Chinese
以精微的理路而言，是所有反驳的特征。处于敌对地位，以任何方式颠倒事物，即为处于对立地位的言辞，即反驳。如果这样，那么相似的同品和异品两者本身就成了反驳，这是为了说明这一点而说的。从对它的分别念中，产生了许多反驳。对于立宗者而言，处于对立地位的是论式的分类中的多种方式。因此，由于它的多种差别，反驳也有许多种。而且，通过“这个特征”等语句，说明了特征的不遍及性。通过“等”字，应理解为不生等相似的情况。在此，由于例子和同品、异品处于争论的对立面是不可能的，因为仅仅是在没有理由的情况下争论。如同因为是牛而成立为牛一样，成立，这是同品和异品相似的自方回答。如同因为是牛而成立为牛的实体时，与乌鸦等异品不同，同样，如果因为是同品而成立为无常，那么与瓶子等异品不同，因为它不是有身体的。对于相似的同品，应通过反过来应用，如同与乌鸦等异品成立差别时，在牛中，从同品中它不会倒转，同样，如果从常和异品中，从感官所取中成立无常，那么从虚空等和同品中，从不是有身体的中它不会倒转。这也是不回答，因为如果从同品和异品中承诺成立无常，那么不要变成承诺相违。通过倒转来倒转不是这样，那么是什么呢？仅仅是说这本身因为相似而处于敌对地位，所以不成立。因为在倒转中也有相似性，所以也不是回答。对于此，反驳者能够陈述说，如果你的仅仅从同品和异品中，无常
English
In terms of subtle reasoning, it is the characteristic of all refutations. Being in an adversarial position, reversing things in any way, is the word that stands in opposition, i.e., refutation. If so, then similar homogeneous and heterogeneous classes themselves become refutations, which is said to explain this. From the discrimination of it, many refutations arise. For the proponent, being in opposition is in many ways a classification of arguments. Therefore, due to its many differences, there are many kinds of refutations. Moreover, through statements such as "this characteristic," the non-pervasiveness of the characteristic is explained. Through the word "etc.," one should understand cases such as non-arising similarity. Here, it is impossible for examples and homogeneous and heterogeneous classes to be in opposition to the debate, because the debate is merely without reason. Just as being established as a cow because it is a cow, is established, this is the self-answer of similar homogeneous and heterogeneous classes. Just as when an entity of a cow is established because it is a cow, it is not different from crows, etc., which are heterogeneous classes, similarly, if it is established as impermanent because it is a homogeneous class, then it is not different from pots, etc., which are heterogeneous classes, because it is not embodied. For similar homogeneous classes, it should be applied by reversing, just as when a difference is established from heterogeneous classes such as crows, etc., in a cow, it will not reverse from the homogeneous class, similarly, if impermanence is established from permanence and heterogeneous classes, from what is apprehended by the senses, then from space, etc., and the homogeneous class, it will not reverse from what is not embodied. This is also not an answer, because if one promises to establish impermanence from homogeneous and heterogeneous classes, then do not become contradictory to the promise. Reversing by reversing is not the case, then what is it? It is merely said that this itself is not established because it is similar and in an adversarial position. Because there is also similarity in reversing, it is also not an answer. To this, the refuter can state that if your impermanence is only from homogeneous and heterogeneous classes,
Chinese
如果成立，那么它也会成立，是这样说的。因此，对此要用其他方式来回答。等等，从所说的等等中，增长和减少相同等等，因为稍微相似的法就能成立近取。从不相似的法中，不能作为对等者存在等等，这些都包括在内。稍微相似的法本身就能成立近取，这是可以见到的，如牛如何，牛虻也如何，是这样说的。牛的所有法都在牛虻上吗？牛虻的法在牛身上能得到吗？因此，这种过失不是，像这样等等，所有这些都要从理性的考察中知道它们是不合理的。同样，对于其他论典中所作的驳斥和回答，为了驳斥，仅仅指出考察理性的这一方面，因此，也要用这一方面来驳斥它们。在理性考察等等中，不仅驳斥了所量，而且通过意义也做了，这是在所有所说的话中用“也”等等来表示的。为什么不会变成现量的证悟呢？回答说，因为他完全考察了词的意义等等，即主、士夫、方、时、相遇、集合等等，因为它们本身是现量，所以为了用因来安立存在，所以是用分别来证悟的。不能忍受考察，意思是不能忍受分别考察。既然不能忍受考察，那么也已经成立了。因此，因为推理不能忍受考察，所以要知道，通过它所证悟的所量也仅仅是在这里通过意义来驳斥的。以正量和所量喜欢做等等，显示了造论的必要性。以前成立正量是直接的真实，而这是通过间接的。那么，从不颠倒的道路中，难道不是也成了为了随顺如来教法的有意义的造论吗？这样，如果成立眼睛是无垢的，那么色也
English
