English
That self-awareness is established as being mistaken for the object of appearance. Because when that appears, it appears as being established by its own characteristic. If that is established, then since consciousness is not established by its own characteristic as the nature of experience, the tenets of the Yogacara school will be abandoned. There is no fault in that, because the basis of clinging to conceptual consciousness in self-awareness does not appear, but the basis of clinging to blue as an external object in prior apprehension does appear. Because those two, being the basis of clinging, cannot arise in self-awareness, etc., where dualistic appearances have ceased, and because it does not contradict the appearance in prior apprehension, which has dualistic appearances. The reason why there must be dualistic appearances when the basis of clinging to conceptualization appears is that when its general conceptualization appears, it necessarily appears as having the aspect of dualistic appearances. This is not the same as knowing, because when a general characteristic appears in conceptualization, it also appears as having the aspect of mere experience. It cannot be said that it is the same because conceptualization necessarily has dualistic appearances. Because the fact that conceptualization has dualistic appearances and the fact that the object appears as having the aspect of dualistic appearances are two different things. If it were not so, then it would have to be admitted that the cessation of dualistic appearances cannot appear in conceptualization, but that is also unreasonable, because the cessation of dualistic appearances would become impossible. If you think that the fact that blue is the basis of clinging to conceptualization is merely posited by the power of conceptualization, so it does not appear to those who are free from conceptualization, then the illusion of a horse and an elephant will also become invisible to those who are free from conceptualization, because it is merely posited by conceptualization. Therefore, the emptiness of the completely imputed, which is imputed as entity and difference, as stated in the Explanation of Intentions as the thoroughly established, is not without the negation of the object and subject as different substances. In that sutra, in the context of calm abiding, the negation of external objects is clearly stated. In general, although there are many completely imputed things, such as all general characteristics and space, they are not mentioned in the Explanation of Intentions because they are not needed when the emptiness of the completely imputed is established as the thoroughly established. Although many of them are existents that cannot be named or designated, they are not established by their own characteristics, because they are merely imputed by conceptualization. The negation of the object and subject in relation to external objects is explained in the Compendium of Vehicles by the reasoning of dreams and images, etc., and in the Twenty Verses by the indivisible particle.
Chinese
遮破的理路和法称（ཆོས་ཀྱི་གྲགས་པ། ）以能取所取的体性产生相似的遮破理路，以及陈那（ཕྱོག་གླང་། ）遮破微尘积聚和极微是所取义的理路等。从《母经》中 所说的“无”全部都是遮破遍计所执，如果不知道《摄大乘论》中所说的对《解深密经》的遍计所执的遮破方式，仅仅解释能取所取是异体的遍计所执，那么在瑜伽行自宗中也必须说出诸多不合理之处，而且对于恒常与无常等任何地方都说没有所取处，用这种方式来解释也极其困难。因此，对于任何地方都说没有所取处，指的是入定（མཉམ་གཞག་）时；区分此是彼非而说有所取处，指的是后得分别的时刻。也必须这样说，实在是无话可说了。在《菩萨地论》、《摄大乘论》和《集论》等中所说的四种寻思和四种如实遍知，是确立唯识宗见解的，进入唯识的殊胜之门，也是烦恼的所依，是对治所知障的分别念。为了了解这些意义，似乎必须从《解深密经》中所说的遮破遍计所执的理路和所破的细微增益来了解。特别是，似乎必须通过这些理路来遮破能取所取是异体，从而了解进入唯识的方式，然而我看到你们连少许的观察都没有 进入，所以仅仅为有智慧的人们展示一点观察之门。第二点是，《解深密经》中说：由于对依他起显现为遍计所执的自性而执著，从而产生烦恼，由此积业而流转轮回；如果看到依他起是遍计所执的体性无自性，那么这些就会依次止息。经中说声闻、独觉和菩萨三者都通过这条道路和修持来获得涅槃，因此他们的清净道和清净也是唯一的，没有第二个。并且，没有说依他起和遍计所执的空性方式与之前所说的不同。因此，声闻和独觉也了达法无我，是这部经的意义吗？如果说是，那么以前共同
English
The reasoning that refutes similarity in the arising of the characteristics of grasper and grasped by Logpa's reasoning and Dharmakirti, and the reasoning of Dignāga that refutes the aggregation of dust and the subtle as the meaning of the grasped. From the Sutra of the Mother, All that is said to be "non-existent" refutes the completely imputed. If you do not know the way to refute the completely imputed in the Exegesis on the Compendium of Determinations, which is said in the Compendium of the Great Vehicle, then you only explain that the grasper and grasped are completely imputed as different substances. Then, in the Yogacara Svātantrika school, you must say many unreasonable things, and it is also extremely difficult to explain that there is no place to grasp anywhere, such as permanence and impermanence, in this way. Therefore, when it is said that there is no place to grasp anywhere, it refers to the time of meditative equipoise (samāhita); when it is said that there is a place to grasp by distinguishing this from that, it refers to the time of subsequent discrimination. It is also necessary to say this, and there is really nothing to say. The four seekings and four complete knowings mentioned in the Bodhisattva-bhūmi, the Compendium of the Great Vehicle, and the Compendium of Topics, etc., are for establishing the view of the Mind-Only school, the supreme gate for entering into Mind-Only, and also the basis of the afflictions, and are said to be the antidote