Chinese
证悟之后，瑜伽士便会获得解脱。当不执著于色等事物时，就不会产生对它们的贪恋等分别念，因此声闻和独觉不会执取任何事物而进入涅槃。菩萨虽然证悟了无我，但由于慈悲心的力量，会持续地维系轮回。第三部分包括：显示一切事物都是依仗而安立的；对因果进行详细解释的两部分。第一部分包括：事物经过分析无法找到，但仅凭名声而存在；一切名言与二谛不相违背的两部分。第一部分是：瓶子、布匹、营地、军队、森林、树木连成的行列，以及房屋、车辆、微尘、客栈等事物，以及那些通过某种原因产生的事物，都应该理解，因为能仁不会与世间争论。将自身和构成自身的要素比作车辆，从而将一切事物都比作车辆：瓶子、布匹、营地、军队、森林、树木连成的行列，以及房屋、车辆、微尘、客栈等事物，所有这些（307a）都像车辆一样，经过七种方式的分析，并不存在。除了这些之外，它们依赖于自身的组成部分而存在，并被如此安立。同样，任何事物仅仅通过这种原因，由众生，即行者所命名和称谓的那些事物，都应该理解为未经分析，仅凭名声而存在。为什么呢？因为能仁说过，他不与世间争论。世间与我争论，而我不与世间争论，因此他解释说，他不会阻止世间的名声和称谓。第二部分是：肢体、功德、贪欲、自性以及木柴等，以及具有功德者、具有肢体者、贪恋者、本体和火等事物。这些事物经过像分析车辆一样的方式分析，七种方式都不存在。除了这些之外，它们通过世间的名声而存在。如果有人问，世间如何给事物命名呢？肢体、功德、贪欲、自性以及木柴等，分别对应于具有肢体者、具有功德者、贪恋者、本体和火等事物，这些事物的前后
English
Upon realization, the yogi will attain liberation. When there is no attachment to things like form, there will be no arising of thoughts of attachment to them, so the Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas will not grasp anything and will enter Nirvana. Although Bodhisattvas realize selflessness, they continue to maintain samsara due to the power of compassion. The third part includes: Showing that all things are established dependently; two parts that explain cause and effect in detail. The first part includes: Things cannot be found upon analysis, but exist only by reputation; two parts that all expressions do not contradict the two truths. The first part is: Pots, cloths, camps, armies, forests, rows of trees, as well as houses, vehicles, dust, inns, and other things, as well as those things that arise through some cause, should all be understood, because the Able One does not argue with the world. Comparing oneself and the elements that constitute oneself to a vehicle, thereby comparing all things to a vehicle: Pots, cloths, camps, armies, forests, rows of trees, as well as houses, vehicles, dust, inns, and other things, all of these (307a) are like vehicles, and upon analysis in seven ways, do not exist. Apart from these, they exist dependent on their own components and are established as such. Similarly, any things that are named and called by beings, i.e., travelers, through this cause alone, should be understood as existing by reputation without analysis. Why? Because the Able One has said that he does not argue with the world. The world argues with me, but I do not argue with the world, so he explains that he does not prevent the world's reputation and expressions. The second part is: Limbs, qualities, desire, nature, and firewood, etc., as well as those with qualities, those with limbs, those who are attached, the essence, and things like fire. These things, analyzed in the same way as analyzing a vehicle, do not exist in seven ways. Apart from these, they exist through worldly reputation. If someone asks, how does the world name things? Limbs, qualities, desire, nature, and firewood, etc., correspond respectively to those with limbs, those with qualities, those who are attached, the essence, and things like fire, the before and after of these things
