Chinese
不是的。因为那是功德，所以确定只是事物。也不是聚合的自性，因为那是像事物一样被认为是唯一的。如果聚合的自性也以聚合相关联，那么将不得不承认第二个聚合。如果没有关联，那么会变成法和有法的事物吗？说了“关联不合理”等等，已经说过那样会太过分了。如果说，因为那六个词义产生了法，所以说那些法的这个是关联，那么，如果那样，仅仅从那产生的关联，也会和其他的水等与手杖、容器等那样的事物相关联。如果那样，那么考察那些具有存在或聚合的其他的关联将变得没有意义。另外，“六者具有的存在性”，即使有其他的法，但那样也只是错误。这样，那也即是存在性具有存在性，因为是有事物。如果那样，那么如何区分那不同的理由的形态？如果说在那也承认其他的存在性，那么那时将变得没有穷尽。如果说因为想要，所以没有穷尽没有损害，说了“其他的法”等等，因为一切都具有后后的法，所以会变成有法的事物。如果那样，那么说这六个是那些只是有法的事物是不合理的，因为有和词义六个不同的其他的有法的事物，是这样想的。又如果认为凡是有法的自性，那些就确定是六个，那么这也是没有意义的。如果那样，那么将不显示功德、业、总、特殊和聚合，因为这些不是只有有法的自性。那么是什么呢？也是法的自性，因为这些是依赖于物的。所谓“从这”，是从具有其他的法。另外，其他的六个都是存在性，因为存在性是能被认识到所缘的量所认识的。能被认识到的也
English
It is not. Because that is merit, it is certain that it is only a thing. It is also not the nature of aggregation, because that is considered to be unique like a thing. If the nature of aggregation is also related by aggregation, then the second aggregation will have to be admitted. If there is no association, then will it become the object of dharma and the object of dharma? It has been said that "association is unreasonable" etc., and it has been said that it would be too much. If it is said that because those six meanings of words produce dharma, it is said that this dharma of those is association, then, if that is the case, only from the association arising from that, other things such as water will also be associated with things such as canes and containers. If that is the case, then examining other associations that have existence or aggregation will become meaningless. In addition, "the six have existence", even if there are other dharmas, it is only a mistake. In this way, that is, existence has existence, because it is a thing. If so, then how can the different forms of reasons be distinguished? If it is said that other existence is also admitted there, then at that time it will become endless. If it is said that because of wanting, there is no harm in being endless, it is said that "other dharmas" etc., because everything has later and later dharmas, it will become an object of dharma. If that is the case, then it is unreasonable to say that these six are only objects of dharma, because there are other objects of dharma that are different from the six meanings of words, that is what I thought. Also, if it is thought that whatever is the nature of the object of dharma, those are definitely six, then this is also meaningless. If that is the case, then merit, karma, general, special and aggregation will not be shown, because these are not only the nature of the object of dharma. So what is it? It is also the nature of dharma, because these are dependent on things. The so-called "from this" is from having other dharmas. In addition, the other six are all existence, because existence can be recognized by the measure of what is perceived. What can be recognized is also
Chinese
即词之六义的对境之识是什么呢？即因为有彼，而作异性之加入也。如是，‘由所知生之识’，即是此，以言说而生者，即是所说也。故成异性之因之第六，亦非无尽，且亦非变成词之六义以外之其他词义。如是说者，此亦唯是分别而已。设若于词之六义彼等，若无能作义之事物自性之彼性，则彼等成如虚空莲花，以于能作义者，无能力之故也。如是，则不能以能见有与非有之量而证知也。若此等于有如是体性之彼性，则能作义之彼等，唯是事物，了知仅是舍弃其他差别，若以异性之差别而显示彼等之有性，则有何相违？自之体性无异性者，亦以心依于彼，而成如异性，说者无有相违也，以词唯随欲而转故。于串连虚假之语者，如于孩童与勇士等，全盘思择功德等，故此亦不成任何事也。‘以能作等异性故’等中，设若说‘从最初之线’等，设若于最初听闻布之名之情况，从所生之线等，成立布为异性，则成已成立而成立，以一切事物皆是刹那性故，虽无与线之实体不同之事物，然亦许诺从线之实体生起，故以布之名所说之线等，彼等与彼不相似之事物亦生也。若成立彼等于布同时生起之线等，则为显示彼等是其他布，则彼等之因不成也。故说‘作业本身唯一’等，设若于彼时，除线以外之彼
English
