English
Appear as emptiness. Similarly, regarding whether or not phenomena are established by their own nature, examine them extensively with reason, and after generating a strong conviction in the absence of inherent existence, observe the arising of appearances, and they will appear like illusions. However, there is no way to separately establish emptiness as being like an illusion. Therefore, when engaging in practices such as circumambulation, first, as before, make sure to have a firm understanding based on examination, and then engage in them, training to appear like illusions, and perform them in that state. In this regard, if you are diligent, even just remembering the view will cause them to appear like illusions. To explain the method of seeking this certainty in an easy-to-understand way, as mentioned before, first let the general object of negation by reason appear clearly, and then carefully consider how your own ignorance fabricates inherent existence, and recognize it. Then, if such a nature exists, one should consider that it will not go beyond being either one or different, and how admitting both of these is subject to harm, and from this, draw the certainty of seeing the harm. Finally, firmly establish the conviction that there is not even a little bit of inherent existence in a person, and practice extensively on the side of emptiness. Then, let the appearances of the undeniable name of a person appear in the mind, and contemplate the aspects of dependent origination from which the accumulator and the experiencer of results are established, and gain certainty about how the absence of inherent existence and dependent origination are compatible. When these two seem contradictory, take images and so on as examples and contemplate how they are not contradictory. For example, the image of a face, wherever it appears in the eyes, ears, etc., is empty, but it arises in dependence on the face and the mirror, and when some of those conditions disappear, it also disappears. These two undeniably exist on the same basis. Similarly, for a person, even if there is not even a particle of inherent existence, it is not contradictory that they arise in dependence on the accumulator of karma and the experiencer of results, and past karma and afflictions, etc. One should train in this way, and know that this situation applies to all similar situations. Secondly, the five aggregates, which are the basis for the imputation of a person, and the six elements such as the earth element, and the six sense sources such as the eye, etc., are phenomena, and are their own nature.
Chinese
以自性成立而空，即是彼等诸法的无我。确定它的方式有两种：一是将先前所说的理路转换运用以遮破；二是以前未曾说过的其他理路来遮破。第一种是：对于蕴、界、处的事物，分为两种，对于有色之物，就其自身的东等方位的分和具有分的事物两者，以及对于识，就其自身的先后等时间的分和具有分的事物两者，以自性成立的一或异，在哪种情况下成立进行观察，然后如先前一样遮破。这也就是：如你对我的认识，同样的智慧应施于一切。所说的经文先前已引述其意义。第二种分为两种：一是显示缘起的理证；二是即使没有前者所说的理路，也能成立无谛实。第一种是：缘起的理证出自《慧海请问经》：凡诸法依缘而生，彼等无有自性。清楚地说明了以缘起的理证来遮破自性成立。在《不热请问经》中也说：何者由因缘所生，彼即非生。于彼无有自性之生。何者依赖于缘，彼即是空。谁知空性，彼即是谨慎。清楚地说明了这一点。这在珍贵的经论中非常多。其中，第一句说“非生”的意义是：第二句说“无有自性之生”，因此在遮破生时，加上了所遮破的差别。在《楞伽经》中说：考虑到自性非生，我说一切法皆非生。在《明句论》中所引用的内容也是如此。由于没有加上差别而说没有生，恐怕会认为一切生都不存在，因此世尊自己取经部的意旨，解释为没有自性之生的意义。然后，第三句说依赖于因缘，依靠自性成立而空，因此说明了自性成立而空是缘起的意义，而不是仅仅遮止生就成为空性。在《中论》中也说：缘起。
English
Emptiness by its own nature is the selflessness of those dharmas. There are two ways to ascertain it: one is to transform and apply the previously stated reasoning to refute, and the other is to refute with other reasoning that has not been previously stated. The first is: for the objects of aggregates, elements, and sources, there are two types. For form, there are its own eastern and other directional parts and the two possessing parts, and for consciousness, there are its own earlier and later temporal parts and the two possessing parts. Examine whether they are established as one or different by their own nature, and then refute them as before. This is: Just as your perception of self, the same wisdom should be applied to all. The meaning of the sutra mentioned earlier. The second is divided into two: one is to show the reasoning of dependent origination; the other is how to establish the absence of truth even without the previous reasoning. The first is: the reasoning of dependent origination is from the Sutra Requested by Sagaramati: Those that arise dependently, they are without own being. It clearly states that the establishment by nature is refuted by the sign of dependent origination. Also in the Sutra Requested by Acharya, it says: Whatever is born from conditions is unborn. There is no birth by its own nature. Whatever depends on conditions is said to be empty. Whoever knows emptiness is mindful. It is clearly stated that this is very common in precious scriptures. Furthermore, the meaning of the first line saying "unborn" is: the second line says "no birth by its own nature," so when refuting birth, the distinction of what is to be refuted is added. In the Lankavatara Sutra, it says: Considering that self-nature is unborn, I say that all dharmas are unborn. The content quoted in the Clear Words is also like this. Since it is said that there is no birth without adding a distinction, it is feared that all births will be considered non-existent. Therefore, the Buddha himself took the meaning of the sutra and explained it as the meaning of no birth by its own nature. Then, the third line says that relying on conditions and depending on emptiness established by its own nature, it shows that emptiness established by its own nature is the meaning of dependent origination, and not that emptiness is merely the cessation of birth. In the Root Wisdom, it also says: Dependent origination.