Chinese
因此，像车一样，用七种方式进行分析，如果寻找，它们是不存在的。不分析与该分析不同的事物，这些事物是根据世俗的共识而存在的。例如，瓶子是有分支的，而碎片等是它的分支。瓶子是有优点的，而蓝色等是它的优点。瓶子是基础，而鼓起的腹部、下垂的嘴和细长的颈部等是它的特征。同样，也适用于布匹等。贪欲是对事物的过度执着，它源于心（307b）。执着是贪欲的基础，即心或人。火是燃烧的东西。木柴是被燃烧的东西。因此，通过将分支作为原因，将其称为有分支的。通过依赖于有分支的，将其称为分支，这与车的例子相似。依赖于木柴，它是火；依赖于火，它是木柴。同样，客体和有客体者，有法和法性等，所有依赖于命名的事物都只是世俗的名称。因为它们无法承受理性的分析，所以应该知道二谛是不矛盾的。第二，显示了因果仅仅是相互依赖的。驳斥了因果是实体的存在。第一，有和没有是不合理的。第一是：如果原因是产生者，那么它就是原因；如果它不产生结果，那么它就不存在，它将变成无因。如果结果有因，那么它就会产生。因此，就像分支等是通过依赖而建立的一样，因果也是通过依赖而建立的。因为如果原因是产生者，那么它就是原因；如果原因不产生结果，那么由于没有结果，原因的名称将变成无因，因为如果没有理由将原因视为原因，那么一切都将变成原因。因此，是否是原因取决于是否是结果的产生者。如果结果有因，那么它就会产生；如果没有因，它就不会产生。因此，因果不是自性存在的，而是依赖于建立的。第二
English
Therefore, like a chariot, analyzed in seven ways, they are non-existent if sought. Not analyzing things that are different from that analysis, those things exist according to worldly convention. For example, a pot has branches, and fragments etc. are its branches. A pot has qualities, and blue etc. are its qualities. A pot is a basis, and a bulging belly, a drooping mouth, and a long neck etc. are its characteristics. Similarly, apply it to cloths etc. Attachment is excessive clinging to things, and it arises from the mind (307b). Clinging is the basis of attachment, i.e., the mind or a person. Fire is what burns. Firewood is what is burned. Therefore, by making the branch the cause, it is called having branches. By relying on having branches, it is called a branch, which is similar to the example of the chariot. Relying on firewood, it is fire; relying on fire, it is firewood. Similarly, object and subject, qualified and quality, etc., all phenomena that are named dependently are merely worldly designations. Because they cannot withstand rational analysis, one should know that the two truths are not contradictory. Second, it shows that cause and effect are merely mutually dependent. Refuting that cause and effect are established as substances. First, there are two: what is and what is not is unreasonable. The first is: If the cause is the producer, then it is the cause; if it does not produce the result, then it does not exist, it will become causeless. If the result has a cause, then it will arise. Therefore, just as branches etc. are established by dependence, so too cause and effect are established by dependence. Because if the cause is the producer, then it is the cause; if the cause does not produce the result, then because there is no result, the name of the cause will become causeless, because if there is no reason to regard the cause as the cause, then everything will become the cause. Therefore, whether it is a cause or not depends on whether it is the producer of the result. If the result has a cause, then it will arise; if there is no cause, it will not arise. Therefore, cause and effect are not inherently existent, but dependently established. Second
