Chinese
他人之意欲显现功德，亦复如是之义。释论作者谓，如心一般，身体亦将显明，成为目标，因与身体无别故，若功德本身即为彼之目标，则如色等一般成为目标，然非目标。是故，身体本身并非智慧，如是显示。如是听闻等之造作，于心所作，此谓智慧之差别乃疑惑之境，是为成立相异。彼亦谓，纵使彼成立，然于智慧之差别仍生疑惑故。事物成立，然非成立为无常耶？非也，因无有前后之差别，事物之目标唯是显说无常之故。如是，身体以理智而言，如色等理智一般，不属于智慧之范畴，如是宣说。听闻等造作之所生，身体之状态超胜，或于生之初所生之差别之差别，非成为彼之所生耶？非由此，仅由其他或非其他之有情生起，差别亦不从习惯之外而生，故从前生而来于此。具慧者不应自主于此，何以故？具慧者不欲自主于多苦之生之相续，乃由业力所致，若如是，业或彼之因又如何进入，此乃应考察之处。是故，如是承许生之死亡，彼之因如现在一般，将成为自在，因是置入者故。差别仅在于彼现在是无罪，乃彼之因。其他则在其他处。任何死亡，有者以某种方式，有者则以其他方式，因业各异故。彼之差别亦由彼之恩德与另一者之差别所致。彼亦由意欲之差别所致，意欲亦如彼
English
The meaning is that the desire of others to manifest qualities will also be the same. The commentator said that just as the mind becomes clear, so will the body, becoming an object, because it is not different from the body. If the quality itself is its object, then it will become an object like form, etc., but it is not an object. Therefore, the body itself is not wisdom, as shown. Just as hearing, etc., are made, what is done to the mind means that the difference of wisdom is the object of doubt, which is to establish difference. He also said that even if it is established, there is still doubt about the difference of wisdom. Even if things are established, is it not established as impermanent? No, because there is no difference between the former and the latter, the goal of things is only to express impermanence. Thus, the body, in terms of reason, is not within the scope of wisdom, like reason such as form, etc., as stated. Is the product of hearing and other actions, the state of the body, superior, or the difference of the difference produced at the beginning of birth, not becoming its product? Not from this, only from the arising of other or non-other sentient beings, the difference does not arise from anything other than habit, so it comes here from the previous life. It is not reasonable for the wise to be independent here, why? The wise do not want to be independent in the continuation of many sufferings, which is caused by karma. If so, how does karma or its cause enter? This should be investigated. Therefore, just like accepting the death of birth, its cause will become free as it is now, because it is the one who puts it in. The only difference is that it is now innocent, which is its cause. Others are elsewhere. Any death, some in some way, others in other ways, because karma is different. The difference is also due to the difference between his grace and the other. It is also due to the difference of desire, and desire is like that
Chinese
是因為串習的差別而有，不是因為自性的差別而有，因為果的差別是無邊的，會導致事物各異的過失。那各異也是自性各異的特徵的緣故。如果僅僅是眾生以自性的差別是無邊的，那麼自在天也勢必會成為無邊，因為僅僅是那些會變成那樣的自性。因此，自在天唯一一個如何以串習的意願的差別，恩惠和另一個等等是有差別的，是成立多種出生的死亡的原因，因為是領受果的差別的低劣之處。與非自在相違，因為是成立差別之因的緣故。也就是說：無力無知此眾生，自己的苦樂為何，自在天所擲往，高處天界或惡趣。如是所說是，上面是有智慧先行的本質，不是有詞等等，而且果的決定也是僅僅以因為是因就足夠，不是以差別為標準。現在是具有出生本身，因為與串習所生的差別的心沒有差別的緣故，如同推測來世一樣，因為與被他人驅使沒有差別的緣故，推測造作者自在天，認為這是此處的區別，回答是具有對自我的貪執。雖然是真實的，但是從串習所生的心，從名為束縛者來推測驅使者，僅僅是具有明顯意願的差別者，如同聽聞串習一樣，是推測所見，不是其他的，因為是串習所生的差別的緣故，是推測，因為是互相束縛的緣故，是這個意思。非由他有情牽引，這句話是，遮止了他人承許的驅使者，因為那沒有遍及串習所生的差別本身的緣故，而且以明顯意願的差別成立了那個差別，這是顯示具有對自我的貪執，如何顯示對自我的貪執是驅使者呢？
English
It is because of the difference of habituation, not because of the difference of self-nature, because the difference of fruit is infinite, it will lead to the fault of different things. That difference is also the characteristic of the difference of self-nature. If only sentient beings are infinitely different in nature, then Ishvara will inevitably become infinite, because only those will become such a nature. Therefore, how does the only Ishvara, with the difference of the desire of habituation, such as grace and another, have differences, and is the cause of establishing various births and deaths, because it is the acceptance of the inferior place of the difference of fruit. It is contrary to non-independence, because it is the reason for establishing the cause of difference. That is to say: This powerless and ignorant being, what is his own happiness and suffering, Ishvara throws to, the high heavens or the evil realms. As it is said, above is the essence of intelligence preceding, not having words and so on, and the determination of the fruit is only enough because it is the cause, not by the standard of difference. Now it is having birth itself, because there is no difference from the mind of the difference produced by habituation, just like inferring the afterlife, because there is no difference from being driven by others, inferring the creator Ishvara, thinking that this is the difference here, the answer is having attachment to oneself. Although it is true, from the mind produced by habituation, infer the driver from the one named bondage, only the one with obvious intention is different, just like hearing habituation, it is inferring what is seen, not others, because it is the difference produced by habituation, it is inference, because it is mutual bondage, that is the meaning. Not led by other sentient beings, this sentence is, it prevents the driver admitted by others, because that does not pervade the difference produced by habituation itself, and the difference of obvious intention establishes that difference, this shows having attachment to oneself, how does it show that attachment to oneself is the driver?