Chinese
因的那些，是不应道理的能量决定。为什么呢？因为决定那些，即成为果的那些没有成立的缘故。没有果，具有果的因存在，那是不可能的。结合是，哪些是空于已经存在的果的决定的那些，不是能量决定，譬如像兔角等等一样。沙鲁的种子等等事物，也是空于已经存在的果的决定，这样说是周遍作用不明显。为了显示自己的宗派良好安住的缘故。如果存在它的决定，等等这样说了。如果存在，即果存在的话，是这个意思。它的，是指能量的。不是那样等等，说的是不定因。像这样，决定那些没有成立时，如果说牛奶有产生酸奶的能量，这样的名称就完全没有了。任何以那种种差别的全部空无，没有虚构的事物，以前没有见过的，哪个的紧接着产生其他事物，那个是没有阻碍的。这样想，对于哪个声音和分别念不进入的，对于那个事物的自性也是退转的，如果这样想。名称不是事物的本体，等等这样说了。如果能区分的自性退转，自己的能区分的也会退转，因退转时，果也会退转，因为有关系的缘故。不是其他的，因为太离谱的缘故。哪个退转时，那种事物会退转，牛奶有酸奶的能量，等等，那是像那样的名称，名称事物等等的自己的本体自性不是存在的。哪个退转时，那种相的事物会退转。说名称是代表，分别念也和它混合而执着。说本体也是代表，不是名称事物的因，因为没有它，事物也存在的缘故。这里的因是，像这样说分别念是，等等这样说了。像这样，是因为什么呢？分别念是依靠和名称混合的。
English
Those of the cause are not reasonable to determine the power. Why? Because those determinations, that is, those that have become the fruit, are not established. Without the fruit, it is not possible for the cause with the fruit to exist. The combination is that those that are empty of the determination of the fruit that has come into existence are not the determination of power, just like the horns of rabbits and so on. The things of the seeds of Salu and so on are also empty of the determination of the fruit that has come into existence, saying that is the pervasion is not obvious. In order to show that one's own sect is well established. If there is its determination, and so on, it is said. If there is, that is, if the fruits exist, that is the meaning. Its, refers to the power. Not like that, and so on, says the uncertain reason. Like this, when those determinations are not established, if it is said that milk has the power to produce yogurt, such a name would be completely gone. Any object that is empty of all such differences, not fabricated, never seen before, which immediately produces other objects, that is without hindrance. Thinking like this, for which sound and discrimination do not enter, for that the nature of things is also reversed, if you think like this. Name is not the essence of things, and so on, it is said. If the nature of being able to distinguish is reversed, one's own able to distinguish will also be reversed, when the cause is reversed, the fruit will also be reversed, because there is a relationship. It is not other, because it is too outrageous. When which is reversed, that kind of thing will be reversed, milk has the power of yogurt, and so on, that is like that name, the own essence nature of the name things and so on is not existing. When which is reversed, that kind of aspect of things will be reversed. Saying the name is representative, discrimination is also mixed with it and clung to. Saying the essence is also representative, it is not the cause of name things, because without it, things also exist. The cause here is, like this saying discrimination is, and so on, it is said. Like this, why is it? Discrimination is based on mixing with the name.
Chinese
是这样的。言说是声音。各种各样的分别念，对于无分且无部分的事物的单一自性，如习惯一般而行。如此，对于声音等唯一的事物，以常等体性的、安住于不同宗派的论敌们进行分别和言说。如果声音和分别念是该事物的自体或者具有该事物作为对境，那么事物就会变成多种多样，或者声音和分别念会和事物的自身体性一样，成为单一的体性。说一个事物是多种多样的，这不合道理，因为会过于极端。因此，因为能力是确定的，所以会产生一些不存在的事物，但不是全部，因此“因为体性不存在”这个理由也是不确定的。因此，因为取因等四个理由也是不确定的，比如，如果成果存在，那么确定取因在某些情况下成立，那么情况就会是那样。只要因的能力是确定的，那么所作也并非理应是确定的取因。仅仅因为因的能力是确定的，也不是一切从一切产生，因为一切事物没有做一切事情的自性。还有，凡是所说的“没有差别的是什么”等等，也是因为不了解想法而说的，我们并没有说凡是会变化的事物，其自性就会坏灭。然而，之前已经说明了，事物本身会产生。那个事物也是因为从所缘的相状变化而来，而不是没有所缘，并且成立也是因为不适合作为成果本身，所以应该说从产生之前是不存在的。当任何因仅仅因为接近而产生那样的事物时，就称之为“它做那个”，但不是因为行为和关联而由某个事物做某个事物，因为一切法都是没有行为的自性。所谓的不存在，不是指稍微存在或者变化，不存在的相状是指遮止事物的自性。
English
It is like that. Speech is also sound. Various kinds of thoughts, for the single nature of things that are indivisible and without parts, proceed as they are accustomed. Thus, for the single thing such as sound, opponents who abide in different tenets with characteristics such as permanence, make discriminations and speak. If those sounds and discriminations are the self-nature of that thing or have that thing as their object, then the thing would become many kinds, or the sounds and discriminations would become the same single nature as the thing's own nature. To say that one thing is many kinds is not reasonable, because it would be too extreme. Therefore, because the ability is definite, some non-existent things are produced, but not all, so the reason "because the nature does not exist" is also uncertain. Therefore, the four reasons such as taking the cause are also uncertain, for example, if the result exists, then it is established that taking the cause is definite in some cases, then the situation would be like that. As long as the ability of the cause is definite, then what is done is not reasonably a definite taking of the cause. It is not that everything arises from everything merely because the ability of the cause is definite, because all things do not have the nature of doing all things. Also, whatever is said, such as "what is it that has no difference," is also said because the thought is not understood, we have not said that the nature of whatever changes will be destroyed. However, it has already been explained before that the thing itself will arise. That thing is also said to be non-existent before arising because it changes from the characteristic of the object, and not because it is without an object, and the establishment is also because it is not suitable as the result itself. When any cause produces such a thing merely by approaching, it is called "it does that," but it is not that one thing does another because of action and association, because all phenomena are of the nature of having no action. What is called non-existence does not mean slightly existing or changing, the characteristic of non-existence is the negation of the nature of things.
