdom, if that is the view. Then, The five objects such as form, The senses and the objects, Apart from these
Chinese
其他的果。不是近似的表示。对此，二是根已过。从五种境中。从见色中。生者于他处无有。任何一个也没有证悟。二是根已过，是指根和境。对于色等五境，任何一个也没有证悟到像从见色中生出的那样。色等不是从见色中生出的，因为是从其他的因生出的。如果确实是从见色中生出的，那么就会变成那些本身。如此，见色诸义的一切。因为存在于一切有情中。差别也是如此，从彼生也是如此。因为生起，意义也会改变。如见色在各个有情中是不同的，色等也会如此改变。因此，如果一切都是境，那么它的差别确定时，了知它的有情各自，就会显现为多种。如果各自自己是境，那么从自证来说就是知识。如果色等在各个有情中，具有不同的自性，一切都将成为境，因此唯一地将色等作为境，如果这样也不是，所以暂时这个方面是不对的。或者，如果是将自己所见的产生的色等作为境呢？如果是这样，因为其他人不能了知，所以承认了自证，那么意义本身就会丧失。如果是被他人作为境，那么如果是那样，它本身生起时，它也会存在差别，而且它也会被他人作为境，因此将变成没有尽头。自己的知识被他人的知识，那样没有了知的是什么呢？称为相的说法是随便的，没有证悟本身就不是相。因此，因为没有相的特征，所以如果说是以智慧通过随念来证悟，那么这个说法是不行的。或者，即使允许证悟其他的意义，即使有相，但是和它，没有见到同时的联系。如何能证悟呢？相和，不是没有见到的显现者。见到火等本身，自己所生的烟等生起后，随
English
Other fruits. It is not an approximate representation. Regarding this, two are the senses that have passed. From the five objects. From seeing form. A being born elsewhere is non-existent. Not even one has realized it. Two, "the senses have passed," refers to the senses and the objects. Regarding the five objects such as form, not even one has realized it as being born from seeing form. Form and so on are not born from seeing form, because they are born from other causes. If they were indeed born from seeing form, then they would become those themselves. Thus, all the meanings of seeing form. Because it exists in all sentient beings. The difference is also the same, being born from it is also the same. Because of arising, the meaning will also change. Just as seeing form is different in each sentient being, form and so on will also change in this way. Therefore, if everything is an object, then when its difference is determined, the sentient beings who know it, will appear as diverse. If each one is the object itself, then from self-awareness it is knowledge. If form and so on, in each sentient being, has a different nature, everything will become an object, therefore uniquely taking form and so on as the object, if that is not the case, then for the moment this aspect is not correct. Or, if it is taking the form and so on produced by one's own seeing as the object? If that is the case, because others cannot know it, therefore admitting self-awareness, then the meaning itself will be lost. If it is taken as an object by others, then if that is the case, when it arises itself, there will also be a difference, and it will also be taken as an object by others, therefore it will become endless. One's own knowledge being known by the knowledge of others, what is it that is not known in that way? The statement called "sign" is random, not realizing itself is not a sign. Therefore, because there is no characteristic of a sign, so if it is said that it is realized by wisdom through recollection, then this statement is not valid. Or, even if allowing the realization of other meanings, even if there is a sign, but with it, there is no simultaneous connection seen. How can one realize it? The sign and, is not the manifestor of what is not seen. Seeing fire and so on itself, after the smoke and so on born from oneself arises, following