Chinese
未成立之意。说显而易见，则不需要特别说明。又或者，这是另一种分别念。所谓“彼”，是指说显而易见，而“已作未成立”是指说者。譬喻并非一定，譬喻并非一定成立。所谓“仅是部分”，是指主要说明在一个方面未成立，而没有考察以量成立和教证的差别。因为所立和能立是不同的，如果不相同，则不能成为它们的自性。所谓“仅仅存在就随之而来”，是指仅仅有声音，就随之，也就是它本身。所谓“到来”，是指成立。也就是，有法，声音，仅仅通过成立本身而成立。如此成立，又说发出声音，是没有意义的。详细解释就是，声音如果那样，所谓“变成”，是指有法通过成立本身，声音自然成立，因此是指出了宗。仅仅通过指出有法，声音就那样成立。之后，所谓“从自身”，是指因为是声音，所以通过显示作为理由的“因为是声音”，也无法从声音本身之外了知其他。因此，如果将声音作为宗，并使之成立。如果它本身也是理由，那么，所谓“它本身也是理”，是指声音作为宗，它本身也是理由。或者，不应指出，所谓“不应指出”，是指仅仅存在就随之而来，因此再次指出它没有意义，这在刚才已经说过了。也会变成没有辩论，所谓“也会变成没有辩论”，是指理由没有意义。如果因为没有见到随行，所以随行没有成立，那么，如果想要成立理由本身，那么就不是没有见到随行，因为这里不可能有随行。比如，有法如何随行于其他有法呢？那是不可能的，因为理由是通过有法的差别而成立的。因此，它不是理由的自性。因此，如果它成立，理由就没有成立。如果像灯等自己产生自己认识的觉知一样，理由也自己使自己被认识，那么，灯等，等等。
English
It means 'not established.' To speak clearly, there is no need for special explanation. Or, this is another conceptualization. The so-called 'that' refers to speaking clearly, and 'made unestablished' refers to the speaker. The example is not certain, the example is not necessarily established. The so-called 'only a part' means mainly explaining that it is not established in one aspect, and not examining the difference between establishment by valid cognition and scriptural proof. Because what is to be proven and what proves are different, if they are not the same, they cannot become their own nature. The so-called 'just by existing, it comes along' means that just by having sound, it comes along, that is, itself. The so-called 'coming' means established. That is, the subject, sound, is established merely by its own establishment. Having established it in this way, it is meaningless to say that it emits sound again. The detailed explanation is that if the sound is like that, the so-called 'becoming' means that the subject itself establishes the sound naturally, so it indicates the subject. Just by pointing out the subject, the sound is established in that way. Afterwards, the so-called 'from itself' means that because it is sound, even by showing the reason 'because it is sound,' one cannot know anything other than the sound itself. Therefore, if the sound is made the subject and made to be established. If it itself is also the reason, then, the so-called 'it itself is also the reason' means that the sound is the subject, and it itself is also the reason. Or, it should not be pointed out, the so-called 'should not be pointed out' means that just by existing, it comes along, so pointing it out again is meaningless, as has already been said. It will also become without debate, the so-called 'will also become without debate' means that the reason is meaningless. If, because the concomitance is not seen, the concomitance is not established, then, if you want to establish the reason itself, then it is not that the concomitance is not seen, because concomitance is impossible here. For example, how can a subject be concomitant with another subject? That is impossible, because the reason is established by the difference of the subject. Therefore, it is not the nature of the reason. Therefore, if it is established, the reason is not established. If, like a lamp and so on, which produce self-cognizing awareness, the reason also makes itself known, then, a lamp and so on, etc.