Tibetan
་ཙམ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གཞན་ཡང་གལ་ཏེ་ཁྱད་པར་དུ་བྱར་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་མེད་པ་མི་བྱེད་དོ་ཞེས་བརྗོད་ལ། ཡོད་པ་ཡང་རང་བཞིན་ཐམས་ཅད་གྲུབ་པའི་ཁྱད་པར་དུ་བྱར་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་དེ་ཇི་ལྟར་བྱེད། དེ་ལྟ་བས་ན་ནུས་པས་ནི་ནུས་པ་བྱེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་འདི་ནི་མ་ངེས་ལ། འབྲས་བུ་མེད་པར་སྨྲ་བ་ལ་ཡང་རྒྱུའི་དངོས་པོ་རིགས་པ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱི་རྒྱུ་ཡོད་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་འདི་ཡང་མ་ངེས་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། །ཡང་ན་སྔར་ཡོད་པ་འབྲས་བུ་ཉིད་དུ་མི་སྲིད་པར་བསྟན་པའི་ཕྱིར་དང༌། འབྲས་བུ་མེད་པར་སྨྲ་བ་ཁོ་ནའི་རྒྱུ་ལེན་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ངེས་པ་རིགས་པ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར། རྒྱུ་ལེན་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་གཏན་ཚིགས་བཞི་པོ་འགལ་བ་ ཡིན་ཏེ། བསྒྲུབ་པར་བྱ་བ་ལས་བཟློག་པ་སྒྲུབ་པར་བྱེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གལ་ཏེ་ཁྱེད་ཅག་གི་ལུགས་ཀྱིས་མེད་པ་ཉིད་སྐྱེའོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་མ་ཡིན་ནམ། དེའི་ཕྱིར་ཇི་ལྟར་མདོ་ལས་ཡོད་པ་དང་མེད་པའི་སྐྱེ་བ་བཀག་སྟེ། ཇི་སྐད་དུ། བློ་གྲོས་ཆེན་པོ་ཆོས་ཐམས་ཅད་ནི་མ་སྐྱེས་པ་སྟེ། ཡོད་པ་དང་མེད་པ་ནི་མ་སྐྱེས་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ་ཞེས་གསུངས་སོ་ཞེ་ན། འདི་ལ་སྐྱེ་བ་དངོས་པོའི་ངོ་བོ་འང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྨོས་ཏེ། འང་གི་སྒྲ་ནི་ངེས་པར་བཟུང་བའི་དོན་ཏོ། །ཁྱད་པར་གཞན་སྤངས་པས་དེ་ཙམ་ཞིག་ཤེས་པར་འདོད་པ་ན། དངོས་པོ་རྣམས་ཀྱི་སྔོན་དང་ཕྱི་མའི་མཐའ་སྟོང་པ་སྐད་ཅིག་མ་ཙམ་གྱི་གནས་སྐབས་ཀྱི་རང་བཞིན་ཉིད་ལ་སྐྱེ་བ་ཞེས་བརྗོད་དོ། །བྱེ་བྲག་ཏུ་སྨྲ་བས་ཀུན་དུ་བརྟགས་པའི་འདུས་བྱས་ཀྱི་མཚན་ཉིད་ཀྱི་སྐྱེ་བ་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ། དེ་ནི་དགག་པར་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །བྱེ་བྲག་པས་ཡོངས་སུ་བརྟགས་པའི་ཡོད་པའི་འདུ་བ་སྐྱེ་བ་འམ། རང་གི་རྒྱུ་འདུ་བ་ཡང་མ་ཡིན་ཏེ་དེ་དག་ཀྱང་འགེགས་པར་འགྱུར་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གཞན་གྱི་ལུགས་ཀྱིས་ཀྱང་དེ་དག་རྟག་པའི་ཕྱིར་དང༌། བརྟག་པ་ཡང་སྐྱེ་བ་མི་འཐད་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །ཇི་སྐད་དུ། ཡོད་པ་རང་རྒྱུ་དང་འབྲེལ་པ། །བྱེད་པས་རྒྱུ་ནི་ཡིན་པར་གྲགས། །ཡོད་པ་དེ་དང་འབྲེལ་པ་དེ། །བརྟག་པ་འདི་ལ་འབྲས་བུ་གང༌། །ཞེས་བཤད་དོ། །དེ་ལྟ་བུའི་བདག་ཉིད་ཀྱི་སྐྱེ་བ་དེ་ནི་མེད་པ་དང་དེའི་བདག་ཉིད་ཀྱི་འབྲེལ་པ་ནི་མེད་དེ། ཡོད་པ་དང་མེད་པ་དག་ནི་འགལ་བའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གང་གི་ཕྱིར་མེད་པ་ནི་མེད་པར་ཡང་འགྱུར་བ་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །ཡོད་པ་དང་མེད་པ་སྔར་བྱུང་བ་དང་འབྲེལ་པ་མེད་དེ། །དེ་ནི་སྔར་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །དེ་ནི་འབྲས་བུ་
Chinese
