Chinese
以分别念如何假立的共相，对你来说，在胜义中是不存在的。因为你们彼此不随顺，所以没有共同的实体。而且，随顺的共同意义，因为没有显现的缘故。（问：）在分别念中显现的相，不是普遍地承认吗？为什么在胜义中不存在呢？（答：）相，作为所立宗，不依赖于错乱的自性，如何能成为随顺于其他意义的树木的共相呢？不应理，因为与分别念的识不相异，并且是同一个实体的缘故。第三，显现的树木各别法，作为所立宗，你认为执持为一个自性的相的分别念是错误的，因为你是实体各异的缘故。第四有二，确定传承的因，遣除不合理的因。第一，什么是执持共相的因呢？凡是具有“树”这个名称意义的，彼此各异的树木各别法，作为所立宗，这个执持树木共相的种子是因，因为是它的传承之因的缘故。第二有二，以两个相似的例子成立各异是因，以两个妨害成立其他因——共相实有。第一，如何以各异的树木各别法产生树木的共相执持这个果呢？某些树木各别法，作为所立宗，即使是没有共相实体的实体各异，也认知为“是树”，成为一个共相，并且成办火和房屋等一个意义，因为成办它依赖于缘起的自性所决定的缘故。例如，根和境等没有一个共相，也了知意义，成为一个根识一样。以及，姜黄和贝母等一种药物，没有一个共相，但那二者一起混合或者各自平息瘟疫等一个果，是可见的，而其他的酸奶和樟脑等不是这样。第二，姜黄等仅仅因为有一个共相，才平息瘟疫，所以例子不成立，如果这样问。药物的共相，作为所立宗，不应理能平息瘟疫，因为在药物各别法中没有差别地存在之故。这是周遍。否则，那些药物各别法，即使田地好坏等各异，也能特别地平息瘟疫的能力
English
The universal, which is imputed by conceptual thought, does not exist for you in the ultimate sense. Because you do not follow each other, there is no common substance. Moreover, the common meaning of following, because there is no appearance. (Question:) Is not the appearance that appears in conceptual thought generally accepted? Why does it not exist in the ultimate sense? (Answer:) The appearance, as the subject of the proposition, how can it become a universal that follows other meanings of trees without relying on the nature of delusion? It is not reasonable, because it is not different from the consciousness of conceptual thought, and it is the same substance. Third, the appearing individual trees, as the subject of the proposition, the conceptual thought that you consider to hold as one self is wrong, because you are different substances. Fourth, there are two: identifying the cause of the lineage, and rejecting the unreasonable cause. First, what is the cause of holding the universal? All the individual trees that have the meaning of the name "tree" and are different from each other, as the subject of the proposition, the seed of this holding of the universal of tree is the cause, because it is the cause of its lineage. Second, there are two: establishing that the differences are the cause by two similar examples, and preventing other causes—the real existence of the universal—by two obstacles. First, how do the different individual trees produce the result of holding the universal of tree? Some individual trees, as the subject of the proposition, even if they are different substances without the real existence of the universal, are recognized as "tree", becoming a common universal, and accomplishing one meaning such as fire and houses, because accomplishing it depends on the nature of dependent origination. For example, even though the senses and objects do not have a common universal, they also know the meaning, becoming one sense consciousness. And, turmeric and aconite, etc., one medicine, do not have a common universal, but the two together or separately pacify one result such as epidemics, which is visible, while other yogurt and camphor, etc., are not like this. Second, turmeric, etc., only because there is a common universal, pacify the epidemic, so the example is not established, if you ask like this. The universal of medicine, as the subject of the proposition, it is not reasonable to be able to pacify the epidemic, because it exists without difference in the individual medicines. This is pervasion. Otherwise, those individual medicines, even if the fields are good or bad, etc., are different, they can especially pacify the ability of the epidemic