Chinese
哦，这是它的意思。如果通过推理能够理解事物的自性，那么就不应是隐蔽的。所说的“能够理解”就是指这个。所说的“成为隐蔽的”是用来消除疑惑的。所说的“那是不存在的”是回答。如果通过推理能够理解事物自身的体性，那么那时就根本不存在隐蔽性，这是它的意思。然而，体性具有显明和不显明的两种自性。其中，不显明的是推理的对象，为了消除这个疑惑，就说了“如果是不显明相”。意思是，不显明相存在于何处，那个事物就是隐蔽的，那么怎么会没有隐蔽性呢？这是所思考的。在这里，也是现量的自性，因此现量会显现两种自性，为了回答这个问题，就说了“如果是现量，为何不承认”。为什么不承认不显明相的事物是现量呢？然而，这确实是现量。因此，执持其自性的现量也会成为推理的对境，这是他的想法。如果两者不能同时显现，那么就像执持此岸和彼岸的部分一样，依次理解也是现量。解释说：“两种自性是”。推理也是因为接触到不显明的事物自性，所以仅仅是现量，这是它的意思。所说的“由于其他的差别”是指由于远近等其他差别的力量。所回答的是“如果差别”，意思是，即使是自性，也不能理解未被理解的事物自性。所说的“为什么青色等”就是指这个。所说的“其他的，自己的自性”是回答。因此，推理本身也会变成现量。对于推理能够使事物显现，以及消除疑惑，就说了“推理本身是根识”。意思是，因为境和根识没有相遇，所以推理是现量。回答是，与境和根识相合也像现量一样，是事物的自性
English
O, that is its meaning. If the nature of things can be understood through inference, then it should not be hidden. What is said as "can be understood" refers to this. What is said as "becoming hidden" is to dispel doubts. What is said as "that does not exist" is the answer. If the essence of things can be understood through inference, then at that time there is absolutely no hiddenness, that is its meaning. However, essence has two natures, manifest and unmanifest. Among them, the unmanifest is the object of inference, to dispel this doubt, it is said, "If it is an unmanifest appearance." It means, where does the unmanifest appearance exist, that thing is hidden, then how can there be no hiddenness? This is what is being considered. Here, it is also the nature of direct perception, therefore direct perception will manifest two natures, to answer this question, it is said, "If it is direct perception, why not admit it." Why not admit that things that appear unmanifest are direct perception? However, this is indeed direct perception. Therefore, the direct perception that holds its nature will also become the object of inference, this is his thought. If the two cannot appear simultaneously, then just like holding the parts of this shore and the other shore, understanding in sequence is also direct perception. The explanation says: "The two natures are." Inference is also because it touches the unmanifest nature of things, so it is only direct perception, that is its meaning. What is said as "due to other differences" refers to the power of other differences such as distance. The answer is "if there are differences," meaning that even if it is nature, the nature of things that have not been understood cannot be understood. What is said as "why blue etc." refers to this. What is said as "other, one's own nature" is the answer. Therefore, inference itself will also become direct perception. Regarding the fact that inference can make things manifest, and to dispel doubts, it is said, "Inference itself is sense consciousness." It means that because the object and sense consciousness do not meet, inference is direct perception. The answer is that being in accordance with the object and sense consciousness is also like direct perception, it is the nature of things.