What is the consciousness that has the six meanings of words as its object? It is because there is that, that the difference is added. Likewise, 'the consciousness generated by what is known' is just that, and what is generated by speaking is just what is to be spoken. Therefore, it becomes the sixth reason for difference, and it is not endless, nor does it become another meaning of words other than the six meanings of words. Even to those who say this, this is just a distinction. If the six meanings of words do not have the very nature of things that can do things, then they will become like lotuses in the sky, because those who can do things have no power. If so, it will not be possible to realize it with the measure that distinguishes being and non-being. If these have the very nature of such a form, then those who can do things are just things, and knowing that only other differences are abandoned, if the existence of those is shown by the difference of difference, then what contradiction is there? That which does not have its own nature different is also relied upon by the mind, and it becomes like a difference, and there is no contradiction in saying it, because words only follow desire. For those who connect false words, such as fully considering the qualities of children and heroes, this does not become anything. In 'because of the difference of being able to do, etc.', if you say 'from the first thread', etc., if in the case of first hearing the name of cloth, from the threads that are produced, it is established that the cloth is different, then it is established that it is established, because all things are momentary, although there is no thing that is different from the substance of the threads, it is also promised that it will arise from the substance of the threads, so the threads that are said by the name of cloth, etc., those things that are not similar to it also arise. If it is established that those threads, etc., arise at the same time as the cloth, then in order to show that they are other cloths, their reasons are not established. Therefore, it is said 'the action itself is one', etc., if at that time, other than the thread
Tibetan
དང་དུས་མཚུངས་པར་འབྱུང་བའི་སྣམ་བུ་གྲུབ་པར་གྱུར་ན། དེའི་ཚེ་དེ་སྣལ་མ་ལ་ལྟོས་ནས་བྱེད་པ་པོ་ཐ་དད་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཆོས་འགྲུབ་པར་འགྱུར་ན། གང་གི་ཕྱིར་སྣལ་མ་ལས་ཐ་དད་པའི་སྣམ་བུ་དེ་ཉིད་འདིར་མ་གྲུབ་སྟེ། དེ་དག་ལས་ཐ་དད་པ་ཉིད་བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །སྣམ་བུ་དང་སྣལ་མ་རྣམས་ཞེས་བྱ་བའི་མིང་ཙམ་ལས་དངོས་པོ་རྣམས་ཐ་དད་པ་ཡང་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ། དགོས་པ་གཞན་གྱི་དབང་གིས་ཀྱང་མིང་གཞན་སྦྱོར་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །འདི་ལྟར་སྣལ་མ་ཁ་ཅིག་ཁྱད་པར་ཅན་གྱི་གནས་སྐབས་ཐོབ་པ་ནི་གྲང་བ་ལ་སོགས་པ་དོན་གཅིག་བྱེད་པར་ནུས་པ་ཡིན་གྱི། གང་དག་བྱེད་བ་པོ་ཅུང་ཟད་ཡིན་པ་གཞན་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །དེ་ལ་ཐ་སྙད་འདོགས་པ་པོ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་ཐ་སྙད་མ་འཆོལ་བར་བྱ་བའི་ཕྱིར། དོན་གཞན་མེད་ན་ཡང་དོན་གཅིག་བྱེད་པ་ལ་ཉེ་བར་མཁོ་བའི་སྣལ་མ་ཁྱད་པར་ཅན་རྣམས་བསྟན་པར་འདོད་ནས་སྣམ་བུ་ཞེས་སྒྲ་གཅིག་ཉེ་བར་སྦྱོར་རོ། །ཡང་ཅིའི་ཕྱིར་སྒྲ་གཅིག་ཉེ་བར་སྦྱོར་ཞེ་ན། སྒྲ་རེ་རེ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྨོས་ཏེ། སོ་སོར་སྒྲ་རེ་རེར་བརྗོད་ན་དཀའ་བའི་སྐྱོན་ཡོད་དེ། འདི་ལྟར་དེ་ལ་བརྗོད་པར་འདོད་པའི་དངོས་པོ་འབྲས་བུ་གཅིག་སྒྲུབ་པར་བྱེད་པར་རུང་བའི་དངོས་པོ་ཇི་སྙེད་པ་ལ་སྒྲ་དེ་སྙེད་སྦྱར་བར་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་དཀའ་བའི་སྐྱོན་ནོ། །འདི་དག་གི་ཐུན་མོང་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ངོ་བོ་བསྟན་པར་མི་ནུས་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཡང་མི་ནུས་པའི་སྐྱོན་ནོ། །རློམས་ཏེ་སྤྱིའི་རྣམ་པས་སྟོན་པ་ན། སྒྲ་གཅིག་ཉིད་བསྟན་པ་མཆོག་ཡིན་གྱི། སོ་སོ་སོ་