Tibetan
་པ་ནི། གང་ལས་གང་ཞིག་འགྱུར་བ་གང་ཞིག་ལས་སྔར་གང་ཞིག་འགྱུར་བ་སྨྲོས།།ཁྱོད་རང་གི་ངོ་བོས་གྲུབ་པར་སེམས་ན་རྒྱུའམ་འབྲས་བུ་ཕྱིས་འབྱུང་རྒྱུའམ་འབྲས་བུ་སྔར་གྲུབ་པ་གང་ལས་(༣༠༨ན) གང་ཞིག་འགྲུབ་པར་འགྱུར་བ་བརྟེན་པ་གང་ཞིག་ལས་སྔར་བརྟེན་པ་གང་ཞིག་འགྲུབ་པར་འགྱུར་བ་དེ་སྨྲོས་ཤིག སྨྲ་མི་ནུས་པས་རྒྱུ་འབྲས་སུ་གདགས་པ་ཡང་ཤིང་རྟ་ལྟར་རྒྱུར་བྱས་ནས་འབྱུང་གི། རང་གི་ངོ་བོས་ནི་མ་ཡིན་ནོ། །གཉིས་པ་ལ། དངོས་དང༌། མཚུངས་པ་སྤང་བ་གཉིས། དང་པོ་ལ། ཕྲད་མ་ཕྲད་བརྟགས་ནས་དགག འཇོག་བྱེད་མེད་པའི་རྒྱུ་མི་འཐད། དབུ་མ་པ་ལྟར་ན་མི་འགལ་བ་གསུམ། དང་པོ་ནི། གལ་ཏེ་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་རྒྱུ་ཡིས་ཕྲད་ནས་འབྲས་སྐྱེད་བྱེད་ན་དེ་ཡི་ཚེ། །དེ་དག་ནུས་པ་གཅིག་པས་སྐྱེད་བྱེད་འབྲས་བུ་ཐ་དད་མེད་འགྱུར་ཞིང༌། །སོ་སོར་ན་ནི་རྒྱུ་འདི་རྒྱུ་མིན་རྣམས་དང་ཁྱད་པར་མེད་འགྱུར་ལ། །གཉིས་པོ་འདི་དག་སྤངས་ནས་རྟོག་པ་གཞན་ཡང་ཡོད་པར་འགྱུར་མ་ཡིན། ། གཞན་ཡང་གལ་ཏེ་འབྲས་བུ་རང་བཞིན་གྱིས་བསྐྱེད་ན་ཕྲད་ནས་སམ་མ་ཕྲད་པར་བསྐྱེད། དང་པོ་ལྟར་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་རྒྱུ་ཡིས་ཕྲད་ནས་འབྲས་བུ་སྐྱེད་པར་བྱེད་ན་དེའི་ཚེ་ཆུ་ཀླུང་དང་རྒྱ་མཚོ་ཕྲད་པ་ལྟར་རྒྱུ་འབྲས་དེ་དག་ནུས་པ་གཅིག་ཏུ་གྱུར་པས་འདི་སྐྱེད་བྱེད་རྒྱུ་དང་དེ་བསྐྱེད་བྱ་འབྲས་བུའོ་ཞེས་ཐ་དད་མེད་པར་འགྱུར་ཞིང༌། དེ་ལྟར་ན་འབྲས་བུ་རྒྱུས་བསྐྱེད་པར་མི་འགྱུར་རོ། །མ་ཕྲད་པར་རྒྱུ་འབྲས་སོ་སོར་ཡོད་པ་ལས་བསྐྱེད་ན་ནི་སཱ་ལུའི་རྒྱུས་མ་ཕྲད་པའི་ནས་ཀྱི་འབྲས་བུ་གཞན་མི་བསྐྱེད་པ་ལྟར་འབྲས་བུ་མི་བསྐྱེད་པའམ། ཡང་ན་འབྲས་བུ་ཡིན་མིན་ཀུན་རྒྱུ་ཡིན་མིན་ཀུན་གྱིས་བསྐྱེད་པར་འགྱུར་ཏེ། མ་ཕྲད་པར་མཚུངས་པའི་ཕྱིར། དེས་ན་རྒྱུ་འདི་རྒྱུ་མིན་རྣམས་དང་ཁྱད་པར་མེད་པར་འགྱུར་ན་དེ་ཡང་ཁྱེད་མི་འདོད་ལ། རང་བཞིན་གྱིས་གྲུབ་པའི་རྒྱུ་འབྲས་ཡོད་ན་བསྐྱེད་བྱ་སྐྱེད་བྱེད་ཕྲད་མ་ཕྲད་གཉིས་པོ་འདི་དག་སྤངས་ནས་རྟོག་པ་གཞན་ཡང་གསུམ་པ་ཡོད་པར་འགྱུར་བ་མ་ཡིན་པས་རང་བཞིན་གྱིས་གྲུབ་པའི་རྒྱུས་འབྲས་བུ་མི་བསྐྱེད་པ་ཁོ་ནའོ། །གཉིས་པ་ནི། ཅི་སྟེ་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་རྒྱུ་ཡིས་འབྲས་བུ་སྐྱེད་པར་མི་བྱེད་དེ་ཕྱིར་འབྲས། །ཞེས་བྱ་ཡོད་མིན་འབྲས་བྲལ་རྒྱུ་ནི་རྒྱུ་མེད་ཅན་འགྱུར་ཡོད་པའང་མིན། །དེས་ན་ཅི་སྟེ་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་རྒྱུ་ཡིས་འབྲས་བུ་བསྐྱེད་པར་མི་བྱེད་ན་དེའི་ཕྱིར་འབྲས་བུ་ཞེས་བྱ་ཡོད་པ་མིན་(༣༠༨བ) ལ། འབྲས་བུ་
Chinese
是。何者从何者转变？何者先于何者转变？说吧！如果你认为自性成立，那么是因还是果后生？是因还是果先成立？何者从何者成立？依于何者？何者先依于何者成立？说吧！因为不能说，所以安立为因果也像车一样，作为因而生起。但不是自性。第二，舍弃实体和相似二者。第一，观察相合不相合而遮破。没有成立之因不合理。如中观派所说，没有相违的三点。第一：如果你的因相合而生果，那么，它们的能力相同，所生之果没有差别。如果各自独立，那么此因与非因等没有差别。舍弃这二者，也不会有其他的分别。 另外，如果果自性产生，那么是相合而生，还是不相合而生？如第一种情况，如果你的因相合而生果，那么就像河流与大海相合一样，因果那些能力变成相同，因此没有这个是能生之因，那个是所生之果的差别。这样，果就不会由因所生。如果不相合，因果各自存在而生，那么就像大麦的因不生不相合的青稞的果一样，不生果，或者一切果与非果，一切因与非因都将产生，因为不相合是相同的。因此，此因与非因等没有差别，这也是你不希望的。如果有自性成立的因果，那么舍弃能生所生相合不相合这二者，也不会有其他的第三种分别，因此自性成立的因不会生果。第二：如果你的因不生果，因此果。名为有不存在，离果之因将变成无因，也不是有。因此，如果你的因不生果，因此名为果的有不存在（308b）。果