Chinese
何者为生起，彼即自性寂。以是依缘而生之理，说以自性成立而寂灭或空性。依中观宗之规，仅以依缘而生，必须说为不生等等。无论说何种愚昧之幻化，彼等亦皆应遣除，如是应知。如是之缘起理极受赞叹，如《不热请问经》云：智者通达缘起诸法，终不依于边见。如是缘起如实通达故，谓不依于执边之见。入行论云：何以外境由依缘而生，故此等分别不能观察，是故缘起之理，能断一切恶见网。如是说，此乃大自在龙树父子之无上特法。是故于此当说诸理中之缘起理。于此，清净见之障碍根本有二，一者，于诸法执为真实之耽著真实之有实执著之常边与增益之见。二者，未取应破之量而太过，以致因果缘起之决定于自宗不能成立，而成此是与此非之对境皆无之断见与诽谤之见。彼二者乃是依于从此因缘生此果之决定所生之理路，于遮止自性成立时，无余而舍弃。以理路之决定能摧毁断见，以所立誓之义决定能从根本上破斥常边之故。是故，外在之苗芽等，与内在之行等诸法，次第依于种子等与无明等而生。如是，则彼等以自相成立不应道理。若以自性成立，则必须成立自主之坚固自性，故与观待因缘相违。百颂云：何者依缘而生起，彼即不得自在转。此
English
Whatever arises, that is inherently peaceful. Because of the reason of arising from dependence, it is said to be peaceful or empty because of being established by its own nature. According to the Madhyamaka system, it is only by arising from dependence that one must say it is unborn, and so on. Whatever kind of deluded manifestations are spoken of, those should also be eliminated, as should be known. Such a reason of dependent arising is highly praised. As it says in the *Questions of Anavatapta*: The wise will understand the dharmas of dependent arising, and will never rely on extreme views. Because of truly understanding dependent arising, it is said that one does not rely on views that grasp at extremes. The *Entering* says: Because things arise dependently, these discriminations cannot be examined. Therefore, this reasoning of dependent arising cuts through all nets of bad views. As it is said, this is the unsurpassed special characteristic of the great master Nagarjuna and his spiritual sons. Therefore, here, among all the reasonings, the reasoning of dependent arising should be spoken. Here, the main obstacles to pure view are two: One is the eternalistic view and the view of superimposition, which are directed towards grasping at truth in the dharmas, with a real clinging to truth. The second is that, by being too extreme without taking the measure of what is to be refuted, the certainty of cause and effect, dependent arising, cannot be established in one's own system, and one ends up with a nihilistic view and a view of denigration, where there is no object of designation of what is this and what is not this. Those two are abandoned without exception when one relies on the reasoning that arises from the certainty that this result arises from this cause and condition, when one refutes establishment by its own nature. Because the certainty of reasoning destroys the nihilistic view, and the certainty of the meaning of what is vowed refutes the eternalistic view from its root. Therefore, external things such as sprouts, and internal things such as formations, arise in sequence depending on seeds and ignorance, and so on. If that is the case, then it is not reasonable for them to be established by their own characteristics. If they were established by their own nature, then they would have to be established as an independent, self-sufficient nature that is autonomous, which is contradictory to depending on causes and conditions. The *Hundred Verses* says: Whatever arises from dependence, that does not become independent. This all