Chinese
对真实事物的辨别，那不是获得。为什么呢？因为叫做真实。因此，叫做不欺骗。后半部分通过解释来回答，叫做住处。如果依赖于不住处，那又如何呢？叫做暂时。如果认为足够，那么谁能识别欺骗？谁能确定真与非真的区别呢？叫做谁。像这样，解释了叫做相反关联处等等的偈颂。因此，叫做因为不能确定区别。这是名言者的生起之悟，而不是讲述者的生起之悟的意思。为什么呢？因为叫做胜义谛。这也被证明过了，所以显示这个叫做这个。那样说有什么用呢？如果怀疑还有其他方式的量之悟，那么消除其他方式的量之悟，叫做如果。会变得没有穷尽，叫做因为又是其他量。如果因为害怕这个过失而承认没有量就能证悟，那么如果那样，那么所量之悟也不依赖于它吗？说叫做没有量。因为有量和无量都承认不能证悟量，所以后面解释。如果问说什么，叫做量本身。为什么呢？因为证悟量的智慧是它的自性，所以它本身不是量。如果认为被其他证悟，那么如果那样，也就是如果被其他承认，那么会说没有穷尽。怎么说呢？叫做因为。不仅是量，而且对其他的名言也进行分析。分析本身说叫做如果。如果名言不是量，那么这时从不是量的名言中不能证悟量，那么对所量也同样会证悟。那样的话，量的定义会变得没有意义。为什么呢？因为所有没有量的，都是因为成立，也就是确定的缘故。
English
The discernment of true objects, that is not attainment. Why? Because it is called "true." Therefore, it is called "not deceiving." The latter half answers by explaining, it is called "abode." If it relies on what is not an abode, how is that? It is called "temporary." If it is considered sufficient, then who will recognize deception? Who will definitely distinguish between truth and non-truth? It is called "who." Thus, the verses such as "opposite relation place" are explained. Therefore, it is called because the distinction cannot be definitively reversed. This is the realization of the arising of nominalists, not the realization of the arising of narrators. Why? Because it is called "ultimate truth." This has also been proven before, so it shows that this is called "this." What is the use of saying that? If there is doubt that there is another way of valid cognition, then eliminating the valid cognition of another way is called "if." It will become endless, called because it is another valid cognition. If, fearing this fault, one admits that enlightenment can be attained without valid cognition, then if that is the case, then will the cognition of the object of measurement not depend on it either? It is said to be called "without valid cognition." Because both those with and without valid cognition admit that valid cognition cannot be realized, it is explained later. If asked what is said, it is called "valid cognition itself." Why? Because the wisdom of realizing that the nature of valid cognition is itself, so it itself is not valid cognition. If it is thought to be realized by another, then if that is the case, that is, if it is admitted by another, then it will be said to be endless. How is it said? It is called "because." Not only valid cognition, but also other terms are analyzed. The analysis itself is said to be called "if." If the term is not valid cognition, then at this time, valid cognition cannot be realized from the term that is not valid cognition, then the object of measurement will also be realized in the same way. In that case, the definition of valid cognition will become meaningless. Why? Because all that is without valid cognition is because it is established, that is, because it is certain.
Chinese
是故。因此，从非量产生的此决定并非相关。因此，名为“因此”是因为没有证悟那唯一。名为“仅仅是名言”，说“仅仅”二字，则说的是远离量。如何说不欺骗不是究竟的呢？名为“如此”。此处的结合是名为“他异”，因为对于他异与非他异二者，不欺骗是不合理的。陈述不合理性本身，名为“如果”。如果从“如果”一词所表示的正在完成之物中获得燃烧等其他事物，那么，当获得燃烧等其他事物时，无遮遣的自性如何能成为不欺骗，或者非实在的自性如何能成为不欺骗呢？不能成为不欺骗。或者，如果从正在证悟之物中获得的事物不是他异，那么，如果是那样，所要获得的事物也如同正在证悟之物一样被证悟。因此，名为“因此”是因为所要获得的事物与正在证悟之物不是他异，所以不是欺骗。在知识产生的时刻，就成为不欺骗。因此，因为没有欺骗的怀疑，所以不是所要进入之处。因此，在究竟上，从现量之后产生的分别念和声音也不是不欺骗。因为没有共同的对境等。如何成为言语完全断除之果呢？名为“唯一”。因为不仅结合了“唯一”一词，而且没有结合的词语也通过词语，在言语中不仅如此，而且断除也会被证悟。其他人说：“这个暂时搁置”，这是断除之果。名为“如此”是见到三种形态。成立宗者说“黑色”。结合“分开而见到本身”。陈述分开的形态是“如果具有差别和确定”等。何时会产生这种区分呢？名为“差别”。如何与差别等结合呢？名为“黑色”。怀疑是名为“没有结合”。回答是名为“场合”等，这个也将在后面解释。名为“其他差别”时，断除慷慨等。
English
Therefore. Therefore, this certainty arising from non-valid cognition is not relevant. Therefore, the term "therefore" is used because there is no realization of that one alone. The term "merely nominal" indicates that by mentioning "merely," it refers to being separate from valid cognition. How can it be said that non-deception is not ultimate? It is referred to as "in this way." This very connection is called "different," because it is unreasonable for non-deception to apply to both different and non-different. Stating the unreasonableness itself is referred to as "if." If obtaining other things such as burning from