Chinese
既然从执著中不能进行推测，那么仅仅是推测的意思。如果与此相反能够成立，那么这如何进行推测呢？就是说，是与感官分离的。为什么呢？因为已经说了是推测。这是它的意义。然而，因为没有事物，所以是推测的对境。感官是回答。如果像了知感官等常时需要推测的事物那样进行推测，那么与感官相关的推测也同样是进入这个对境的唯一推测，为了消除这种疑惑，就是“如果与感官相关”。就像常时需要推测的事物一样，其他的推测对境也不会成为进入的对境，因此，不进入的推测不会成为量，为了回答这个问题，就是“因为这个”。因为推测不进入，所以没有意义。为什么不进入呢？因为说了“非天”。即使那样，也会进入吗？回答说，没有意义，就是没有结果。那么如何进入呢？说了“为了需要而追求”等等。会成为非量，这是针对当时情况的推测。那个，是因为后来出现。回答是，那也不真实。如果执著于与感官相关，那么从推测中了知它的特殊意义的自性，而不是之前的自性，因为它不会被了知为原因。为了了知它而接近推测，如果不这样做，怎么会没有意义呢？因此，会分离的不是推测。以自己的体性了知，也不是即将发生的，说了“那时”。“如果”是迎接疑惑。虽然以自己的体性显现，但不是现在的，因为显现为过去等的自性，这是它的意义。对于现量所见，推测是回忆的自性。
English
Since inference cannot be made from clinging, it simply means inference. If the opposite is established, how can this be inferred? It means being separated from the senses. Why? Because it has been said to be inference. That is its meaning. However, since there is no object, it is the object of inference. The senses are the answer. If inference is made in the same way as things that always need to be inferred, such as the senses, then inference related to the senses is also the only inference that enters this object. To dispel this doubt, it is "if it is related to the senses." Just as things that always need to be inferred, other objects of inference will not become objects of entry, and therefore, inference that does not enter will not become valid. To answer this question, it is "because of this." Because inference does not enter, it is meaningless. Why does it not enter? Because it is said to be "non-divine." Even so, will it enter? The answer is, it is meaningless, which means there is no result. Then how does it enter? It is said, "seeking for needs," etc. It will become non-valid, which is inference for the situation. That is because it appears later. The answer is, that is also not true. If one clings to being related to the senses, then the nature of its special meaning is understood from inference, not the previous nature, because it will not be understood as the cause. If inference is approached to understand it, how can it not be meaningless if it is not done? Therefore, what will be separated is not inference. Knowing by its own nature is also not appropriate to be about to happen, it is said "at that time." "If" is to welcome doubt. Although it appears by its own nature, it is not the present, because it appears as the nature of the past, etc., that is its meaning. For what is seen by direct perception, inference is the nature of memory.
Chinese
如果进入，那么过去本身不会变成推测的对境，因为不是它的对境，回答说这是因为推测。如果认为不理解，就说这样。认为推测是记忆的自性。如果说，那么它对此有进入吗？回答说，现量也有。什么时候，这是迎接疑问。像这样，是在推测的时候。那么，这是回答。对此，是过去自性。如果是这样，那又有什么过失呢？回答说，对此也有。对于已经产生的过去自性，任何时候都没有现量。因为那个理由，对于任何推测来说，凡不是现量的对境，就没有记忆，因为从经验中产生记忆，这是规律。推测也是记忆，怎么会在现量没有认识到的情况下产生呢？对于将要产生的情况，也不是推测，因为任何时候都不是现量，这样说的是任何。那是对于将要产生的情况。 相同的是过去本身和将要产生本身。两者任何时候都不是现量的对境。如果对于佛来说，现量的自己的对境也不是过去或未来，因为是具有自己对境中存在本身的对境。如果说，那不会变成那个推测的形状，就说如果。像这样，这是对于过去本身等等。它的形状是过去等等的形状。显现是推测自性的知识。回答说，不是。那个佛是。像那样是过去等等本身。另外，业也是由贪着等等。因为以那样的方式进行解释的原因，所以是想要执持意义的知识。另一种方式是过去等等的形状。如果即使那样，过去怎么会显现呢？回答说，因为与习气分离。对于过去的时间自性，是从现见中。
English
If it enters, then the past itself will not become the object of inference, because it is not its object, the answer is that it is because of inference. If you think you do not understand, say this. It is thought that inference is the nature of memory. If you say, then does it have entry into this? The answer is that there is also direct perception. When, this is to welcome the question. Like this, it is at the time of inference. Then, this is the answer. To this, it is the past nature. If so, then what is the fault? The answer is that there is also this. For the past nature that has already arisen, there is never direct perception. Because of that reason, for any inference, whatever is not the object of direct perception, there is no memory, because memory arises from experience, this is the rule. Inference is also memory, how can it arise when direct perception has not recognized it? For the situation that is about to arise, it is not inference, because it is never direct perception, what is said is anything. That is for the situation that is about to arise. What is the same is the past itself and the future itself. Neither is ever the object of direct perception. If for the Buddha, the direct object of his own direct perception is not the past or the future, because it is the object of having the existence itself in his own object. If you say, then it will not become the shape of that inference, say if. Like this, this is for the past itself and so on. Its shape is the shape of the past and so on. Manifestation is the knowledge of the nature of inference. The answer is no. That Buddha is. Like that is the past and so on itself. Also, karma is also from attachment and so on. Because of the reason for explaining in that way, it is the knowledge that wants to hold the meaning. Another way is the shape of the past and so on. If even so, how will the past appear? The answer is because of separation from habit. For the nature of past time, it is from direct seeing.