If it is established, then it will also be established, it is said. Therefore, one should answer this in another way. Et cetera, from what is said et cetera, increase and decrease are the same et cetera, because slightly similar dharmas can establish near acquisition. From dissimilar dharmas, not being able to exist as an equal et cetera, these are included. Slightly similar dharmas themselves can establish near acquisition, this can be seen, like how a cow is, so is a gadfly, it is said. Are all the dharmas of a cow on a gadfly? Can the dharmas of a gadfly be obtained on a cow? Therefore, this fault is not, like this et cetera, all of these should be known from the examination of reason that they are unreasonable. Similarly, for the refutations and answers made in other treatises, in order to refute, only pointing out this aspect of examining reason, therefore, one should also refute them with this aspect. In the examination of reason et cetera, not only the object of measurement is refuted, but also through meaning, this is indicated by "also" et cetera in all the words spoken. Why will it not become direct perception of realization? The answer is, because he completely examines the meaning of the words et cetera, namely, the chief, the person, the direction, the time, the encounter, the collection et cetera, because they themselves are direct perception, therefore, in order to establish existence by cause, it is therefore realized by discrimination. Unable to endure examination, means unable to endure separate examination. Since it is unable to endure examination, then it has also been established. Therefore, because reasoning is unable to endure examination, one should know that the object of measurement realized through it is also only refuted here through meaning. With the pramana and the object of measurement liking to do et cetera, it shows the necessity of composing the treatise. Previously, establishing pramana was directly real, while this is through indirect. Then, from the undeviated path, is it not also becoming a meaningful composition in order to follow the teachings of the Tathagata? Thus, if it is established that the eye is without stain, then form also
Tibetan
ཅི་མ་ལོག་པར་དོན་གྱིས་ཉེ་བར་བསྟན་པར་ འགྱུར་བ་ཇི་ལྟ་བ་དེ་ལྟར་ཚད་མ་བྱེ་བྲག་ཏུ་རྟོགས་པར་བྱས་པ་ན། ཕྱིན་ཅི་མ་ལོག་པའི་དེ་ཁོ་ན་ཉིད་ལ་རྗེས་སུ་འཇུག་པའི་ལམ་ཡང་ངོ་ཞེ་ན། དེའི་ཕྱིར་གསུངས་པ། འདི་ཙམ་གྱིས་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ཞེས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའོ། །ཅིའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེ་ན། གསུངས་པ། དེའི་ཆོས་ནི་རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མ་ཡིན་པ་ཉིད་ཀྱི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་སོ། །རྟོག་གེ་སྨོས་པ་ནི་ཐ་སྙད་པའི་ཚད་མ་ཉེ་བར་མཚོན་པའི་དོན་དུ་སྟེ། འཇིག་རྟེན་ལས་འདས་པ་ཁོ་ནའི་ཚད་མའི་ཡུལ་བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་ཀྱི་ཆོས་ནི་སོ་སོ་རང་གིས་རིག་པར་བྱ་བ་ཡིན་གྱི། ཐ་སྙད་པའི་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་པའི་དོན་ཏོ། །གལ་ཏེ་དེ་ལྟར་ན་ཅི་ལོག་པ་དེ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་གལ་ཏེ་ལོག་ཀྱང་ཆོས་ཉིད་མི་རྟོགས་སམ་ཞེ་ན། དེའི་ཕྱིར་གསུང་པ། ལོག་པ་རྣམས་ནི་ཞེས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པ་སྟེ། མ་ལོག་པ་རྣམས་ནི་དེ་ཁོ་ན་ལ་སྙིང་པོར་ལྟ་བ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པའི་བསྟན་པ་ཉན་པར་ཡང་མི་སྒྲོ་ཞིང༌། ལོག་པ་རྣམས་ནི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པའི་བསྟན་པ་ལ་གང་ཆོད་རྣམས་ཀྱི་ཆོས་ཉིད་ཡོངས་སུ་གསལ་བར་བྱས་པ་དེ་ཐོས་པ་དང་བསམ་པ་དང་ཡང་དག་པར་བསྒོམ་པའི་རིམ་པས་འབད་པ་མེད་པ་ཁོ་ནར་རྟོགས་པར་འགྱུར་རོ། །ཆོས་ཉིད་ནི་ཆོས་རྣམས་ཀྱི་ཕྱིན་ཅི་མ་ལོག་པའི་རང་བཞིན་ཏེ། དེ་ཁོ་ན་ཉིད་ཅེས་པའི་ཐ་ཚིག་གོ ། ཡང་ཅིའི་ཕྱིར་མུ་སྟེགས་པའི་ལུགས་ཐོས་པར་བྱས་ཀྱང་ཆོས་ཉིད་མི་རྟོགས་ཀི། དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པའི་བསྟན་པ་ཐོས་ནས་རྟོགས་ཤེ་ན། གསུངས་པ། བར་ཤིན་ཏུ་རིང་བའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེས་པ་སྟེ། དེ་ཡང་ལེགས་པར་བྱས་པ་དང་ཉེས་པར་བྱས་པ་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་སོ། །ཐུབ་པའི་དབང་པོའི་བསྟན་པ་ནི་ལེགས་པར་བྱས་པ་སྟེ། དེར་ཆོས་རྣམས་ཀྱི་ཕྱིན་ཅི་མ་ལོག་པའི་བདག་མེད་པ་ཉིད་ལ་སོགས་པའི་རང་བཞིན་རབ་ཏུ་གསལ་བར་བྱེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་དང༌། མུ་སྟེགས་པའི་ལུགས་ནི་ཉེས་པར་བྱས་པ་སྟེ་བཟློག་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །དེའི་ཕྱིར་བདེ་བར་གཤེགས་པའི་བསྟན་པ་ལ་བརྟེན་པ་ཁོ་ནས་དེ་ཁོ་ན་ཉིད་རྟོགས་བར་འགྱུར་གྱི་ཅིག་ཤོས་ཀྱི་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །བར་ཤིན་ཏུ་རིང་བ་ཉིད་ཁོ་ནར་བསྟན་པའི་ཆེད་དུ་ཚིགས་སུ་བཅད་པ་གསུངས་པ། རྟོག་གེ་ཙམ་སྟོབས་ཅན་རྣམས་ཞེས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའོ། །རྟོག་གེ་ཙམ་གྱི་སྐྱབས་ཅན་ནི་མུ་སྟེགས་པ་རྣམས་ཏེ། དོན་གང་རྣམས་ཀྱི་ཕྱིན་ཅི་མ་ལོག་པའི་རང་བཞིན་ རྟོགས་པ་ལས་འབའ་ཞིག་པ་ཉིད་ཐོས་པར་འགྱུར་བ་བདག་ལ་སོགས་པ་དེ་རྣམས་རྟོག་གེ་ཙམ་ལས་རྟོགས་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །འོ་ན་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་ཡང་བ
Chinese
如果不如颠倒地以意义显示亲近，像那样以量单独地了知后，那么不如颠倒的真实，也是随顺的道吗？因此说：“仅此不是”等等。为什么呢？说：“它的法不是分别的境地之故”。说分别，是为了近似表示世俗的量，超世间的仅仅是量的境地，薄伽梵的法是各自自己所能知的，不是世俗的意义。如果那样，那么颠倒的那些，如果颠倒也不了知法性吗？因此说：“颠倒者是”等等，不颠倒者以真实为心要，听闻如来教法也不隐瞒，颠倒者是对如来教法中所有能断者之法性完全阐明，听闻和思维以及如理作意的次第，无勤就能了知。法性是诸法的不颠倒自性，是真实性的同义词。又为什么外道的宗派听闻后也不了知法性，听闻如来教法后就能了知呢？说：“中间非常遥远之故”，那也是善作和恶作的缘故。能胜者的教法是善作，因为在那里诸法的不颠倒的无我等自性完全阐明之故，外道的宗派是恶作，因为是颠倒的缘故。因此仅仅依靠善逝的教法才能了知真实性，其他的不是。为了仅仅显示中间非常遥远，说了偈颂：“唯有分别力强者”等等。唯有分别的救护者是外道徒，因为仅仅从了知诸法的不颠倒自性，听闻将要成为我等，那些仅仅从分别而了知之故。那么你的也
English
If, without reversing, it is closely shown by meaning, and after realizing the measure separately in that way, then is the path that follows the non-reversed reality also? Therefore, it is said, "This alone is not," and so on. Why is that? It is said, "Because its dharma is not the realm of conceptualization." Mentioning conceptualization is to approximate the meaning of worldly measure. The realm of measure that is solely beyond the world, the dharma of the Bhagavan, is to be known by each individual, not the worldly one. If that is the case, then if those who are reversed, even if they are reversed, do not realize the nature of dharma? Therefore, it is said, "Those who are reversed are," and so on. Those who are not reversed do not conceal the teachings of the Tathagata, because they regard reality as the essence. Those who are reversed, having fully clarified the nature of dharma of all those who can cut off in the teachings of the Tathagata, will realize it effortlessly through the sequence of hearing, thinking, and truly meditating. The nature of dharma is the non-reversed nature of all dharmas, which is synonymous with reality. Furthermore, why is it that even if one hears the tenets of the Tirthikas, one does not realize the nature of dharma, but after hearing the teachings of the Tathagata, one realizes it? It is said, "Because the distance is very great," and that is also because of good deeds and bad deeds. The teachings of the Lord of Sages are good deeds, because there the non-reversed nature of all dharmas, such as selflessness, is fully clarified. The tenets of the Tirthikas are bad deeds, because they are reversed. Therefore, only by relying on the teachings of the Sugata will one realize reality, not by the other. In order to show only that the distance is very great, the verse was spoken, "Those who are strong only in conceptualization," and so on. Those who are protected only by conceptualization are the Tirthikas, because they will hear that only from realizing the non-reversed nature of all things, such as self, will become. Those are realized only from conceptualization. Then your also