what is being completed as indicated by the word "if," then when obtaining other things such as burning, how can the nature of non-negation become non-deceptive, or how can the nature of non-existence become non-deceptive? It cannot become non-deceptive. Or, if what is to be obtained from what is being realized is not different, then if that is the case, what is to be obtained is also realized in the same way as what is being realized. Therefore, it is said that what is to be obtained is not different from what is being realized, so it is not deceptive. At the very moment when knowledge arises, it becomes non-deceptive. Therefore, since there is no doubt of deception, it is not what is to be entered. Therefore, ultimately, even the conceptual thought and sound arising from the aftermath of direct perception are not non-deceptive. This is because there is no common object, etc. How can it be the fruit of completely cutting off speech? It is referred to as "only." Because not only is the word "only" combined, but even words that are not combined are also through words, and not only in speech, but also cutting off will be realized. Others say, "Let this be put aside for now," this is the fruit of cutting off. The term "in that way" refers to seeing three aspects. The proponent of established tenets says "black." Connect "seeing itself after separating." Stating the aspect of separating is "if there is difference and certainty," etc. When will this distinction occur? It is referred to as "difference." How to connect with difference, etc.? It is referred to as "black." Doubt is referred to as "without combining." The answer is referred to as "occasion," etc., and this will also be explained later. When it is called "other difference," it cuts off generosity, etc.
Tibetan
འགྱུར་བའོ། །དེས་ན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ཡོན་ཏན་གཞན་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པར་འགྱུར་བས་སོ། །དེ་ལྟར་འགྱུར་མོས་སྙམ་ན། དེ་ལྟར་ནི་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་སྟེ་ཡོན་ཏན་ཐམས་ ཅད་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པ་ནི་མི་འཐད་དེ་ཚད་མ་དང་འགལ་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །སུན་འབྱིན་པ་གཞན་ནི་མི་ལྡན་པ་དང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་སྟེ། གཉི་གས་ཀྱང་འགའ་ཞིག་འགོག་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །དེར་ཡང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་མ་འགྲེལ་བ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པའི་ངག་ལ་ཡང་ངོ༌། །ནག་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་དོན་རྣམས་ལ་ནིའོ། །ཅི་ལྟར་མ་འབྲེལ་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་བཟློག་ཟླ་ཡིན་ཞེ་ན། དེ་ཉིད་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་འཕོང་སྐྱེན་པ་ཉིད་དོ། །ད་ལྟར་མ་ཡིན་ན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་གཏོང་ཕོད་པ་ལ་སོགས་པ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་ནའོ། །དེ་ལྟར་གཞན་དང་ལྡན་པ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པའི་ངག་ལ་ཡང་ཟླ་བོ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པ་ཉིད་རྟོགས་པར་འགྱུར་བ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་བརྗོད་པ་ནི་དེ་བཞིན་དུ་ཞེས་བྱ་བའོ། །ར་མ་ལ་སོགས་པ་ནི་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་དེ་སྐབས་སུ་མ་བབ་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཏེ། གཉིས་པོ་ཁོ་ན་སྐབས་སུ་བྱས་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །རམ་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྐབས་སུ་བབ་ན་ནི་དེ་ཡང་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་དོ་ཞེས་འཆད་པར་འགྱུར་རོ། །སྐབས་སུ་ཡིན་ན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་སྐབས་སུ་བབ་པར་བྱས་ནའོ། །དེ་ཉིད་བརྗོད་པ་ཅི་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི། མཁས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཡོན་ཏན་གཞན་ནོ། །གལ་ཏེ་ཡོན་ཏན་མཐའ་དག་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་ན། ནག་པ་ཉིད་ལ་སོགས་པ་ཡང་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པར་འགྱུར་རོ། །དེ་ལྟར་ནི་འཐད་པ་ཡང་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ། ཚད་མ་དང་འགལ་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ་ཞེས་དོགས་