སོར་སྟོན་པའི་སྦྱོར་བ་འདི་ལ་འབྲས་བུ་འགའ་ཡང་མ་དམིགས་པའི་ཕྱིར་འབྲས་བུ་མེད་པའི་སྐྱོན་ནོ། །དངོས་པོ་མཐའ་དག་བརྗོད་པར་འདོང་པ་ན་དོན་མ་ལུས་པ་བརྗོད་པར་བྱས་ན་ཐ་སྙད་སླ་བ་ཡོན་ཏན་ཡིན་ཏེ། འགྲོ་བ་དང༌། སྲིད་པ་གསུམ་དང༌། སྣ་ཚོགས་པའི་སྒྲ་བཞིན་ནོ། །བརྗོད་པ་གཅིག་ཅེས་བྱ་བ་ནི་སྣམ་བུ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ཚིག་གཅིག་ཅེས་བྱ་བའི་དོན་ཏེ། བྱེད་པ་པོ་དང་ནུས་པ་དང༌། ཡོངས་སུ་གྱུར་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཆོས་ཀྱང་ཡིན་པས་དེ་དག་ལ་དེ་སྐད་ཅེས་བྱའོ། །དེ་ནས་ཐ་དད་པའི་སྒྲ་དང་ཁྱད་པར་གྱི་བསྡུ་བ་བྱས་ནས་བསྟན་པར་བྱའོ། །གང་ཡང་རགས་པའི་དོན་ཡོད་པ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པ་དེ་ལ། གང་དག་རྡུལ་ཕྲན་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྨོས་ཏེ། རྡུལ་ཕྲ་རབ་རྣམས་དབང་པོ་ལས་འདས་པ་ཉིད་མ་གྲུབ་སྟེ། ཁྱད་པར་ཅན་གྱི་གནས་སྐབས་ཐོབ་པ་རྣམས་ཀྱི་དབང་པོས་གཟུང་བར་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་པའི་
Chinese
当与此时同时产生的氆氇成立时，那时它依赖于线而成立，成为作者不同等等的法，那为什么与线不同的氆氇本身没有在这里成立呢？因为要成立与它们不同的缘故。氆氇和线等只是名称而已，事物也不是不同的，因为由于其他需要也施加其他名称的缘故。比如，有些线获得特殊的状态，能够做冷等等同一件事，而有些作为者稍微不同的则不是。因此，为了使施设名称者不混淆名称，即使没有其他意义，也想要显示接近做同一件事的特殊线，所以就施加一个“氆氇”的声音。又为什么施加一个声音呢？说了声音一个一个等等。如果分别说声音一个一个，会有困难的过失，比如，对于想要说的那件事物，对于能够成立一个果的事物有多少，就要施加多少声音，因此有困难的过失。因为不能显示这些的不共特征，所以也有不能的过失。如果傲慢地以总相显示，显示一个声音才是最好的，因为对于分别显示的这种施加，没有见到任何果，因此有无果的过失。当想要说一切事物时，如果说了没有遗漏的意义，那么名称容易是优点，如“有情”、“三有”、“多种”的声音一样。所谓一个表达，就是氆氇这个词一个词的意思，也是作者和能力以及完全变化等等的法，所以对它们那样说。然后要做不同声音和特征的集合并显示。对于“任何粗大的意义都没有”等等，说了哪些叫微尘等等。极微尘等不是胜义，因为特殊状态获得者可以用根识取
English
When the phelchen that arises simultaneously with this time is established, then it relies on the thread to be established, becoming the dharma of different authors, etc. Why is the phelchen itself, which is different from the thread, not established here? Because it is to establish the difference from them. Phelchen and thread are just names, and things are not different either, because other names are also applied due to other needs. For example, some threads that have attained a special state are able to do the same thing as cold, etc., while others that are slightly different as actors are not. Therefore, in order to prevent those who apply names from confusing names, even if there is no other meaning, they want to show the special threads that are close to doing the same thing, so they apply a single sound of "phelchen." Why apply a single sound? It is said that sounds are one by one, etc. If you say sounds one by one separately, there will be the fault of difficulty, for example, for the thing you want to say, for how many things can establish one result, you have to apply that many sounds, so there is the fault of difficulty. Because it cannot show the uncommon characteristics of these, there is also the fault of inability. If you arrogantly show it in general, showing one sound is the best, because for this application of showing separately, no fruit is seen, so there is the fault of no fruit. When you want to say all things, if you say the meaning without omission, then the easy name is an advantage, like the sounds of "sentient beings," "three existences," and "various." What is called one expression is the meaning of one word, the word phelchen, and it is also the dharma of the author, ability, and complete transformation, etc., so say that to them. Then you have to make a collection of different sounds and characteristics and show them. For "there is no coarse meaning," etc., it is said which are called atoms, etc. The extremely fine dust, etc., are not ultimate, because those who have attained a special state can be taken by the root consciousness.