English
It is. From what does what transform? What transforms before what? Speak! If you think that self-nature is established, then is the cause or the effect born later? Is the cause or the effect established first? What is established from what? Relying on what? What relies on what before it is established? Speak! Because it cannot be said, the establishment as cause and effect is like a chariot, arising as a cause. But it is not self-nature. Second, abandoning both substance and similarity. First, examining whether they are in contact or not in contact and refuting. A cause without establishment is unreasonable. As the Madhyamaka school says, there are three points without contradiction. First: If your cause produces an effect by being in contact, then, their abilities are the same, and the effect produced has no difference. If they are independent of each other, then this cause is no different from non-causes, etc. Abandoning these two, there will be no other distinctions. Furthermore, if the effect arises from its own nature, then does it arise from being in contact or from not being in contact? As in the first case, if your cause produces an effect by being in contact, then, like a river merging with the ocean, the abilities of those causes and effects become the same, so there is no difference between this being the producing cause and that being the produced effect. In this way, the effect will not be produced by the cause. If they do not come into contact, and the cause and effect exist independently and produce, then just as the cause of barley does not produce the effect of naked barley that is not in contact, it does not produce an effect, or all effects and non-effects, all causes and non-causes will arise, because the non-contact is the same. Therefore, this cause is no different from non-causes, etc., which is also what you do not want. If there are causes and effects established by their own nature, then abandoning these two, the producing and the produced, being in contact and not being in contact, there will be no other third distinction, so a cause established by its own nature will not produce an effect. Second: If your cause does not produce an effect, therefore the effect. The so-called existence does not exist, and the cause without effect will become causeless, and it is not existent either. Therefore, if your cause does not produce an effect, therefore the existence called effect does not exist (308b). Effect