ན། འཁྲུལ་བ་མེད་པ་སྤངས་པའོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་སྟེ། ཅི་ལྟར་འཁྲུལ་པ་མེད་པ་སྤངས་པ་དེ་ལྟར་ཡོན་ཏན་མཐའ་དག་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། །ཐེ་ཚོམ་ཟ་བའི་སྐབས་སུ་བབ་པའི་ཚུལ་བརྗོད་པ་ནི། ཅི་འདྲ་བ་ན་ཞེས་བྱ་བའོ། །མཐའ་དག་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་ར་མ་ལ་སོགས་པ་ཡང་ངོ༌། །ཅིའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེ་ན། དེའི་ཚེ་ཞེས་བྱ་བའོ། །དེ་བཞིན་དུ་ཤིན་ཏུ་མི་སྲིད་པ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པའི་ངག་གིས་ཀྱང་པདྨ་སྔོན་པོ་ནི་མི་སྲིད་པ་ཁོ་ནའོ་ཞེས། པདྨ་ལ་སྔོན་པོ་དང་གཏན་མི་ལྡན་པའི་སྐབས་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་དེ་ཉིད་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པར་བྱེད་པ་ཡིན་ཏེ། པདྨའི་རིགས་ཀྱི་ཕྱོགས་གཅིག་དང་སྔོན་པོ་ལྡན་པར་མཐོང་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གང་གི་ཕྱིར་དེ་ལྟར་རྣམ་གཅོད་རྣམ་པ་གསུམ་ཡོད་ཀྱི། རྣམ་པ་འབྲེལ་པ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པ་དང༌། ཅིག་ཤོས་ཁོ་ན་ནི་མ་ཡིན་པ་དེས་ན། བྱས་པ་ཉིད་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཆོས་དང་མི་ལྡན་པ་གང་ཡིན་པ་དེ་རྣམ་པར་གཅོད་པས་ན། ཆོས་ཅན་བྱས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་ཁྱད
Chinese
是转变。因此，之所以说“因此”，是因为能转变，从而区分其他功德。如果认为会那样转变，那么“那样”的意思是，区分一切功德是不合理的，因为这与量相违背。其他的反驳是“不具备”，意思是，因为二者也能遮止一些。那里也，指的是对于没有解释的区分之语也一样。对于黑色等等的意义也是如此。如果问：如何是不相关的等等的反面呢？“那本身”指的是敏捷本身。如果现在不是，指的是区分慷慨等等。像这样，对于区分与他者具备的言语，也能领悟到区分反面本身，说的是“像那样”。“拉玛”等等不是区分，因为那不合时宜，因为只是针对二者。如果“拉玛”等等合时宜，那么也会解释说那也是区分。如果合时宜，指的是如果使其合时宜。“说那本身有什么用”，指的是贤善等等的其他功德。如果区分一切功德，那么也会区分黑色本身等等。那样也是不合理的，因为与量相违背，如果怀疑，那么说的是“舍弃无错乱”，意思是，如何舍弃无错乱，那样就是区分一切功德。陈述产生怀疑的场合的方式是“怎么样呢”。“一切”指的是“拉玛”等等。为什么呢？因为“那时”。同样，以区分极不可能的言语也能说“青莲是不可能的”，因为是在莲花与青色完全不相符的场合，因此能区分那本身，因为见到莲花种类的一部分与青色相符。因为那样有三种区分，即区分关联的方式，以及唯一不是另一种，因此，区分不具备所作性等等的法，因此，有法所作性等等是法的差别。
English
It is transformation. Therefore, the reason for saying "therefore" is that it can transform, thereby distinguishing other merits. If it is thought that it will transform in that way, then "that way" means that distinguishing all merits is unreasonable, because it contradicts the valid means of cognition. The other refutation is "not possessing," meaning that because both can also prevent some. There also refers to the words of distinction that have not been explained. It is also the same for the meanings of blackness and so on. If you ask, how is it the opposite of being unrelated, etc.? "That itself" refers to agility itself. If it is not now, it refers to distinguishing generosity and so on. In this way, for the speech that distinguishes possessing others, it is also possible to understand the distinction of the opposite itself, which is said to be "like that." "Rama" and so on are not distinctions, because that is not appropriate, because it is only aimed at the two. If "Rama" and so on are appropriate, then it will also be explained that that is also a distinction. If it is appropriate, it means if it is made appropriate. "What is the use of saying that itself" refers to other merits such as virtue. If all merits are distinguished, then blackness itself and so on will also be distinguished. That is also unreasonable, because it contradicts the valid means of cognition, if you doubt, then it is said "abandoning non-confusion," meaning, how to abandon non-confusion, that is how to distinguish all merits. The way to state the occasion of generating doubt is "how is it?" "Everything" refers to "Rama" and so on. Why? Because "at that time." Similarly, by distinguishing extremely impossible words, it can also be said that "the blue lotus is impossible," because it is in the occasion where the lotus and blue color are completely incompatible, therefore it can distinguish that itself, because it is seen that a part of the lotus species is compatible with blue color. Because there are three kinds of distinctions in that way, namely, the way of distinguishing associations, and the only one that is not another, therefore, distinguishing the dharma that does not possess the nature of being made, etc., therefore, the subject of dharma, the nature of being made, etc., is the difference of dharma.