Chinese
而且，关于乌金（藏文：ུང་）的印度和藏地的注释，似乎也有很多不一致之处。时轮金刚中所说的根本堕罪，以及其他续部和论典中所说的，也都不相同。无论哪一方，都指出另一方是邪法。2. 朵玛的仪轨，以及供养、补缺、赎朵、遣朵、送朵等行为，似乎与任何经续都不一致。据说，这就像用毛线做的投石索一样。现在，你的清净经续正在逐渐减少，因为有朵玛仪轨，所以不清净吗？关于白伞盖佛母，迪日瓦玛等人所作的回遮朵玛、诛魔朵玛等非常多。四臂怙主的法类中，供养、赎朵、祭朵等，很多印度和藏地的上师都已造作。同样，还有帐怙主、六臂怙主、黑敌法王琼波传承等，以及财神寂静和忿怒相，还有红矛神等等，很多印度和藏地的智者和成就者都已经造作完毕。难道这些及其眷属一切都变成邪法了吗？
English
Moreover, the Indian and Tibetan commentaries on Ugin (Tibetan: ུང་) also seem to have many inconsistencies. The root downfalls mentioned in the Kalachakra, as well as those mentioned in other tantras and treatises, are also different. Whichever side it is, it points out the other as a false dharma. 2. The rituals of Torma, as well as offerings, replenishments, redemption Torma, sending Torma, etc., seem inconsistent with any sutras and tantras. It is said that this is like a sling made of wool. Now, are your pure sutras and tantras gradually decreasing because there are Torma rituals, so they are not pure? Regarding the White Umbrella Goddess, there are many reversion Tormas and demon-subduing Tormas made by Dhiri Varma and others. In the Dharma teachings of the Four-Armed Mahakala, offerings, redemption Tormas, sacrificial Tormas, etc., have been created by many Indian and Tibetan lamas. Similarly, there are Tent Mahakala, Six-Armed Mahakala, Trakshad Gyonyul tradition, etc., as well as peaceful and wrathful forms of Vaishravana, and the Red Spear God, etc., which have been completed by many Indian and Tibetan scholars and accomplished ones. Would all of these and their retinues turn into false dharma?
Chinese
所有的大圆满以及胜乐金刚等其他的续部，在意义上也是非常一致的。如果因为表达方式和词句的表面相似性，就说一个是正确的，另一个是不正确的，这是不依赖意义的言论。不能因为作品的风格稳重等就证明是清净的续部。时轮续的注释等心类注释中，也没有仅凭悦耳的声音和纯正的梵语，以及优美的词句表达就说是清净的续部。一切遍知佛陀是为了调伏众生，才用一切遍知的语言来宣说佛法，而不是遍入天和猛厉尊等其他神祇。如果遍入天等之中也有圆满这些功德的，我们也应当以各种方式去礼敬供养。如是说，即使不具备词句和组合等，仅仅依靠意义就足够了。如果那样还不够，那么外道的所有论典都将无可争议地成为清净的续部，因为它们的写作方式优美而精妙。2 这些续部在任何根本的续部中连名字都没有出现过，在印度和邬金（Orgyen）等地的智者和成就者的根本论典中也没有出现过，因此可以肯定地说，这些不是被那些智者和成就者所认可的根本续部。 如果仅仅因为没有出现名字，就像佛智足的《释论滴》（Buddhajñānapāda's Bindutīkā）中所说：“大圆满是智慧总体的形象。”如果因为一部论典中没有出现另一部论典的名字就说是虚假的，那么在三乘的体性乘中，下乘中连大乘的名字都没有出现过，难道一切都是虚假的吗？在四续部的下三部中，连无上部的甚深秘密的名字都没有，难道要说所有无上瑜伽续部都是虚假的吗？如果因为在某些续部论典中没有出现就说是虚假的佛法，那么对于圣者佛陀的寂静法类三部，即在断法中著名的那些，即使连名字都没有在你们认为是根本的那些论典中出现过。按照你的说法，寂静法的经文
English
All of the Dzogchen, along with other tantras such as Guhyasamaja, are also very much in agreement in terms of meaning. If, because of the superficial similarity of expressions and phrases, one says that one is correct and the other is incorrect, that is a statement devoid of reliance on meaning. One cannot prove that it is a pure tantra just because the style of the work is stable, etc. In the commentaries on the Kalachakra Tantra and other mind-class commentaries, it is not said that it is a pure tantra merely because of the pleasant sound and pure Sanskrit, and the beautiful expression of words. The Omniscient Buddha teaches the Dharma in the language of the Omniscient One, according to the capacity of sentient beings to be tamed, and not by other deities such as Vishnu and the Wrathful One. If there are some among Vishnu and others who have perfected these qualities, then we should pay homage and make offerings in every way. As it is said, even if the words and combinations are not complete, it is enough to rely solely on the meaning. If that is not enough, then all the tenets of the outsiders will undoubtedly become pure tantras, because their writing style is beautiful and exquisite. 