to the conceptual thought that is the obscuration of knowledge. To understand the meaning of these, it seems necessary to understand from the reasoning of refuting the completely imputed and the subtle imputation of what is to be refuted, as stated in the Exegesis on the Intention. In particular, it seems necessary to understand the way to enter into Mind-Only by refuting the grasper and grasped as different substances through these reasonings, but I see that you have not even entered into the slightest investigation, So I am just showing a little bit of the door of investigation to those who have intelligence. The second point is, in the Exegesis on the Intention, it says: Because of clinging to the other-powered as the nature of the completely imputed, afflictions arise, and by this, karma is accumulated and one revolves in samsara; if one sees that the other-powered is the nature of the completely imputed as without self-nature, then these will cease in order. The sutra says that the Hearers, Solitary Realizers, and Bodhisattvas all attain Nirvana through this path and practice, so their path of purification and purification are also one, and there is no second. And, it does not say that the way in which the other-powered and completely imputed are empty is different from what was said before. Therefore, do the Hearers and Solitary Realizers also realize the selflessness of phenomena as the meaning of this sutra? If so, then the previous common
Chinese
这与那些所说的并不相符。如果不这样做，那又该如何解释经部的意义呢？对此，在《瑜伽师地论》中，也说通过对事物本质和差别的分别，以及执持整体的分别念，生起分别念所缘的增益处，依靠它而生起坏聚见，由此产生其他的烦恼，从而在轮回中流转。如果通过四种寻求和四种如实知，了知分别念所执持的意义不存在，那么这些就会止息。因此，认为对诸法施设的本质和差别，执持为以自性成立的法我执，是坏聚见的根本。而认为法我执是人我执的基础，这也是认为声闻和独觉没有证悟法无我的中观师们的观点。对此，如果法我执灭尽，则人我执也会止息，但如果法我执没有灭尽，则人我执不会止息，因此，即使没有断除轮回的根本，也不会与从轮回中解脱相违背。因此，所说的“这条道路本身”，是指证悟了其他自在遍计的自性空性的道路，但不必将其作为法无我的道路。因为在《摄大乘论》中也说了，其他自在遍计的空性，也可以归于人无我。证悟人无我能够清净烦恼，并且仅仅断除烦恼的解脱，大小乘没有差别，因此也说清净的道路和清净是相同的。将蕴等其他自在，以及将法我执着于其上，视为遍计所执，而将由此而空的法无我，安立为圆成实，这是通过《解深密经》解释大乘经典的意义。通过这种方式，可以理解小乘经典的意义，即将蕴的其他自在，视为空于人我的遍计所执，并将人无我的空性，安立为人无我的圆成实，这仅仅是三种自性的安立。因此，听闻初转法轮的所化，是能够证悟以人无我为基础的自性无自性的法器，但不能成为证悟以法无我为基础的自性无自性的法器。
English
This contradicts what has been said. If not, how should the meaning of the sutras be explained? In this regard, the *Yogācārabhūmi* also states that through the discrimination of the essence and differences of things, and the conceptualization of grasping wholes, the conceptual proliferation of the objects of conceptualization arises, and relying on that, the view of the perishable aggregate arises, which then generates other afflictions, thus revolving in samsara. If, through the four seekings and four complete knowings, one knows that the meaning grasped by conceptualization does not exist, then these will cease. Therefore, it is held that the clinging to the self of phenomena, which clings to the essence and differences imputed to phenomena as being established by their own characteristics, is the root of the view of the perishable aggregate. And the Madhyamikas, who hold that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not realize the selflessness of phenomena, also hold that the clinging to the self of phenomena is the basis for the clinging to the self of persons. In this regard, if the clinging to the self of phenomena is exhausted, then the clinging to the self of persons will also cease, but if the clinging to the self of phenomena is not exhausted, then the clinging to the self of persons will not cease. Therefore, even if the root of samsara is not reversed, it is not contradictory to be liberated from samsara. Therefore, what is said as "this very path" refers to the path of realizing the emptiness of the characteristics of other-powered and completely imputed phenomena, but it is not necessary to take it as the path of the selflessness of phenomena. For in the *Compendium of Determinations*, it is also said that the emptiness of other-powered and completely imputed phenomena can also be attributed to the selflessness of persons. Realizing the selflessness of persons purifies afflictions, and liberation that merely abandons afflictions is the same for both the Great and Small Vehicles, so it is also said that the path of purification and purification are the same. The *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*, through its explanation of the meaning of the Great Vehicle sutras, establishes that the other-powered aggregates and the imputation of the self of phenomena upon them are completely imputed, and that the emptiness of these is established as the perfected nature of the selflessness of phenomena. In this way, one can understand the meaning of the Small Vehicle sutras, which is that the other-powered aggregates are empty of the completely imputed self of persons, and that the emptiness of the self of persons is established as the perfected nature of the selflessness of persons; this is merely the establishment of the three natures. Therefore, the trainees who hear the first turning of the wheel of Dharma are vessels capable of realizing the characteristic of the absence of inherent existence based on the selflessness of persons, but they are not vessels capable of realizing the characteristic of the absence of inherent existence based on the selflessness of phenomena.