仅仅是如此的缘故。另外，如果说因为没有可作区分的特点，所以不会不做，那么存在的事物，也因为没有可作区分的特点，即一切自性都已成立，那又该如何做呢？因此，说“因为能力能够发挥作用”是不确定的。对于说没有果的人来说，说“因为是因的实物种类，所以有因”也是不确定的。或者，为了显示先前存在的事物不可能成为果本身，以及对于仅仅说没有果的人来说，取因等确定是合理的缘故，所以说“因为取因”等四种理由是相违的，因为所要证成的与所证成的相反。如果按照你们的观点，不是说无产生吗？因此，为何经中遮止了有和无的产生呢？如经中所说：“大慧，一切法是不生的，因为有和无是不生的。”如果这样问，那么这里说了“产生，事物的自性也是”等，其中的“也”字是确定的意思。如果想要通过舍弃其他差别来了解这一点，那么事物的先前和后来的边际空虚，仅仅是刹那间的状态的自性，就被称为产生。分别说者所说的遍计所执的积聚的特征的产生不是，因为那是需要否定的。顺世外道所说的完全计度的存在的集合是产生，或者自己的因的集合也不是，因为那些也将被遮止。其他宗派的观点也认为那些是常恒的缘故，并且考察也是产生不合理的缘故。如所说：存在与自因相连，作用故，因是名声。存在与彼相连，彼考察此有何果。这样说了。如此自性的产生，与无以及其自性的关联是没有的，因为有和无是相违的。因为什么缘故，无也不会变成无。有和无与先前产生的没有关联，因为那是先前没有的。那是果。
English
It is only for this reason. Furthermore, if it is said that because there is no distinguishing feature, it will not not do, then how can existent things, because there is no distinguishing feature, that is, all self-natures have been established, do it? Therefore, it is uncertain to say that "because ability can function." For those who say there is no result, it is also uncertain to say that "because it is the kind of causal entity, therefore there is a cause." Or, in order to show that what existed before cannot become the result itself, and for those who only say that there is no result, it is reasonable to take causes, etc., so the four reasons such as "because of taking causes" are contradictory, because what is to be proven is the opposite of what is being proven. If, according to your view, isn't it said that non-existence arises? Therefore, why does the sutra prohibit the arising of existence and non-existence? As it is said in the sutra: "Great wisdom, all dharmas are unborn, because existence and non-existence are unborn." If you ask this, then here it is said "arising, the self-nature of things is also," etc., and the word "also" means certainty. If you want to understand this by abandoning other differences, then the previous and subsequent limits of things are empty, and only the self-nature of the momentary state is called arising. The arising of the characteristics of the compounded, which is completely imputed by the Vaibhashikas, is not, because that is what needs to be negated. The collection of existences that is completely measured by the Lokayatas is arising, or the collection of its own causes is not, because those will also be prohibited. Other schools of thought also believe that those are permanent, and examination is also unreasonable for arising. As it is said: Existence is connected with its own cause, Because of action, cause is fame. Existence is connected with that, that Examination, what result is there? It is said like this. Such an arising of self-nature has no connection with non-existence and its self-nature, because existence and non-existence are contradictory. For what reason, non-existence will not become non-existence either. Existence and non-existence have no connection with what was produced before, because that was not there before. That is the result.