Chinese
就像具有排除他者的对立一样，对于具有排除他者之境者来说，则没有这种情况。具有声音所依的名称也是如此显现，因为是缘于事物之境而设立，并且那也是排除他者的自性。如是由于思惟的力量而显示了“总是有”之后，现在为了宣说“在胜义谛中没有”，所以说了“此智”。由于思惟的力量，具有无有差别的相状的智之所取境，说是排除他者，而“总”这个名称是没有的。如诸智生起无有差别，以“彼之所依”之名，是说显现，但那并非彼之所依本身之义。现在为了建立其宗义，所以说了“如此”。花色等显现之法，是不随行，并且不是互相随顺，花色不是黄色，黄色也不是花色。如何了知不随行呢？因为是显现之故。如果总存在显现，则会变化，因为是依赖于它，并且那也是互相各异的缘故。如果随行，那么由于花色有黄色，花色是什么，那本身就会变成黄色。现在如果显现之法是一，则总本身就会重要。如果相同者都变成那样之原因的自性是总，如果变成一，那么因为丝毫没有相同者，会变成什么事物的总呢？因此，因为显现本身，显现之法不随行，所以此处没有宣说其他的道理。虽然显现之法不随行，如果那些具有随行关联的相同理由的总存在，那么说“没有”就是所谓的“其他随行”。从显现中关联。因此，像那样具有随行之法，在一个显现上存在，在其他显现上也存在的现象是没有的。对于显现之法，具有随行之法的差别，任何显现上都没有显现，是这个意思。此处是成立不现见，如若观察，分别念也无法了知，这将在下面阐述。其他的随行没有被现量所了知。
English
Just as there is opposition to having the exclusion of others, for those who have the object of excluding others, there is no such situation. The term with sound as its basis also appears in this way, because it is established based on the object of things, and that is also the nature of excluding others. Thus, after showing that "generals exist" due to the power of thought, now, in order to explain that "they do not exist in the ultimate sense," it is said, "this mind." Due to the power of thought, the object grasped by the mind, which has the aspect of being without difference, is said to be the exclusion of others, but the name "general" does not exist. How do minds arise without difference? By the name "basis of that," appearance is expressed, but that is not the meaning of being the basis of that itself. Now, in order to establish its tenet, it is said, "like this." Manifestations such as variegated colors do not follow, and they do not mutually accord; variegated color is not yellow, and yellow is not variegated color. How is it known that they do not follow? Because they are manifestations. If a general exists as a manifestation, it will change, because it relies on it, and that is also because they are mutually different. If it follows, then because variegated color has yellow, whatever is variegated color will itself become yellow. Now, if the manifestations are one, then the general itself will become important. If the nature that is the cause of the similar things becoming like that is the general, if it becomes one, then because there is not the slightest similarity, what thing will it become the general of? Therefore, because the manifestations themselves do not follow, no other reason is explained here. Although the manifestations do not follow, if there exists a general that is the same reason for those having a following connection, then saying "there is not" is what is called "another following." It is connected from the manifestations. Therefore, such a phenomenon of having a following, existing in one manifestation and also existing in another manifestation, does not exist. For the manifestation, the difference of having a following does not appear in any manifestation, that is the meaning. Here, it is established that it is not directly perceived; if it is examined, even conceptual thought cannot know it, which will be explained below. Other followings are not known by direct perception.
Chinese
那么，这是如何理解的呢？就像这样，对于不同的显现，将这个显现和那个显现联系起来，理解为空性的一个方面是存在的。例如，说“杂色的也是牛，黄色的也是牛”，但并不是说“凡是杂色的就是黄色的”。因此，不同和随后的关联是存在的，因为如果不不同，就会导致显现被联系起来；如果没有联系，也就无法成立为一个认知。那就是像它自己的本质一样，仅仅执着于“这是牛”或者“这是无常”等等不同的事物。因此，如何说“其他的随行者是不显现的”呢？如果说因为不是现量所以不显现，那么又如何理解“这不是现量”呢？如果不是现量，那么即使是盲人也会有“这是牛”的想法。如果说因为是分别念所以不是现量，那是不对的，因为没有矛盾。如果没有分别念，那么脱离分别念本身就不能成立为现量的特征。因此，如果说其他的随行者没有成立为不显现，那么，对于这个，不同的表达和随行者并没有成立为现量的法。即使不同和随行者的分别念与现量同时产生，这个是现量显现本身吗？因为有分别念和没有分别念的两种意识同时进入，所以在进行分析时，由于分别念与现量的显现不同，因此排除了分别念是现量本身，所以说这是分别念而不是体验。就像这样，即使没有认识到蓝色，如果眼睛的功能不存在，也不会认识到蓝色显现；而对于具有眼睛功能的人来说，就会有现量和分别念的两种显现，当对有和没有感官功能的各种状态的差别进行近似描述时，在认识到蓝色时才能确定。因此，事物显现的体验也是另一种，而不显现的分别念也是另一种。同样，不同显现也是
English
So, how is this understood? Like this, for different appearances, understanding as one aspect of emptiness by connecting this appearance and that appearance exists. For example, saying "the mottled one is also a cow, and the yellow one is also a cow," but it is not saying "whatever is mottled is yellow." Therefore, difference and subsequent connection exist, because if there is no difference, it would lead to appearances being connected; and if there is no connection, it cannot be established as one cognition. That is, like its own essence, merely clinging to "this is a cow" or "this is impermanent," and so on, as different things. Therefore, how is it said that "other followers are not apparent"? If it is said that it is not apparent because it is not directly perceived, then how is it understood that "this is not directly perceived"? If it is not directly perceived, then even a blind person would have the thought "this is a cow." If it is said that it is not directly perceived because it is conceptual thought, that is not correct, because there is no contradiction. If there is no conceptual thought, then being free from conceptual thought itself cannot be established as a characteristic of direct perception. Therefore, if it is said that other followers have not been established as not apparent, then, for this, different expressions and followers have not been established as phenomena of direct perception. Even though the conceptual thought of difference and followers arises simultaneously with direct perception, is this the appearance of direct perception itself? Because two minds, with and without conceptual thought, enter simultaneously, when analyzing, since conceptual thought is different from the appearance of direct perception, it is excluded that conceptual thought is direct perception itself, so it is said that this is conceptual thought and not experience. Like this, even if one does not recognize blue, if the function of the eye does not exist, one will not recognize the appearance of blue; but for someone with the function of the eye, there will be two appearances of direct perception and conceptual thought, and when approximating the differences between various states of having and not having sensory functions, it can only be determined when blue is recognized. Therefore, the experience of the appearance of things is also another, and the conceptual thought of non-appearance is also another. Similarly, different appearances are also