2 These tantras have not even appeared by name in any of the fundamental tantras, nor have they appeared in any of the fundamental treatises of the wise and accomplished ones of India and Orgyen. Therefore, it is certain that these are not the fundamental tantras that are recognized by those wise and accomplished ones. If it is only because the name has not appeared, as it says in Buddhajñānapāda's Bindutīkā: "The Great Perfection is the image of the totality of wisdom." If it is said to be false because the name of another treatise does not appear in one treatise, then in the three vehicles of the characteristic vehicle, the name of the Great Vehicle has not even appeared in the lower vehicle, is everything false? In the lower three of the four tantras, there is not even the name of the profound secrets of the Unsurpassed, are all the Anuttarayoga tantras to be made false? If one makes it a false Dharma because it does not appear in some tantric treatises, then for the three sections of the Pacifying Dharma of the Holy Buddha, those famous in the Chöd practice, even the name has not appeared in those treatises that you consider to be fundamental. According to your assertion, the sutra of the Pacifying Dharma
Chinese
所有续部口诀的灌顶引导，也会变成歧途之法。2、克里亚萨木扎和金刚鬘等等，将灌顶仪轨汇集在一起，以及所有口诀，瑜伽圆满鬘，和成就法海等等汇集在一起，以及口诀派，瑜伽六支，和五次第、基线、四次第成就法、七部，莲花女姐妹的俱生根本成就释等等，在任何圆满次第的广大论典中，噶举和德钦等大圆满的追随者的灌顶和成就法、引导文的名称都没有听说过，而且词义的错误和仪轨的颠倒无边无际，因此这个大圆满肯定是邬金莲师和比玛拉等大学者成就者所造的论典。如果这样，克里亚萨木扎等的灌顶仪轨是莲花生大师和比玛拉等所造吗？为了把是否的证据寄托于此。总之，生圆次第的灌顶仪轨等中没有出现大圆满等的名称就断定为非法是不太合适的。如果因为那里出现就断定为清净，那么苯教和外道徒的论典都会变成清净的法，因为所有佛教的清净论典中都引用和出现了很多那些论典和宗派的分类。那些灌顶成就口诀等也会因为在其他地方没有出现而变成没有依据，总的来说，如果因为这些地方没有出现就认为不是法，那么在这些地方除了大圆满之外的马尔巴、米拉等甚深法门、胜乐耳传等很多，以及香巴的四金法等很多，以及当巴的希解法类等很多，连名字都没有出现，那么那些法门之间哪个是错误的呢？噶举和善逝总集等理由的名称的少许部分都没有记住，就好像要进行驳斥一样，口头上做着高度的谎言和捏造，这种人是冒充聪明的人吗？如果不是邬金莲师和比玛拉等所造的论典，那么那些在藏地萨迦派的昆·鲁旺松巴等很多，以及杰尊
English
All the initiations and instructions of the tantras and oral instructions will also become the Dharma of the wrong path. 2. Kriya Samuccaya and Vajramala, etc., the collection of initiation rituals, and all the oral instructions, the Yoga Perfection Garland, and the Ocean of Sadhanas, etc., collected together, and the Oral Instruction School, the Six Branches of Yoga, and the Five Stages, the Base Line, the Four Stages of Accomplishment, the Seven Sections, the Co-emergent Root Accomplishment Commentary of the Lotus Lady Sisters, etc., in any extensive treatise on the Completion Stage, the Kagye and Dechhen, etc., even the names of the initiations, sadhanas, and instruction manuals of the followers of Dzogchen have not been heard, and the errors in words and meanings and the perverted rituals are endless, so this Dzogchen must not be a treatise composed by the scholars and siddhas such as Orgyen Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra. If so, were the initiation rituals of Kriya Samuccaya, etc., composed by Guru Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra, etc.? It is for entrusting the evidence of whether it is or not to this. In short, it is not appropriate to judge that those with the generation and completion stage initiation rituals, etc., are not Dharma because the names of Dzogchen, etc., have not appeared in them. If it is judged to be pure because it appears there, then the treatises of Bon and the Tirthikas will become pure Dharma, because all the pure Buddhist treatises quote and mention many classifications of those treatises and tenets. Those initiation sadhana oral instructions, etc., will also become unfounded because they have not appeared elsewhere, and in general, if it is considered not Dharma because it has not appeared in these, then within these, apart from Dzogchen, the profound Dharmas of Marpa, Mila, etc., the Shangpa's Four Golden Dharmas, etc., and the Dampa's Zhi Cho cycle, etc., even the names have not appeared, so which of those Dharmas is wrong to each other? Without remembering even a small part of the names of the reasons for Kagye and Desheg Dupa, etc., it seems like refutation is being done, and this kind of person who makes tall tales and fabrications is a pretender of knowledge. If it is not a treatise composed by Orgyen Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra, etc., then many of those in Tibet, such as Khon Kluwang Sungpa of the Sakya school, and Jetsun