Chinese
说的是，在自己的认识对象中，对具有特征的事物进行认识是不可能的。对作为认识对象的标志进行确立，这本身也不是一种认识，因为从认识标志到之后认识到具有该标志的事物。这些是原因和结果的关系，因此不是同时发生的。这里会产生荒谬的推论，即对标志的认识是将具有该标志的事物作为认识对象。如果说，法和有法，例如所作和无常，在究竟意义上没有差别，所以过失是相同的，这是你的想法。已经说过了，指的是在第二品中。如果那样，那是不成立的。指的是法和有法的差别不成立。应该驳斥它和非它。指的是法和有法应该驳斥它和非它，在究竟意义上只有它和非它。依靠自己的差别。指的是依靠所作和无常的相异的法的差别。在认识上如何区分？指的是法和有法显现为既非它也非非它，因此所作和无常的诸多法不显现，因此依赖于标志和具有标志的名称，所以过失不相同。这里指的是，因为是声音。在名称上看到的是，通过所作和无常的相异差别，在作为标志和具有标志的名称上，对于不同的见解的智慧本身也没有触及，对于执持相异差别的智慧也没有触及，与此相似的差别也没有显现。对于自身也是，意思是像事物有诸多差别又在哪里呢？也就是说，从声音到声音，因为没有相异的差别，所以没有被理解和理解者。因为在两者上都不成立，指的是对于论敌和反驳者双方来说，任何微小的不同方面都没有成立。他们也解释了法，例如声音是无常的，因为它是无常的，这也被理解为陈述法性本身作为理由的不成立。从不一致的方面返回指的是不是不一致的方面本身。对于它也是，指的是有法或法性成立
English
It is said that it is impossible to recognize the characterized object in one's own object of knowledge. Establishing the sign as the object of knowledge is not itself a recognition, because the recognition of the characterized object comes later than the knowledge of the sign. These are cause and effect, so they are not simultaneous. Here, there would be an absurd inference that the knowledge of the sign takes the characterized object as its object. If it is said that dharma and dharmī, such as what is made and impermanent, are not different in ultimate meaning, so the fault is the same, this is your thought. It has already been said, referring to the second chapter. If that is the case, it is not established. Refers to the difference between dharma and dharmī not being established. It and otherness should be refuted. Refers to dharma and dharmī should refute it and otherness, in the ultimate sense only it and otherness. Relying on one's own distinctions. Refers to relying on the distinctive differences of the opposing dharmas of what is made and impermanent. How to distinguish in knowledge? Refers to dharma and dharmī appearing as neither it nor other than it, therefore the many dharmas of what is made and impermanent do not appear, therefore relying on the names of sign and characterized object, so the fault is not the same. Here, it refers to because it is sound. What is seen in name is that through the distinctive differences of what is made and impermanent, in the names of sign and characterized object, the wisdom of different views itself is not touched, and the wisdom of holding different differences is not touched, and similar differences do not appear. For oneself also, it means where are there many differences like things? That is, from sound to sound, because there is no different difference, there is no understood and understander. Because it is not established in both, it refers to for both the opponent and the refuter, no small different aspect is established. They also explained the dharma, such as sound is impermanent, because it is impermanent, which is also understood as stating the non-establishment of the nature of dharma itself as the reason. Returning from the inconsistent side refers to not being the inconsistent side itself. For it also, it refers to the dharmī or the nature of dharma being established.
Tibetan
པར་བྱེད་པར་འགྱུར་བའོ། །ཉིད་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བར་བསྟན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བའི་ཆོས་ཉིད་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རྟགས་མ་གྲུབ་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། །གལ་ཏེ་ཕྱོགས་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྟེ། །མཐུན་པ་དང་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་དག་གིས་ཕན་ཚུན་ཐ་དད་པ་གསུམ་དུ་གནས་པའི་ཕྱིར་མི་མཐུན་བའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་པ་ཉིད་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་རྟགས་ཀྱི་རང་བཞིན་གྱི་ཆོས་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་ཀྱང་མ་ཡིན་ལ། བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ཅན་དུ་གྱུར་པ་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་ཀྱང་མ་ཡིན་བ་གསུམ་པ་ཕྱོགས་ལ་ཡོད་བ་ཉིད་མ་ཡིན་ནམ། དེའི་ཕྱིར་རྟགས་གྲུབ་པོ་སྙམ་མོ། །གང་གིས་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་རྒྱུན་གྱིས་སོ། །དེ་ལས་བཟློག་པ་མི་མཐུན་ པའི་ཕྱོགས་སོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་སྒྲུབ་བར་མི་འདོད་པའོ། མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་ཡང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་པའི་ཕྱོགས་སུ་རྣམ་པར་གཞག་གི་དངོས་པོ་མ་ཡིན་ན་སྒྲུབ་བར་འདོད་པས་ནི་ཕྱོགས་སུ་འགྱུར་པའི་ཕྱིར་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་མེད་པ་དངོས་པོས་གནས་པ་ཡང་འདོད་པས་འཇིག་པར་འགྱུར་ཏེ། མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་པར་འགྱུར་རོ། །དེ་ལྟ་ན་གཏན་ཚིགས་འགའ་ཡང་མ་ངེས་པར་མི་འགྱུར་ཏེ། མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་ཀྱང་འདོད་པས་བྱས་པའི་ཕྱིར་འདོད་པས་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མེད་པར་བྱས་ནས་རྟགས་ཉིད་དུ་འགྱུར་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །མང་དུ་སྨྲས་སོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་ལེའུ་འདི་ཉིད་དུའོ། །གལ་ཏེ་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་མ་གྲུབ་པ་ཙམ་ཐམས་ཅད་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་མེད་པ་ཙམ་མོ། །གཉི་ག་ལ་ངེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་རྒོལ་བ་དང་ཕྱིར་རྒོལ་བ་གཉི་གས་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་མེད་པར་ངེས་པའོ། །དེའི་ཕྱིར་ཆོས་ཅན་ལ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བའི་ཆོས་ཅན་ལའོ། །མ་ངེས་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་རྒོལ་བ་དང་ཕྱིར་རྒོལ་བ་དག་གིས་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་མེད་པར་མ་ངེས་པའི་ཕྱིར་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་པ་ཉིད་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་གཏན་ཚིགས་ཀྱི་རང་བཞིན་གྲུབ་པོ་ཞེ་ན། འདིར་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་ཡང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བའི་ཆོས་གཏན་ཚིགས་སུ་བྱས་པ་འདིར་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ལ་དེས་ན་ནི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་སུ་འགྱུར་བས་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ལ་ཐེ་ཚོམ་ཟ་བ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་མ་ཡིན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་གཏན་ཚིགས་ཡིན་ནོ། །དེ་ལྟ་ན་གཏན་ཚིགས་དེ་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ལོག་པ་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་ཡིན་ལ། དེ་ལས་ལོག་པའི་མཚན་ཉིད་དུ་མ་ངེས་ན་ནི་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་གྲུབ་པའི་ཕྱིར་ལམ་ལོག་ན་ངེས་པ་ཡང་མི་མཐུན་པའི་ཕྱོགས་ཉིད་དུ་གྲུབ་པ
Chinese
将成为施加。因为被指示为是“彼”。因为是要被成立的法性，所以因不成。如果说，由于同品和异品等各方，以三种互相不同的方式存在，因此所谓“非异品”的因的自性之法，既不是异品，也不是成为要成立者的同品，难道第三者不是存在于各方吗？因此认为因成立。所谓“以何者”是说以常法。与此相反，所谓“异品”是不欲成立者。所谓“虽非异品”，如果不是在方所安立的事物，由于想要成立，则会成为方，因此异品，没有要成立的事物，以事物存在也想要毁灭，则会成为非异品。这样一来，任何正因都不会不决定，因为异品也是由欲所作，由欲使异品不存在后，会成为因的缘故。所谓“多说”是在此品中。如果说，所有未成立的要成立的事物，就是没有要成立的事物。所谓“于二者决定”是说论敌和反论敌二者决定没有要成立的事物。因此，所谓“于有法”是在要成立的有法上。所谓“由于不决定”是说由于论敌和反论敌等不决定没有要成立的事物，所谓“非异品”是说，如果因的自性成立，那么，在此，所谓“虽非异品”是说，如果将要成立的法作为因，那么在此，对于要成立的事物，因此会成为同品，因为对于要成立的事物是犹豫的缘故，所谓“非异品”是因。这样一来，那个因是要成立之事的颠倒，是异品，如果不能决定与此相反的体性，那么由于要成立的事物已成立，如果道路颠倒，那么决定也是成立为异品。
English
It will become the act of applying. Because it is indicated as "that itself." Because it is the nature of the object to be established, the sign is not established. If it is said that because the similar and dissimilar sides, etc., exist in three mutually different ways, therefore, the nature of the sign's own nature, which is called "not the dissimilar side," is neither the dissimilar side nor the similar side that has become the object to be established. Is it not the third that exists on the sides? Therefore, it is thought that the sign is established. "By what" means by continuity. The opposite of that, "dissimilar side," means not wanting to establish. "Even if it is not the dissimilar side," if it is not an entity that is established in a place, because one wants to establish it, it will become a side, therefore, the dissimilar side, there is no object to be established, and if one wants to destroy the existence of the entity, it will become the non-dissimilar side. In that case, no reason will be uncertain, because the dissimilar side is also made by desire, and after desire makes the dissimilar side non-existent, it will become the reason. "Speaking much" means in this chapter itself. If it is said that all that is not established as the object to be established is just the object to be established. "Determined in both" means that the opponent and the counter-opponent both determine that there is no object to be established. Therefore, "on the subject" means on the subject of the object to be established. "Because of uncertainty" means that because the opponent and the counter-opponent, etc., are uncertain about the object to be established, "not the dissimilar side" means that if the nature of the reason is established, then here, "even if it is not the dissimilar side" means that if the object to be established is made the reason, then here, for the object to be established, therefore it will become the similar side, because there is doubt about the object to be established, "not the dissimilar side" is the reason. In that case, that reason is the opposite of the object to be established, it is the dissimilar side, and if the nature opposite to that cannot be determined, then because the object to be established is established, if the path is reversed, then the determination is also established as the dissimilar side.