Chinese
知是比量。所谓“已逝”，是因为并非执著于真实义。或者，与习气相关的，那是喜乐已逝之时的，将要发生的任何事物。因为是从事物的自性中产生的，所以比量执著于已逝，即显现清晰存在的事物，就称之为“已逝”。例如，从一个月亮产生的，由于昏暗等的影响，显现为两个月亮的样子，同样，由于习气的影响，从非已逝中产生的，也显现为已逝的样子，这是它的含义。如果比量具有已逝的形态，那么事物的自性如何已逝呢？因此说“已逝”。所谓“彼”，是指事物自性的不共之处。例如，执著于蓝色本身，就像是蓝色本身一样。所谓“彼亦无”，是指比量所把握的事物自性。“是”是指因为事物自性的当下性，即不共性，所以比量不是量，仅仅是额外的执著而已。如果不是量，那么事物的自性如何获得呢？根本无法获得。回答是，因为是存在的缘故。因为在胜义中是比量的对境，所以不是事物的自性，但却是存在的缘故。如果事物的自性不是比量的对境，那么如何说它是存在的呢？回答是“见”。当下的相是与其它时相连的相之周遍，因此通过势力的作用所要证实的，在那时并不存在，如果它不存在，那么它的相续就会断绝。还有，任何不显现的事物，在那个时候是不存在的，例如制陶师在陶器的集合中一样。因此，考虑到特殊的结果，所要证实的在那个时候是存在的，这是他的想法。通过它，即通过相。如果说“通过知”，即通过比量。回答是“从不欺惑性中”。如果说“烟”，这是他人所说。烟也是不欺惑存在的缘故。
English
Knowing is inference. The term "past" means that it is not grasping onto the ultimate meaning. Or, that which is related to habituation is the time when joy has passed, whatever is to come. Because it comes from the nature of the thing, inference clings to the past, that is, the clear appearance that exists is called "past." For example, just as the appearance of two moons arises from one moon due to dimness and so on, similarly, due to the influence of habituation, what arises from what is not past also appears as past, that is the meaning. If inference has the aspect of being past, then how is the nature of the thing past? Therefore, it is said, "past." The term "that" refers to the uncommon nature of the thing. For example, just as grasping onto blueness itself is like being blueness itself. The term "that is also non-existent" refers to the nature of the thing grasped by inference. "Is" means that because of the present nature of the thing, that is, its uncommonness, inference is not valid cognition, but merely an additional clinging. If it is not valid cognition, then how is the nature of the thing obtained? It is not obtained at all. The answer is, it is because it exists. Because it is the object of inference in the ultimate sense, it is not the nature of the thing, but it is because it exists. If the nature of the thing is not the object of inference, then how can it be said to exist? The answer is, "seen." The sign of the present is not the pervasion of a sign that possesses another time, therefore, what is to be proven by force is not present at that time, and if it is not present, then its continuum will be cut off. Furthermore, whatever does not appear distinctly is not present at that time, just like the potter in the collection of pots. Therefore, considering the special result, what is to be proven is said to be present at that time, that is his intention. Through it, that is, through the sign. If it is said, "through knowing," that is, through inference. The answer is, "from non-deception itself." If it is said, "smoke," this is said by another. Smoke is also non-deceptive because it exists.