Chinese
您现在才需要展示，什么是针对愚昧等所说的教诲之法。2.以前的目录《丹噶玛》、《旁塘玛》、《巴协》、《拉协》中，连名字都没有出现过，所以以前的国王大臣们时期翻译的宁玛派经典肯定不是正确的。虽然这么说，但仅仅因为这些目录中没有记载，并不能证明这些经典不是在国王大臣们时期翻译或宣说的。而且，所有这些目录也都有前后顺序颠倒遗漏等问题。此外，由于存在对显宗和密宗各自的偏袒等各种意见不合的情况，仅仅因为这些目录中没有记载，并不能反过来说明这些经典不是前译经典。即使假设这些目录中没有记载，这些目录也只是共同使用的经藏和论藏，因此，伟大的秘密经典和不共的口诀并没有在这些目录中出现。因此，如果因为三个目录中没有记载就断定这些法不是正法，那就是想要把从胜者到胜者化身的所有智者大师们口耳相传的不共口诀，全部贬低为非法的前兆。2.那若巴、寂天菩萨、弥勒巴、印度达玛巴、阿底峡、嘎雅达拉、仁钦桑波、卓弥、俄、玛尔巴译师、俄译师等后来的智者大师们，似乎也没有翻译出哪怕一句关于大圆满的著作，所以可以肯定的是，在邬金和印度弘扬的法不是正法。虽然这么说，但事实并非如此。如果是这样，那么成就者邬金巴在他的传记中写道：在比哈尔邦的寺庙里，宁玛派经典的目录本身就有一大卷。你把这个也抹去吧！ 特别是，阿底峡尊者对阿若的伟大的瑜伽给予了极高的赞扬，达玛巴持有大圆满的宗见，俄译师赞美桑耶寺的汉文佛经等等，这都是没有见过的谎言。此外，后来的译师和班智达们，并没有翻译任何宁玛派和大圆满的著作，也没有任何证据表明在印度没有找到可以翻译的。难道除了邬金和印度之外，其他地方弘扬的所有法都不是正法吗？
English
You must now show what is the teaching of precepts spoken to ignorance and so on. 2. In the former catalogs, Ldan dkar ma, Phang thang ma, Ba bzhed, and Bla bzhed, not even the name appears, so it is certain that the Nyingma tantras translated during the time of the former kings and ministers are not correct. Although it is said so, just because these catalogs do not record it, it cannot be proved that these classics were not translated or preached during the time of the kings and ministers. Moreover, all these catalogs also have problems such as reversed order and omissions. In addition, due to various disagreements such as partiality towards sutras and tantras, it cannot be concluded that these are not pre-translated classics just because they are not recorded in these catalogs. Even if we assume that these catalogs do not record them, these catalogs are only the common usage of the Tripitaka and treatises. Therefore, the great secret tantras and uncommon oral instructions did not appear in these catalogs. Therefore, if it is concluded that these dharmas are not the correct dharma because they are not recorded in the three catalogs, it is a precursor to wanting to degrade all the profound dharmas passed down from ear to ear by all the wise masters from the Victorious One to the Victorious One's incarnation as non-dharma. 2. Naropa, Shantipa, Maitripa, Indian Dampa, Atisha, Gayadhara, Rinchen Zangpo, Drogmi, Ngo, Marpa Lotsawa, Ngok Lotsawa, etc., the later wise masters, also seem to have not translated even a single verse about the Great Perfection, so it is certain that the dharma propagated in Oddiyana and India is not the correct dharma. Although it is said so, the truth is not so. If so, then the accomplished Ugyenpa wrote in his biography: In the monastery of Bihar, the catalog of Nyingma classics itself is a large volume. You erase this too! In particular, Lord Atisha gave extremely high praise to Aro's Great Vehicle Yoga, Dampa held the view of Dzogchen, and Ngok Lotsawa praised the Chinese Buddhist scriptures of Samye Temple, etc., these are all lies that have not been seen. In addition, the later translators and pandits did not translate any Nyingma and Dzogchen works, and there is no evidence that nothing to translate was found in India. Is all the dharma propagated in places other than Oddiyana and India not the correct dharma?